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

[Melomaniacal]

If the opponent gets planked for 7 minutes they must be doing nothing about it (I guess they could be using a character that cant do anything about it, but as planking progresses it might show certain character to be "non-tourney viable" characters) In that SK92 match, he really doesnt try much to get around planking. He could of at least tryed a number of things such as, wall jump to Dair, bair of the side, or reflector near the edge hopping for a slight slip in Planks planking (if he would mess up he would then go slightly above the edge). As I recall he just stood on the opposite side and Shoot lasers >_>. Not saying these ideas would work, but if he was about to lose he could of tryed something. I find this example to be invalid. If he tryed something and it didnt work than this example would be a little more compelling but still written off as the fact that falco might not be able to do anything against planking. Well go cry about it. If you play Falco learn to get around planking with him or accept the fact that you cannot play him. The brawl communities stand on "If I cant beat it, ban it" is getting really old really fast.

Aslo if people keep reffering to planking as stalling I'm going to scream >=(

Also the ledge grab rule is stupid because if something is agree that it needs limits than it should be agreed that this tactic is broken. Limits should not be placed, epecially (spelling) limits that will limit stuff that is not the tactic under question. Ban or dont ban, but dont put a stupid limit that will limit the players playing styles out of fear for losing when they have done no tactics that are concidered broken.

...go watch the match again
Oh yeah, and once again (this time in bold caps): THE LEDGE GRAB RULE DOES NOT AND WILL NOT BAN PLANKING.

Planking can be used as a stalling technique, and that shouldn't be allowed. Like I've been saying, the ledge grab rule would prevent it's use as a way to stall the match to an end to win by percentage (what Plank was trying to do), and keep it as a defensive tactic to gain positional advantage. What is wrong with that? I seriously don't see the problem in it. Seriously I have been saying this for awhile and no one responds to it. I want someone to prove me wrong here, because I do feel like I'm missing something. So please do.

It will not limit your play style if you like to plank. I'm getting tired of saying this. It only goes into effect if the timer runs out, and it's only illegal if you have grabbed the edge 50 or so times (I assume the number will be 50). Do you have any idea how incredible it is to grab the edge 50 times? Please, check how many times you grab the edge in any match.

The ledge grab rule will not change your playstyle, unless you intend on planking to end the match by time out (aka STALLING).

some dude in the comments section said that he used 69 ledge grabs. so by the ledge grab rule, this would be a legitimate match

Wrong. The ledge grab rule in JAPAN requires 70 grabs. They play TEN MINUTE matches. We play 7/8 minute matches. It would be less; around 50.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phRs10GVwvg&feature=related

I think this match is a better example of planking, used by Plank throughout the whole match (from beginning to end), and the round right before the example video given in the first post. I'd recommend using this video rather than the other one.

Was this really such a bad match? SK92 played pretty evenly for the first stock and the first half of the second stock and was even up quite a bit. He had trouble landing a kill move on the second stock which let Plank get a substantial percentage lead for the third stock. He made somewhat of a comeback on the third stock, getting Plank up to 61%, but he ended up not being able to make up for the deficit on the second stock.

It just seems strange to me that a match that is an example of how broken planking is supposed to be involving one of the best characters at doing it against one supposedly one of the worst at countering it ends on the last stock at mid%. Shouldn't this have been much less close?

 

[Eddie G]

This may be a silly proposal, so if it is don't get on my case too hard for it, but why don't we just get rid of or alter the "player X beats player Y if they have more stocks and/or less percentage when the timer runs out" rule?

What I mean is: Why not just institute an automatic "tie-breaker match" with one stock and no time limit if a match goes to time? I know that would just make a time limit seem like it is unnecessary, but it could possibly be used as a method to discourage planking altogether as well as make sure that a player actually KOs/gimps their opponent. At the very least, a temporary instillation of this method to try it out would be nice.

I know it's stretching it a little, but it at least avoids any outright banning of anything, and avoids telling people something along the lines of "you can't do this". It's more of a "do this at your own risk" enforcement.

