Should Planking (i.e. Ledgestalling) be Banned?

[Staco]

Pls bann planking.
Some characters cant do anything against it and the most characters get a high chance to beeing gimped if they go offstage.
Even chars like Pit or Wario have got trouble vs. a planking MK.
If MK gets one UAir hit he can combo his enemy to much damage.
So you have to hit MK multiple times, if he hits you one time (and then can follow up with other aerials).
And simply bann it to make this game more fun. <<
Will anyone miss planking if it gets banned?!
Everyone hates it and the people who vote dont plank are people, who do it, or people, who think its beatable but they mostly still doesnt like it.

 

[Sunstar]

i voted for ban planking

i think planking is a bit like stalling... or IS stalling
and stalling is banned already

it seems that marios or pikachus n-b can stop a planking character... (and sometimes even gimp him O.O (hi ike xD )) but mario and pikachu are only 2 of 35 characters...

planking is VERY annoying and stops the fun you have when you are playing brawl...

 

[Falconv1.0]

i voted for ban planking

i think planking is a bit like stalling... or IS stalling
and stalling is banned already

it seems that marios or pikachus n-b can stop a planking character... (and sometimes even gimp him O.O (hi ike xD )) but mario and pikachu are only 2 of 35 characters...

planking is VERY annoying and stops the fun you have when you are playing brawl...

1.) No, it's not stalling.

2.) Fun is not the name of the game when it comes to making arbitrary rules.


Has no one here heard of ****ing Sirlin? Seriously?

 

[Sunstar]

but an absoulute unfair game is not the name of the game when it comes to making arbitrary rules either

some characters are better than others, thats not the problem... but 90/10 matchups because of a technique is dumb

the arbitrary rules also exist because they want to make the game more fair... wario ware is not banned because of the minigames... the random division of items is the reason for wario wares banning
random=not fair
not fair= banned

planking is not honorable
a tourneys winner should be honored
but he or she cannot be honored for winning because of doing dishonorable things all the time

 

[Falconv1.0]

but an absoulute unfair game is not the name of the game when it comes to making arbitrary rules either

some characters are better than others, thats not the problem... but 90/10 matchups because of a technique is dumb

the arbitrary rules also exist because they want to make the game more fair... wario ware is not banned because of the minigames... the random division of items is the reason for wario wares banning
random=not fair
not fair= banned

planking is not honorable
a tourneys winner should be honored
but he or she cannot be honored for winning because of doing dishonorable things all the time

Wow you totally dont get this at all. We dont make rules based off honor. And Wario ware is completely random, randomness hampers COMPETITIVE play.

Ok, get this, the game isn't ****ing fair. There are characters with 7/3 match ups, infinites, etc etc. Hell you could argue Falco is being unfair when he camps with lasers. Dont tell me we ban things because it's just 'unfair'. That's not how it's ****ing done.

We ban things if they're too good and can be done discretely. Planking isn't too good, this has been proven, dont bull**** me on that, and we cant discretely ban it.


You dont understand anything about rules are made, get learned.

 

[Sunstar]

omg -.-

please unbann mks ghosting... it is not too good either... mk can't deal or recieve damage in that time...
with planking it is the same!

competitive should look interesting... outsiders should be able to say: "wow! those players are really skilled!"

if they see that one player camps at the edge the whole time and because of that even wins they would not say that ever...
like me they just would think something like "-________-"

you win for having skill
you win for beeing better than your enemy
but for planking you dont need skill and you dont need to be better than your enemy

 

[Falconv1.0]

omg -.-

please unbann mks ghosting... it is not too good either... mk can't deal or recieve damage in that time...
with planking it is the same!

competitive should look interesting... outsiders should be able to say: "wow! those players are really skilled!"

if they see that one player camps at the edge the whole time and because of that even wins they would not say that ever...
like me they just would think something like "-________-"

you win for having skill
you win for beeing better than your enemy
but for planking you dont need skill and you dont need to be better than your enemy

Actually yes IDC is too good, you are just continuing to demonstrate you know NOTHING.

People dont win just with planking, and it is nothing like IDC. Read my ****ing sig.

It can be beaten, dont ****ing debate this me. You're bringing up honor and skill when it comes to rules, once again proving, you dont understand anything about competitive rules. Good sir do you even go to tourneys?


