Event - E3 Invitational 2014 Smash Ball in Competitive Smash

[Narpas_sword]

in summary:

Items are great. theyre really fun, a good thing to have on when youre playing with your friends who have no interest in getting good at a competitive level. It means they're likley to continue playing (instead of getting pants'd), and hopefully get to a point where they'd also like items off.

but they have no fking place in tourney.

 

[Phaazoid]

What? So you say " to turn [ items ] off would be to ignore a large part of the game " then follow that up with " [ items ] aren't game changing ." I think you're confused.

Secondly - I think it would make more sense for those people to just train vs. Diddy or Peach rather then making a tournament scene that probably wouldn't be as effective.

How do you have no johns with items? Like when the game can give anyone a boost at anytime ( you don't need a huge boost to win ) you expect people to have no johns.

The problem with items is that it doesn't ensure that the best player wins. Someone who is clearly the better at the game can be eliminated because fate wasn't on his side. Which to me is dumb. Like the whole point of a tournament is that you have a bunch of people fighting and whoever is the best ultimately stands on top.

Pulling two parts of a long post out of context isn't the same thing as an argument. Both of those statements made sense where I said them, and I stand by them.

The error in your other argument here is that you are basing your argument on the fact that if someone fights someone else, and one person has an item, that person has an unfair advantage, and if that person wins, it will not be because of his skill, but because of the item.

While there definitely are a few items that sentiment is true for, those are the items I would argue should be banned. Items like the ones I listed in my previous post, however, don't give one player or another an unfair advantage. Each item has it's ups and downs for each character that holds it.

On the flip side of that argument, some characters have received buffs in game when items are in play, like I mentioned before as well. To not include items at all would be to indirectly nerf those characters options and limit their playstyles. Items are being factored into the games balance as a whole.

And for your remark on the point of a tournament, I agree wholeheartedly. The point of a tournament is to see who is best at a game. The thing is, items are an integral part of the game. They are weaved into it's characters, stages, and game modes. Is a player really the best at 'the game' if he can't handle items?

Again, as I said in my other argument with Alfonzo, I'm not trying to say that all items should be in all tournaments, forever. I'm only trying to argue that the anti-item bias is too strong here, and it shouldn't impact us giving items a chance in smash 4 before ruling them out. They have to be innocent until proven guilty, this is a new game, we don't know how it will work out.

 

[C_Mill24]

Smash Balls are not the same as Super Combos and Ultra Combos from Street Fighter. Smash Ball is still an item and it interrupts the flow and pace of the match when the players start scrambling for it.

 

[KCCHIEFS27]

This honestly might be a candidate for worst thread topic EVER

 

[PBK!]

Sorry but items will never have a place in competitive smash. There is no argument that supports it, reserve items for the casuals.

 

[Tristan_win]

Items weren't banned in melee because items are unfair. They were only banned because if any items were turned on, explosives containers would still sometimes spawn, which could land and explode, which could kill. That was unfair, so all items had to go.

In brawl, you were given the option to turn this off. But with the sheer amount of anti-item bias around, and the lack of adaptation of competitive brawl, items never made a come back.

How exactly does one turn off the chance for explosive containers, this is the first time I've heard of this?

Edit: I hate items more then the next guy but I might be able to fathom the possibility if you explain how and it applies to all containers including capsules.

 

[Chibi-Chan]

How exactly does one turn off the chance for explosive containers, this is the first time I've heard of this?

Edit: I hate items more then the next guy but I might be able to fathom the possibility if you explain how and it applies to all containers including capsules.

Pretty sure hey can only Explode in Brawl if you have any of the explosive items enabled (Bob-Omb, Motion Sensor, Smart Bomb, TNT crate thing? I think those are it). As long as all of those are disabled, boxes, capsules and party balls wont kill you.

 

[Phaazoid]

How exactly does one turn off the chance for explosive containers, this is the first time I've heard of this?

Edit: I hate items more then the next guy but I might be able to fathom the possibility if you explain how and it applies to all containers including capsules.

Containers are toggle-able in the items list now. Not only that, but they've distinguished explosive and regular crates, which are toggle-able separately. I assume that feature will carry over to Sm4sh.

 

[Brendan Stepladder]

Smash ball is possibly the most unbalanced item mechanic in all the game. I don't even know how does Sakurai balance these, oh my god.

He doesn't. That's his secret :3

 

[Malex]

The item debate is an old one. Aren't you really just assuming that it hasn't been tested at length? A link was already produced that had extensive testing and debate with the aim of creating a standardized item rule set. It, obviously, didn't become mainstream.


In Melee, the number one most important argument was that there were explosive containers, which is enough to warrant a ban.

In Brawl, after extensive testing, the Item Standard has been established and to my understanding may continue to be a work in progress. Especially with the new games on the horizon.



Honestly, I'm neutral on items. Strategy, techniques, and skills have to be modified if they are introduced. Most of my experience has been with melee and I have some small experience with brawl. (I put a lot of debate into the original thread listed above all those years ago, as well.)

So, maybe someone with more experience with Brawl could provide some more meaningful input, but as far as I know, almost every item is not worth the trade off of losing your aerials. Nine times out of ten, the optimum choice is to throw the item.

Look at the legal items:

Most of them are activated by throwing. What's left over either consumables that aren't even necessarily worth picking up (Bunny Hood) or better off being thrown (Lip's Stick, Fire Flower). The only real advantage here is for characters who don't have projectiles to throw at characters who do have projectiles.

Another issue (again in melee, don't know about brawl for sure) was that it pretty much only reinforced the tiers. For example, the stronger characters had less "item pick up frames." The shortest, I think, was Fox with 1 or 2 frames. combined with his speed, and shine just make items great for him.