Thoughts? ^.^;

 

[Melomaniacal]

I know it's stretching it a little, but it at least avoids any outright banning of anything, and avoids telling people something along the lines of "you can't do this". It's more of a "do this at your own risk" enforcement.

Thoughts? ^.^;

If I had just read this part, I would think that you're describing the ledge grab rule.

Again: the ledge grab rule does not ban planking.

 

[Eddie G]

If I had just read this part, I would think that you're describing the ledge grab rule.

Again: the ledge grab rule does not ban planking.

Did you read my full post or just that part?

I am not referring to the ledge grab rule in any way.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Did you read my full post or just that part?

I am not referring to the ledge grab rule in any way.

I know, I read your post. I'm just saying, from the sounds of it, the ledge grab rule accomplishes what you want. A limit on using planking as a stalling technique without eliminating it.

 

[Eddie G]

I know, I read your post. I'm just saying, from the sounds of it, the ledge grab rule accomplishes what you want. A limit on using planking as a stalling technique without eliminating it.

I agree that it could possibly accomplish what I want, but the thing is...my proposal is to alter the results of a match's time-out in a way that makes planking still available, not limited from use in a match, but ultimately pointless if the player is seeking to win by a time-out. That way, planking could still be used and just be used as a defensive tactic, and not for stalling, thus changing its purpose from stalling to camping, which is ok.

In short: To leave planking available, to not limit it, but to change its purpose for use (if used).

See the difference?

 

[Melomaniacal]

I agree that it could possibly accomplish what I want, but the thing is...my proposal is to alter the results of a match's time-out in a way that makes planking still available, not limited from use in a match, but ultimately pointless if the player is seeking to win by a time-out. That way, planking could still be used and just be used as a defensive tactic, and not for stalling, thus changing its purpose from stalling to camping, which is ok.

In short: To leave planking available, to not limit it, but to change its purpose for use (if used).

See the difference?

But that's almost exactly what the ledge grab rule does.

Since it only goes into effect if the timer runs out, it eliminates its use as a stalling tactic. This combined with the requirement of 50 or more grabs means you can also use it as a camping/defensive tactic to gain positional advantage. The only way you'll break the ledge grab rule is if you were using planking to stall. Literally, it's nearly impossible to break the rule if you're just using planking as a camping technique. There's no way you'll break the rule.

 

[RP`]

some dude in the comments section said that he used 69 ledge grabs. so by the ledge grab rule, this would be a legitimate match

Then he must have not been planking the entire match (Problem Solved!). Because I counted him grabbing the ledge almost 30 times in the first minute of the 5:13 minute game. Never mind if a ledge grab rule was set into place I doubt it would be 69 grabs, because as said before the **** set it to 70 grabs for a 10 minute game, so chances are we if set a ledge grab rule ourselves it will be lower for our 7-8 minute games.

 

[Eddie G]

But that's almost exactly what the ledge grab rule does.

Since it only goes into effect if the timer runs out, it eliminates its use as a stalling tactic. This combined with the requirement of 50 or more grabs means you can also use it as a camping/defensive tactic to gain positional advantage. The only way you'll break the ledge grab rule is if you were using planking to stall. Literally, it's nearly impossible to break the rule if you're just using planking as a camping technique. There's no way you'll break the rule.

True, but that still leaves the player with that distant inconvenience of worrying about how many times they grab the ledge (a la planking or not). A predetermined impossibility of breaking that rule without planking isn't nearly enough to assure players that it is, in fact, an impossibility.

With my proposal, players can grab the edge as many times as they wish, they can play how they prefer to play, but it is guaranteed that if a match goes to time they will have no choice but to play a tie-breaker match with one stock and no time limit, so hanging on the edge (in the tie-breaker or in the matches leading up to it) only serves as a defensive option, but again with no inconvenience to the player of keeping count.