Now seriously, stop, you aren't saying anything with an once of credibility. You claimed it's dishonorable, another way of saying "HEY GUYS IGNORE THIS POST"

 

[Eddie G]

As sad as the reality is, there really is no honor in what a lot of us do anymore. I can see where Sunstar is coming from in terms of craving honor within a match. However Sunstar, and I'm progressing beyond just the central topic of Smash with this statement, you're questioning the mindset of a mainly capitalistic and opportunistic crowd. A lot of us players here ARE Americans, and I don't care if this is a stereotype but money is our main driving force in what we do, especially in today's economy.

In Brawl's case it could be money, a longing for recognition as one of the best, or a combination of both that keeps players going. Some play just to have fun with the game, but fun usually goes hand-in-hand with winning in most cases, especially in a game where the primary objective is to beat your opponent, whether it is a casual or competitive match. So there you have it; despite what anyone may tell you it all ultimately boils down to the "me me me" mentality. This mentality is definitely flexed in tense competitive play, and as a result there is no room left for honor. People want to win, will do what it takes to win, and will not hesitate to do so. If that means playing gay, they will play gay. If it means planking when they need to, they will plank. I know it is a sad truth to accept for one who abides by an honor code, but this mentality will not be going anywhere.


And as for you Falcon, you really should relax a little when you carry on with an argument.

 

[Sunstar]

you don't eben understand irony -.-


i think people win because of planking...
there are 2 ways to win with planking:

1.
a player planks all the time... the other player stands up at smashes his fist into the planking players face...
the planking player wins because of violence...

2.
a player planks all the time... the other tries to break that
after some damage he was able to deal damage to the planking player
the planking player stops planking he smashes the other from the stage because of his or her massive damage
bitter


if you don't ban planking, you will read something like this some time "Why has characterX risenin the tier list?"
There are two possible answers:

1. He is good at planking

2. He is good against planking



I bring up honor and skill in connection with the rules, because in other games it is the same!
soccer for example
a bloody sliding tackle: a really good move to win the game
you get the ball and remove an enemy from the game for a short time

you dont need honor or skill to perform something like that

but it can be evaded by your enemy by just jumping
so there is a way to do something against that
it is banned anyway



planking is a great andvantage...
i think everybody agrees on that
the question is: is the advantage to big? will there be tourneys, where players win just because of planking?
we'll see...

 

[Falconv1.0]

Could that analogy have been any wors-oh wait Overswarm already topped that.

 

[Lythium]

It seems like instituting a reasonable ledge grab rule wouldn't effectively ban planking, but it would cut down it's use as a stalling tactic. Personally, I don't condone banning a particular strategy because it is hard to deal with, but planking to stall is an abuse of the system.

 

[Falconv1.0]

It seems like instituting a reasonable ledge grab rule wouldn't effectively ban planking, but it would cut down it's use as a stalling tactic. Personally, I don't condone banning a particular strategy because it is hard to deal with, but planking to stall is an abuse of the system.

Did you like...miss my giant argument with Melomaniacal or something?

You can only STALL if the opponent cant do ANYTHING. If you're planking, you're camping, a technique can not be used to just camp OR stall. It's one or the other, oh my Gawd how many times do I have to say this. Planking is camping, end of discussion.

 

[Lythium]

Did you like...miss my giant argument with Melomaniacal or something?

Yes. I'm so terribly sorry that I didn't read the 76 page thread in its entirety.

You can only STALL if the opponent cant do ANYTHING. If you're planking, you're camping, a technique can not be used to just camp OR stall. It's one or the other, oh my Gawd how many times do I have to say this. Planking is camping, end of discussion.

Oh noes! Words aren't synonymous! I'm sure planking can be used as both a stalling and camping tactic. Moreover, I fail to see your point. Wouldn't it be more productive to the thread to address the issues I commented on in my post, rather than arguing semantics?

 

[JOE!]

the problem with planking is that its not all too fun to watch...and can turn people off of brawl who might have gone into it if they saw a match that had a big back and foth, trading hits kinda battle

 

[Kage Me]

Planking isn't too good, this has been proven

Where and how? Is there any record of it?

I originally voted edge grab limit because it seemed like half the cast had poor defense against it. If you can prove that every character can reasonably be expected to be able to deal with it, I'll gladly change my mind.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Where and how? Is there any record of it?