So yes, they both strive toward the discouragement of planking to stall, but my proposal does not include any possible inconvenience of keeping count for players, and also can prevent Brawl from becoming one stop-watch of a competitive game.

 

[Eyada]

This may be a silly proposal, so if it is don't get on my case too hard for it, but why don't we just get rid of or alter the "player X beats player Y if they have more stocks and/or less percentage when the timer runs out" rule?

What I mean is: Why not just institute an automatic "tie-breaker match" with one stock and no time limit if a match goes to time? I know that would just make a time limit seem like it is unnecessary, but it could possibly be used as a method to discourage planking altogether as well as make sure that a player actually KOs/gimps their opponent. At the very least, a temporary instillation of this method to try it out would be nice.

I know it's stretching it a little, but it at least avoids any outright banning of anything, and avoids telling people something along the lines of "you can't do this". It's more of a "do this at your own risk" enforcement.

Thoughts? ^.^;

Because that one-stock, no time limit match could (and would) last for an indefinite period of time if both players refused to approach.

Hypothetical: Two MK's, both at 200%, with just that one Stock. Both are planking. Neither will want to approach because doing so means almost certain defeat. There is no time limit, so, if the prize money is significant enough to warrant such extreme behavior, it becomes a contest to see who can stay awake the longest.

Imagine those contests where people have to keep their hand on a car (or some other valuable item) and if a contestant removes their hand from the object they are DQ'ed. You know, the ones where everyone essentially brings camping supplies and has friends/family on hand to bring them more supplies if needed. That's what large-payout Smash tournaments would have the potential to devolve into.

It would take "Brawl is a camping game" to a whole new, rather tedious extreme.

 

[Melomaniacal]

True, but that still leaves the player with that distant inconvenience of worrying about how many times they grab the ledge (a la planking or not). A predetermined impossibility of breaking that rule without planking isn't nearly enough to assure players that it is, in fact, an impossibility.

With my proposal, players can grab the edge as many times as they wish, they can play how they prefer to play, but it is guaranteed that if a match goes to time they will have no choice but to play a tie-breaker match with one stock and no time limit, so hanging on the edge (in the tie-breaker or in the matches leading up to it) only serves as a defensive option, but again with no inconvenience to the player of keeping count.

So yes, they both strive toward the discouragement of planking to stall, but my proposal does not include any possible inconvenience of keeping count for players, and also can prevent Brawl from becoming one stop-watch of a competitive game.

They only need to worry about that if the timer is running out. I promise, if you don't plan on running the timer, you won't. You will only run the timer if you're trying to.

 

[Eddie G]

Because that one-stock, no time limit match could (and would) last for an indefinite period of time if both players refused to approach.

Hypothetical: Two MK's, both at 200%, with just that one Stock. Both are planking. Neither will want to approach because doing so means almost certain defeat. There is no time limit, so, if the prize money is significant enough to warrant such extreme behavior, it becomes a contest to see who can stay awake the longest.

Imagine those contests where people have to keep their hand on a car (or some other valuable item) and if a contestant removes their hand from the object they are DQ'ed. You know, the ones where everyone essentially brings camping supplies and has friends/family on hand to bring them more supplies if needed. That's what large-payout Smash tournaments would have the potential to devolve into.

It would take "Brawl is a camping game" to a whole new, rather tedious extreme.

You make a good point. That is certainly a possibility with this method.

However, in regard to something like planking, with every possible solution there will be some sort of drawback. This should be a matter of gauging every possible proposal and drawback, comparing and contrasting them, and coming up with what could work out the best. My presentation is merely an option. ^.^

 

[Eddie G]

They only need to worry about that if the timer is running out. I promise, if you don't plan on running the timer, you won't. You will only run the timer if you're trying to.

True but what I said gives the planking "victim" an option as well, and that is to let their opponent plank if they wish, since if the match goes to time they will have to play each other in that tie-breaker anyway. Sure, that would mean that planking could still be used as a defensive option in the tie-breaker, but the whole purpose of this discussion is to influence the incentive for planking if it is used, right?

I'm sure this alternative is beneficial to those characters who can just not deal with planking so well (especially a planking MK), and even though they still have a mountain of difficulty to climb when fighting against planking, the worst case scenario is a loss by KO, and not by time.

Also, your option, while setting a respectable limit, still leaves room for possible "planking in spurts" to go along with the inconvenience of keeping count. Those are still potholes big enough to make players stray away from the idea.

Edit- sorry for the double post. People don't post fast enough.

 

[Melomaniacal]

True but what I said gives the planking "victim" an option as well, and that is to let their opponent plank if they wish, since if the match goes to time they will have to play each other in that tie-breaker anyway. Sure, that would mean that planking could still be used as a defensive option in the tie-breaker, but the whole purpose of this discussion is to influence the incentive for planking if it is used, right?

I'm sure this alternative is beneficial to those characters who can just not deal with planking so well (especially a planking MK), and even though they still have a mountain of difficulty to climb when fighting against planking, the worst case scenario is a loss by KO, and not by time.

Also, your option, while setting a respectable limit, still leaves room for possible "planking in spurts" to go along with the inconvenience of keeping count. Those are still potholes big enough to make players stray away from the idea.

You're right, and your idea sounds good on paper. But I'm not sure how well it would work in large tournaments and such. Could take up some time, you know?

You don't have to keep count. It will tell you in the results screen. Just don't run out of time, or don't be ridiculous. Trust me, 50 is a lot.

OMG LOL U DBL POAST'D CAL TEH POLIC

 

[Eddie G]

You're right, and your idea sounds good on paper. But I'm not sure how well it would work in large tournaments and such. Could take up some time, you know?

You don't have to keep count. It will tell you in the results screen. Just don't run out of time, or don't be ridiculous. Trust me, 50 is a lot.

OMG LOL U DBL POAST'D CAL TEH POLIC

Yes I know that it could be a possible inconvenience at larger tournaments, but as I told Eyada: at this point it comes down to comparing proposals along with their drawbacks and determining which would still benefit players the most.

I know you don't literally have to keep count, but players who still play a somewhat heavy edge-game (such as myself with Peach for many instances) are still left with that inconvenience of "I hope I don't go over", even if 50 is a lot. It gives players something else to worry about along with the match, which in my opinion is something we shouldn't be doing.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Yes I know that it could be a possible inconvenience at larger tournaments, but as I told Eyada: at this point it comes down to comparing proposals along with their drawbacks and determining which would still benefit players the most.

I know you don't literally have to keep count, but players who still play a somewhat heavy edge-game (such as myself with Peach for many instances) are still left with that inconvenience of "I hope I don't go over", even if 50 is a lot. It gives players something else to worry about along with the match, which in my opinion is something we shouldn't be doing.

Do you keep track of how much you grab the edge in a match? I don't think I've ever gone above 20. Seriously. Keep track of how much you grab the edge for a little while, if you don't already, you'll probably be surprised.

It's just in my mind, the ledge grab rule is the most reasonable, easy to enforce, and effective rule so far. That, and it's not even really banning it, so it's not really leaving anyone out here.

 

[Eddie G]

Do you keep track of how much you grab the edge in a match? I don't think I've ever gone above 20. Seriously. Keep track of how much you grab the edge for a little while, if you don't already, you'll probably be surprised.

It's just in my mind, the ledge grab rule is the most reasonable, easy to enforce, and effective rule so far. That, and it's not even really banning it, so it's not really leaving anyone out here.

Well I am a Peach main, and I'm guessing you're a Lucario main, so obviously our preferences of edge use will be different from one another. I also sub Lucario, and I will say that without a doubt, Peach has a much larger dependency on the edge. So yes, players like me who are more reliant on the edge are still left with the inconvenience of keeping count, and if they don't keep count then they are stuck with the paranoia of not knowing if they've gone over or not, all of which comes from the ledge grab limit (key word that fuels my argument).