I originally voted edge grab limit because it seemed like half the cast had poor defense against it. If you can prove that every character can reasonably be expected to be able to deal with it, I'll gladly change my mind.

Mah sig. Read it.

I never said every character, we might as well call DDD unbeatable because he ***** some characters. And if you'd go back just a lil bit you can see how the ledge grab rule still ****s over characters who suck vs it.

 

[Eddie G]

Falcon, if you're going to refer to what was mentioned in the past so often, provide a link or a quote at the very least. You can't expect everyone who visits this thread to already know about every point that was brought up. That's an unfair expectation to have with a 76 page thread.

 

[Kage Me]

Mah sig. Read it.

I never said every character, we might as well call DDD unbeatable because he ***** some characters. And if you'd go back just a lil bit you can see how the ledge grab rule still ****s over characters who suck vs it.

You implied "every character" when you said that planking wasn't too good. If it turns a match-up into 100-0 once the plankers get a lead in damage, it's too good, regardless of which match-up.

And Dedede's standing infinite deserves a ban too, so bringing that into the discussion won't help.

*reads a few pages back* I'm guessing that you mean planking in the last few seconds of a match so that you don't reach the time limit? Yes, that would still be viable, but the edge grab limit would help a lot more than not banning it at all. You're saying that because a solution has a flaw, it is not the best available. You are wrong. There is no perfect solution.

 

[1048576]

A large portion of the cast can't do anything to stop a planking MK.

 

[AvaricePanda]

It seems like instituting a reasonable ledge grab rule wouldn't effectively ban planking, but it would cut down it's use as a stalling tactic. Personally, I don't condone banning a particular strategy because it is hard to deal with, but planking to stall is an abuse of the system.

Planking ISN'T stalling. For like the millionth time, EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER can hit a planker. You can only stall if it's physically impossible to hit you. A lot of people plank with the intention to stall, but the tactic itself is not stalling

The thing that people are debating about planking is if it puts the opponent in too disadvantageous of a situation for it to be legal. For some characters, trying to counter planking leads to getting hurt and can possibly lead to a gimp. However, hardly anyone's actually tested this, and character boards haven't taken the time to actually bring the issue up. People shouldn't be complaining if they don't even take the time to experiment with planking and know the full extent of what it can do.

And a ledge-grab rule doesn't help. Usually, two scenarios happen.

1) Say you're a Kirby or a Diddy fighting a MK. Now these two characters have good options against planking anyway and can already beat it, but with the ledge-grab rule, the MK can only grab the ledge like 50 times the match, limiting its usage. Because of this, the MK can no longer use planking as camping or a forced approach, because they'd just run out the limit on themselves. Against characters who have counters against planking anyway, all forms of planking are eliminated, the "stalling" part and the camping part.

2) Now say you're a Falco fighting an MK. Falco, as of now, is known to have very bad options against planking, Without the ledge-grab rule, planking beats him. However, with the rule...planking still beats him. Why?

If the Falco just hangs out in the middle of the stage, the MK can just sit on the ledge and not regrab. Because Falco doesn't have an approach against planking, the MK doesn't have to worry about coming up to hit the Falco. Therefore, he's camping by just staying on the ledge.

Now when the Falco approaches, the MK regrabs the ledge and starts planking. Now, the Falco either gets hurt or he gets gimped. Either way, planking beats him and puts him in a bad situation, while the MK can steer clear of the ledge-grab rule. The MK doesn't have to keep regrabbing the ledge when the opponent is away, so he can save his ledge-grabs for these times and ta-da, Falco gets planked regardless.

Not only does the ledge-grab rule ban a tactic that's arguably not even broken (and even if it is, people haven't taken the time to find out, so I'm calling it not broken until they actually do), but it only helps a small amount of characters that kind of struggled with planking before. Characters who really can't do anything about planking, like Falco and the other spacies, Falcon, Ganondorf, etc., still can't do anything about planking even with the rule.

Edit:

A large portion of the cast can't do anything to stop a planking MK.

You know this how? With what research? How did you test this? Or are you basing that statement all on assumptions?

My point still stands. People need to actually test planking instead of just THINKING about what can happen against a planker.