 

[Melomaniacal]

Well I am a Peach main, and I'm guessing you're a Lucario main, so obviously our preferences of edge use will be different from one another. I also sub Lucario, and I will say that without a doubt, Peach has a much larger dependency on the edge. So yes, players like me who are more reliant on the edge are still left with the inconvenience and/or paranoia that goes with the ledge grab limit (key word that fuels my argument).

I still highly doubt that you will reach 50 ledge grabs and a time out.
But I do see your point. I think if you become very familiar with how much you normally grab the edge, you won't be so paranoid about it.

 

[PK-ow!]

I think in the end, the way we will deal with this is Gentleman's rule.

IF it's a problem.

Until we know it's a problem, (A) stalling is still banned and can be judged on a case-by-case basis, and (B) we have to let people ***** the hell out of it so we know exactly how deep and vast the 'problem' is.

I rest my case. Good talk, guys.

 

[Eddie G]

I still highly doubt that you will reach 50 ledge grabs and a time out.
But I do see your point. I think if you become very familiar with how much you normally grab the edge, you won't be so paranoid about it.

Good point, but why should I put my faith into doubt when I can depend on what can be guaranteed. Doubt is just an assurance, it does not eliminate the possibility of what it is claiming will not happen, in this case grabbing the edge 50 times. The possibility of it happening, no matter how slim, is still present, which still gives players something extra to worry about in-game.

Sure, my proposal leaves the possibility of inconvenient time extensions out-of-game, but that can be dealt with post-match and does nothing to affect the actual match at hand.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Good point, but why should I put my faith into doubt when I can depend on what can be guaranteed. Doubt is just an assurance, it does not eliminate the possibility of what it is claiming will not happen, in this case grabbing the edge 50 times. The possibility of it happening, no matter how slim, is still present, which still gives players something extra to worry about in-game.

Sure, my proposal leaves the possibility of inconvenient time extensions out-of-game, but that can be dealt with post-match and does nothing to affect the actual match at hand.

I still feel like that would be an initial thing.
Keep track of how much you grab the ledge in a game. Trust me.

I am not only confident, but I am 100% absolutely positive that I would never break the ledge rule, even if I do chose to plank in the match. It's almost a guarantee. This is because I keep track of my ledge grabs, and I fully understand what it takes to break this rule.

You would have to be incredibly stupid to break this rule, honestly. If you see that you're running out of time, stop grabbing the ledge. I guarantee that you won't grab it 50 times in 7/8 minutes. You would have to be grabbing it a ridiculous amount of times.

 

[Falconv1.0]

I actually thought Sk92 vs Plank was a pretty fair match. Technically on maps like FD without planking MK gets to eat lazers and has to basically let himself get hurt or risk the cg which really hurts him early on.


Not even arguing one side or another any more, just added some thoughts.

 

[Eddie G]

I still feel like that would be an initial thing.
Keep track of how much you grab the ledge in a game. Trust me.

I am not only confident, but I am 100% absolutely positive that I would never break the ledge rule, even if I do chose to plank in the match. It's almost a guarantee. This is because I keep track of my ledge grabs, and I fully understand what it takes to break this rule.

You would have to be incredibly stupid to break this rule, honestly. If you see that you're running out of time, stop grabbing the ledge. I guarantee that you won't grab it 50 times in 7/8 minutes. You would have to be grabbing it a ridiculous amount of times.

There is that lack of certainty again. There is no 100% that is associated with just doubting something will happen. A guarantee is what players need right now.

As for the second underlined point, not necessarily. Maybe players have more important things to worry about in a match (especially the nail-biters) than how many times they grab the edge. It's just...an added distraction, whether consciously or sub-consciously. I'll stick to my main point and say that it gives some players something else to worry about when they shouldn't have to pay attention to the number of times they do it at all.

 

[Melomaniacal]

There is that lack of certainty again. There is no 100% that is associated with just doubting something will happen. A guarantee is what players need right now.

As for the second underlined point, not necessarily. Maybe players have more important things to worry about in a match (especially the nail-biters) than how many times they grab the edge. It's just...an added distraction, whether consciously or sub-consciously. I'll stick to my main point and say that it gives some players something else to worry about when they shouldn't have to pay attention to the number of times they do it at all.

The point is that you will only break this rule if you are trying to stall out a match via planking, which is exactly why the rule is there. I can 100% guarantee you that you will not break the rule if you are not trying to stall (illegal) by planking. There is no lack of certainty if you're not trying to stall by planking. Seriously.

If you're not planking to stall, there is ABSOLUTELY no reason to worry about the rule. And if you are worrying about it anyway, that's your own lack of experience with the rule, or lack of knowledge about how much you grab the ledge. That's your own fault, you still won't break the rule. The whole "added thing to worry about" is really a moot point. That doesn't matter. Worrying about something means inexperience, or lack of knowledge. I worry about my percentage vs. MK all the time, I don't want to ban MK. Competitive games require you to think of a lot of things at once.

 

[Eddie G]

The point is that you will only break this rule if you are trying to stall out a match via planking, which is exactly why the rule is there. I can 100% guarantee you that you will not break the rule if you are not trying to stall (illegal) by planking. There is no lack of certainty if you're not trying to stall by planking. Seriously.

If you're not planking to stall, there is ABSOLUTELY no reason to worry about the rule. And if you are worrying about it anyway, that's your own lack of experience with the rule, or lack of knowledge about how much you grab the ledge. That's your own fault, you still won't break the rule. The whole "added thing to worry about" is really a moot point. That doesn't matter. Worrying about something means inexperience, or lack of knowledge. I worry about my percentage vs. MK all the time, I don't want to ban MK. Competitive games require you to think of a lot of things at once.

*sigh* Well we'll just have to see how things turn out.

I'd still rather take a guarantee over what you "absolutely doubt" will happen, because that is not a guarantee, that is your own certainty that applies to you but not necessarily to everyone else. That doesn't mean that they are inexperienced, and why present them with something that can (I'll say it), in game context, "artificially" add something to worry about when a more worry-free option is available to them?

Again, we'll see what happens. XP

 

[Melomaniacal]

*sigh* Well we'll just have to see how things turn out.

I'd still rather take a guarantee over what you "absolutely doubt" will happen, because that is not a guarantee, that is your own certainty that applies to you but not necessarily to everyone else. That doesn't mean that they are inexperienced, and why present them with something that can (I'll say it), in game context, "artificially" add something to worry about when a more worry-free option is available to them?

Again, we'll see what happens. XP

The rule has been applied to a few tournaments, and the TO reported no problems. He claimed that no people attending the tournament saw any issues with the rule. I can try to find the post if you really want me to, but... that's probably buried... somewhere I don't know.

Keep track of your ledge grabs the next few times you play, trust me. It's not something you have to worry about. Matches end without a time out far more often than not anyway. If you're planking to stall, you're planking to stall, that's all I have to say.

Also, keep track of your ledge grabs for awhile. Srsly

Found the post (easier than I thought):

I used this rule at a tournament this weekend. The number I used was 60. I encouraged people to check their edge grabs. Almost everyone was surprised at the numbers, some games the edge grabs were as low as 2-3 per person, and that was in the finals of the tournament. There were 2 Meta Knights in the top 5.

No problems came up with the rule. No one complained about it. No one "planked" that I saw. And finally no one got over 60 edge grabs, and once again the average for most people was under likely under 10. Next time I run a tournament I'll probably make the rule 50 edge grabs.

And just for the record: I do not believe planking is broken or cheap.