 

[Blad01]

Basically anyone with no multiple jumps and / or awesome Dtilt can't do anything against planking = A large portion of the cast.

 

[Kage Me]

Panda, you are right. I hadn't thought of it that way, and you've convinced me that this should be looked into more.

 

[JOE!]

Basically anyone with no multiple jumps and / or awesome Dtilt can't do anything against planking = A large portion of the cast.

what about arcing projectiles?

 

[Orange_Soda_Man]

what about arcing projectiles?

So that adds Pikachu and Snake. Everyone else would have to get within hitrange. I think.

 

[AvaricePanda]

So that adds Pikachu and Snake. Everyone else would have to get within hitrange. I think.

And Diddy. And from the top of my head, possibly Sonic, Ivysaur, and anyone with fire.

But again, this needs to be tested instead of throwing out statements and thinking they work. For all the rest of the characters, the point isn't, "Who can hit the planker without getting hit," it's, "How can you most safely beat planking?"

 

[XienZo]

1) Say you're a Kirby or a Diddy fighting a MK. Now these two characters have good options against planking anyway and can already beat it, but with the ledge-grab rule, the MK can only grab the ledge like 50 times the match, limiting its usage. Because of this, the MK can no longer use planking as camping or a forced approach, because they'd just run out the limit on themselves. Against characters who have counters against planking anyway, all forms of planking are eliminated, the "stalling" part and the camping part.

Thats exactly what the rule should do. Any MK who planks against a Kirby or Diddy SHOULD be punished, and while the ledge rule DOES affect it, it doesn't go against the flow (make planking against Diddy/Kirby a better idea), and minimizes the impact.

2) Now say you're a Falco fighting an MK. Falco, as of now, is known to have very bad options against planking, Without the ledge-grab rule, planking beats him. However, with the rule...planking still beats him. Why?

If the ledge rule made it so Falco could fight planking, then that wouldn't be right, since that REMOVES one of Falco's CHARACTER WEAKNESS. Any rule that actually HELPED Falco against plankers would be like a rule that prevented people from edge-hogging Olimar.

The ledge rule is NOT supposed to change any matchups because of the way a character can/cannot hit below the ledge (Falco, Kirby). Its SUPPOSED to change any matchups that rely on dealing damage first, and then running out the clock, and THOSE matchups (Wario) ONLY.

 

[AvaricePanda]

Um... c stick down throw the bike, it bounces towards the direction you're facing quite slowly, so unless they absolutely perfectly time their invince, they'll get hit, and then you grab the edge into waft or whatever (using invince frames). Not a big deal at all, people just don't seem to know about throwing the bike with c stick down.

From thread I made like an hour ago in the Wario boards.

One of the ways that Wario can counter planking and it's pretty effective it seems. And the thread's early, so I'm pretty sure there are more possible ways to counter planking and not let the MK run out the time.

But I don't get what you're saying, XienZo. Planking runs out the time on characters that don't have feasible approaches against the MK planking, so in essence MK could deal with the Falco match-up the exact same way. I'm not understanding the difference you're mentioning between planking vs. Falco and planking vs. Wario.

 

[XienZo]

From thread I made like an hour ago in the Wario boards.

One of the ways that Wario can counter planking and it's pretty effective it seems. And the thread's early, so I'm pretty sure there are more possible ways to counter planking and not let the MK run out the time.

But I don't get what you're saying, XienZo. Planking runs out the time on characters that don't have feasible approaches against the MK planking, so in essence MK could deal with the Falco match-up the exact same way. I'm not understanding the difference you're mentioning between planking vs. Falco and planking vs. Wario.

Fine, I suppose a better example is a MK vs MK matchup.

The difference is that one will always lose to a planker, and the other will manage to dislodge MK, but not before the MK has retaliated and kept the damage difference in his favor.

 

[adumbrodeus]

As sad as the reality is, there really is no honor in what a lot of us do anymore. I can see where Sunstar is coming from in terms of craving honor within a match. However Sunstar, and I'm progressing beyond just the central topic of Smash with this statement, you're questioning the mindset of a mainly capitalistic and opportunistic crowd. A lot of us players here ARE Americans, and I don't care if this is a stereotype but money is our main driving force in what we do, especially in today's economy.