 

[xDD-Master]

If Planking wont get banned, there will be more MKs, not because they will plank, because MK is sooo good in counter planking (nado for the win)

And now the ****ing question:

DO ... WE ... want more MKs ??? Yes

Super DSmash MKs Brawl :D

 

[brinboy789]

why cant everybody just be like azen and shut down planking? sure its not easy but if someone can do it then you can also do it >_>

 

[Nidtendofreak]

why cant everybody just be like azen and shut down planking? sure its not easy but if someone can do it then you can also do it >_>

Because if everyone was like azen, nobody would complain about Brawl, and it would almost play like Melee.

 

[TLMSheikant]

If Planking wont get banned, there will be more MKs, not because they will plank, because MK is sooo good in counter planking (nado for the win)

And now the ****ing question:

DO ... WE ... want more MKs ??? Yes

Super DSmash MKs Brawl :D

LOL what?? this post is one of the worst ive seen in my time in SWF X_X.

 

[Man of Popsicle]

The point is that you will only break this rule if you are trying to stall out a match via planking

What if you're getting repeatedly ledge *****?

 

[Falconv1.0]

why cant everybody just be like azen and shut down planking? sure its not easy but if someone can do it then you can also do it >_>

Because that would imply doing something instead of *****ing about it and claiming it's stalling.

 

[Melomaniacal]

What if you're getting repeatedly ledge *****?

Are you kidding? You will NEVER be forced to grab the ledge FIFTY TIMES. Never. You would have to be knocked off the stage every, like, 4 seconds. Absolutely will not happen.
And if for some reason the game glitches and your character, like, twitches on the edge 40 times, the timer still has to run out.

Won't happen. Not a good point

 

[AvaricePanda]

Or we could wait until it becomes a valid problem in tournaments and not, "OMG BAN PLANKING LOOK LET'S ALL LINK TO THESE TWO MATCHES WITH PLANKING IN THEM REPEATEDLY TO FURHTER OUR POINT!!!"

Plank vs. SK92 was from September, and planking still hasn't become a problem. I honestly doubt it will, and honestly, every single character does have something to counter planking, it's just that half the cast is put in a disadvantageous position to do so. And who knows, some of those characters might not be put in as much of a disadvantageous position as you think.

Now I'm 100% clear that we shouldn't do anything about it. It's too early, and at this point, not banworthy. We shouldn't put a safe-guard rule on something we aren't even sure is broken.

Besides, if Azen can get past it, so can you.

 

[XienZo]

Well, how do we DEFINE what is a "problem"?

Besides, if Azen can get past it, so can you.

Uhh....

...while we're at it, why don't we do all the things Chuck Norris did?

 

[Falconv1.0]

...while we're at it, why don't we do all the things Chuck Norris did?

Chuck Norris is a bad ***, no lie, but a very over rated one.


Azen is a top level player, we really shouldn't be banning things if top level players can handle them.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Why do people continue to think that a ledge grab rule bans planking?

 

[Falconv1.0]

Why do people continue to think that a ledge grab rule bans planking?

I hope that wasn't aimed at me.

I'm not really too sure about it, although supposedly Plank did 69 ledge grabs vs Sk92 in one match, which means like what, 2 more and he would have lost. And I dont think he was stalling in that match, he was just being really campy. Hell I'm pretty sure I saw SK92 pointing out how funny it was that people were still out raged at the match.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I hope that wasn't aimed at me.

I'm not really too sure about it, although supposedly Plank did 69 ledge grabs vs Sk92 in one match, which means like what, 2 more and he would have lost. And I dont think he was stalling in that match, he was just being really campy. Hell I'm pretty sure I saw SK92 pointing out how funny it was that people were still out raged at the match.

The ledge grab rule would be set to either 50 or 57 (7 or 8 minutes). But he wouldn't have lost anyway because the timer didn't run out.
The point is that the ledge grab rule gives you room to be campy and plank, but not plank to run the timer. I'm pretty **** sure Plank was trying to run the timer, haha.

I don't even have a problem with planking. I think it's a completely viable strategy, but I don't think we should allow people to abuse it as a stalling technique. The ledge grab rule would prevent this.