In Brawl's case it could be money, a longing for recognition as one of the best, or a combination of both that keeps players going. Some play just to have fun with the game, but fun usually goes hand-in-hand with winning in most cases, especially in a game where the primary objective is to beat your opponent, whether it is a casual or competitive match. So there you have it; despite what anyone may tell you it all ultimately boils down to the "me me me" mentality. This mentality is definitely flexed in tense competitive play, and as a result there is no room left for honor. People want to win, will do what it takes to win, and will not hesitate to do so. If that means playing gay, they will play gay. If it means planking when they need to, they will plank. I know it is a sad truth to accept for one who abides by an honor code, but this mentality will not be going anywhere.


And as for you Falcon, you really should relax a little when you carry on with an argument.

What you don't seem to realize is many of us find that mindset of adding arbitrary rules that exist only in your mind to make it "honorable" quite frankly, insulting and dishonorable, because it always add the element of "what if he had chosen to fight with everything?", and furthermore adding the insulting element of "I don't need my full power to beat you".

In other words, to us, it comes across as both an inherent John and an insult to our competency and strikes us as dishonorable.

Ultimately, for us, the only way to have fun is for everyone to do everything they can within the rules of the game to win.


That's the theory behind competitive gaming, whether it's for money, to test skill differences, or purely for fun, it's not interesting unless you play to win (or to learn).


Now let me ask you this, why are certain moves dishonorable? Is it perhaps because your personal honor code defines it as such? What about people who hold very different codes which they stick just as strongly to, is it your right to force them upon those others?

If so... congrats, you are the thought police.

If not, then why even ask people to abide by your code.

The idea of competitive gaming is that we're supposed to have an idea in common about this, that we all do everything within the rules to win. If you don't believe that, then competitive gaming really isn't your scene, no matter what your motives are.

Sure, if you're willing to not attempt to force us to play by your rules you can play, but if you attempt to make us conform to your mentality, then it creates a fundamental breach in values which cannot be resolved. If enough people like that attempt to change the community, then the community itself fractures into constant irresolvable bickering....


Sort of like the smash community is doing now.


So, no. Honor, at least your honor code, has no place in competitive gaming. The honor that has a place in competitive gaming is pride in your work, strict adherence to the rules of the game, and respect for the other player out of game. Once it makes the jump to "arbitrary rules that exist only in your mind", then it becomes destructive to the community.

 

[XienZo]

Once it makes the jump to "arbitrary rules that exist only in your mind", then it becomes destructive to the community.

How is the 8 minute time limit directly connected to the competitive scene?

 

[MeLL0W]

I see planking as pretty annoying sometimes. I use a very minimal version of planking as a part of my Peach's ledge game whenever my opponent likes to keep the fights on the sides. (Like Marth) In general I see a limit of grabbing the ledge is a good option in regards to people who plank to stall out the match.

 

[adumbrodeus]

How is the 8 minute time limit directly connected to the competitive scene?

arbitrary rules that exist only in your mind

Nearly every tournament in existence has the "8 minute time limit" rule explicitly on their rule list, therefore it wasn't covered in that rant.

If you want a rant about arbitrary/stupid rules that are explicitly within the tournament rules, I have plenty of those in just about every "ban" thread that came up.


This is talking about people expecting other people to follow rules of in-game behavior that are not within the scope of thee tournament rules, it was talking about "honor", which is not related to an 8 minute time limit in the slightest.












missed this previous post:

It only applies at the top tier, since you can dump broken OU Pokemon to Uber, but at the point where you get into a handful-of-character Uber tier, you can't dump broken pokemon into the tier above it. Thats why there's no borderline between Uber and OU; its banned or not banned.

Ubers is NOT designed to be balanced. I don't think there's any major person in the Pokemon community that says otherwise; thats where I hear it from all the time.

I never suggested it was designed to be balanced, but it definitely has it's own metagame.

It serves as a way to get around (for the most part) the need for banning, because while things may not be completely balanced at any level and some more then others, this format cuts down the number of unviable characters in a very extreme way, while at the same time, allowing (nearly) everything to be tournament legal.

Of course, but the Uber tier is more centralized (or rather, has more % of unviables) than the others.

True.

I meant in D/P/Pt, he was shown NOT to be unbalanced for OU. I think he it may have been due to the far more offensive metagame, but I recall Wobba not being gamebreaking during the test period.

Ok, shoddy memory I guess.

Regardless, uber tier is far more comparable to different weight classes in MMA, Wrestling, and boxing, because it does not remove people from competition, but instead sets a division for them to compete in, as such, it has far lower standards.

Same basic inherent balance issue with heavyweight too, a guy that's 340 competes against a guy that 220, but such is the issue when you create "everybody above" or "everyone below" groups, as such those two types of groups have a tendency to be far less balanced.

 

[arwildcats09]

I say ban, because some characters really have nothing to counter.

 

[XienZo]

arbitrary rules that exist only in your mind

Nearly every tournament in existence has the "8 minute time limit" rule explicitly on their rule list, therefore it wasn't covered in that rant.

If you want a rant about arbitrary/stupid rules that are explicitly within the tournament rules, I have plenty of those in just about every "ban" thread that came up.


This is talking about people expecting other people to follow rules of in-game behavior that are not within the scope of thee tournament rules, it was talking about "honor", which is not related to an 8 minute time limit in the slightest.

Got it.

I never suggested it was designed to be balanced, but it definitely has it's own metagame.

It serves as a way to get around (for the most part) the need for banning, because while things may not be completely balanced at any level and some more then others, this format cuts down the number of unviable characters in a very extreme way, while at the same time, allowing (nearly) everything to be tournament legal.

Ok, shoddy memory I guess.

Regardless, uber tier is far more comparable to different weight classes in MMA, Wrestling, and boxing, because it does not remove people from competition, but instead sets a division for them to compete in, as such, it has far lower standards.

Same basic inherent balance issue with heavyweight too, a guy that's 340 competes against a guy that 220, but such is the issue when you create "everybody above" or "everyone below" groups, as such those two types of groups have a tendency to be far less balanced.

Eh, regardless of what Uber is, the main point is the same: Wobba had test run in Standard, didn't overcentralize but was boring, people banned him, he left Standard, and no one really regrets it.

What about Meta?

 

[Eddie G]

Misguided retort.

You need to relax. When did I even say that I was one to believe in or abide by any honor code in my post? Oh that's right, not once!

I was pointing out my thoughts as to why WE believe in playing the way we do in competitive gaming. Just because I believe that our mindset while we play is sad, it does not mean that I have any expectations for people to change that mindset. I myself play to win and will utilize whatever it takes, I share a perspective with the competitive viewpoint, so what right do I have to even tell someone "no you can't"? You should have read my post a lot better before you let your fingers get so excited to type up an argument.

My post to Sunstar was nothing more than an explanation.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You need to relax. When did I even say that I was one to believe in or abide by any honor code in my post? Oh that's right, not once!

I was pointing out my thoughts as to why WE believe in playing the way we do in competitive gaming. Just because I believe that our mindset while we play is sad, it does not mean that I have any expectations for people to change that mindset. I myself play to win and will utilize whatever it takes, I share a perspective with the competitive viewpoint, so what right do I have to even tell someone "no you can't"? You should have read my post a lot better before you let your fingers get so excited to type up an argument.

My post to Sunstar was nothing more than an explanation.

What you suggested was that the "play to win" mindset is degenerate and ultimately harmful to competitive gaming.

The fact is that it is the "play with honor" mindset that is degenerate within competitive gaming and I was merely pointing it out.

I was not personally attacking you, but instead pointing out that the mindset that you seem to think is better is in reality, fundamentally flawed.

 

[Eddie G]

What you suggested was that the "play to win" mindset is degenerate and ultimately harmful to competitive gaming.

The fact is that it is the "play with honor" mindset that is degenerate within competitive gaming and I was merely pointing it out.

I was not personally attacking you, but instead pointing out that the mindset that you seem to think is better is in reality, fundamentally flawed.

What I "suggested" is nothing of the sort. Oh sure, the way I typed my post is full of negative connotations, I know that. I expressed my opinion of such a mindset being sad, however "sad" in this sense can mean a number of things, but that does not point out and neither did I imply that said mindset causes any sort of harm to competitive gaming. You merely pointed out what YOU interpreted my post as.

Aside from that, you did take the time to point out this so-called "fact" that is contrary to your misinterpretation of what I posted. If your point is indeed fact, would you care to provide an explanation as to why it is?