Sure, if items are turned on, you have to play differently. There were several times in the invitational where some of the players were not actively pursuing powerful items on the field and ended up paying dearly for it. Just because something is part or not part of the game shouldn't automatically affect its inclusion in competitive play.

Example: Tripping.

I know, I know. You'll say it isn't the same, but it is. Tripping was a random element sure. It could be avoided altogether though by moving predominantly through the air. Just like using items have risk/rewards, moving excessively on the ground did as well. It was included a mandatory included feature in the game. If you were "TRULY" good at the game, you should be able to win with tripping enabled.



As far as the claim that melee players have a harder time dealing with item characters, I would say that evidence is needed. Even if that were the case, it should only be at first because of item-specific special techniques and will eventually not be an issue as their experience within the game grows.

 

[The Slayer]

It's not to say items aren't fun, more or less the Smash Ball. However, predicting and adapting to getting them just seems like the focus is more on them than the players. When we see competitive players duke it out, we see oneself makes the fewest mistakes while utilizing their character to the fullest on their opponents' mistakes. Outside advantages to open the mistake window doesn't sound engaging. In the first match of the Invitational, Zero's ZZS gobble up four Final Smashes while easily take stocks with little effort and thought. But in the last match, while it was still in his favor due to range and evasion, going up on HB's Kirby was a lot more focused and engaging.

The best I can see for items is at parties or a small money pool on the side on the main tournaments, but making a full-blown tournament out of it? I don't see it happening.

 

[metalmonstar]

The randomness certainly hurts Smash Balls and items in general. However good stage control and adding more stocks/matches should limit the random factor. The better player will still come out on top despite the randomness giving the lesser skilled player a higher chance. Thus items could be competitive.

The main that hurts Smash Balls at least in Brawl was that it broke risk vs reward. There was an inherent risk to going after the smash ball. It certainly added depth when you have the option to punish your opponents greed for the smash ball or go after it yourself. However once the Smash Ball was attained there was no reason not to use it. You were invincible on startup, often during the attack, and safe afterwards. You literally pushed the b button and got so much out of it. Even if you missed there was usually no loss on your end. If you landed the final smash though the results could be devastating and swing the match in your favor.

If Smash balls were balanced a bit more where they could be disrupted or punished then I could see them being a legitimate tournament.

Also I will say that I would like to see item tournaments taken more seriously in Smash 4 then with Brawl. I feel like we jumped the gun on items and gave EVO too much criticism for having them.

 

[metaXzero]

I really don't get why every thread, people argue about the viability of items in a tournament (especially those making the sweeping claim that item tournies are impossible or have no place) when the fact is regardless of that, the demand for item tournies just isn't there. For all the casuals who harp on about wanting to see item tournies, barely any of them have any interest in attending them. And of course, the majority of players who already attend tournies aren't going to want items thrown in. Item tournies would be made up of a new audience instead of the existing tournament-attending community. It's too different to be replacing the no-item format, so it'd have to be its own thing.

But it never becomes its own thing even after the founding of ISP because in reality, there really aren't that many people interested.

 

[Icy_Eagle]

Even if items were to be included in tourneys, I'd personally not want smash balls to be included. Not because of of perceived lack of balance or anything like that, but simply because they're my least favorite item. When I do FFA item matches with my friends, we turn off sballs. I like items when they're just 'pick up and use', it goes well with the pace of frantic FFA's. Sballs completely changes the dynamic however, you have to chase the ball all over instead of actually fighting, and once someone gets it and uses their FS it's a lot of the time just 3 players being bored waiting for the spectacle to be over so they can get back to beating each other up.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

Pulling two parts of a long post out of context isn't the same thing as an argument. Both of those statements made sense where I said them, and I stand by them.

The error in your other argument here is that you are basing your argument on the fact that if someone fights someone else, and one person has an item, that person has an unfair advantage, and if that person wins, it will not be because of his skill, but because of the item.

While there definitely are a few items that sentiment is true for, those are the items I would argue should be banned. Items like the ones I listed in my previous post, however, don't give one player or another an unfair advantage. Each item has it's ups and downs for each character that holds it.

On the flip side of that argument, some characters have received buffs in game when items are in play, like I mentioned before as well. To not include items at all would be to indirectly nerf those characters options and limit their playstyles. Items are being factored into the games balance as a whole.

And for your remark on the point of a tournament, I agree wholeheartedly. The point of a tournament is to see who is best at a game. The thing is, items are an integral part of the game. They are weaved into it's characters, stages, and game modes. Is a player really the best at 'the game' if he can't handle items?

Again, as I said in my other argument with Alfonzo, I'm not trying to say that all items should be in all tournaments, forever. I'm only trying to argue that the anti-item bias is too strong here, and it shouldn't impact us giving items a chance in smash 4 before ruling them out. They have to be innocent until proven guilty, this is a new game, we don't know how it will work out.

There wasn't any context to make what you said make sense. Reread your post. You said how the game is becoming more item orientated...said how it's a big part of the game...then down the road on a separate point you said items aren't game changing.

My assumptions are valid. That's the point of items - why would you pick it up if it didn't give you the advantage? If the item didn't give you a net advantage you simply won't pick it up. And even looking at SSBB item list, most of the items don't give that advantage/disadvantage balance that you claim. Even the weaker items are mainly things that have a "I'll just use it and maybe it will work" mentality but hardly put you at the disadvantage.

My point was that I don't want to watch a match where someone who was clearly going to lose ends up winning due to an item. You can't always "handle" an item. And I don't think those few examples of characters with item specific abilities is enough to warrant them in tournaments - and would result in the game being more balanced as a result.

It's still Smash Bros, still plays similarly. We've seen tons of footage already - I think people are right to infer ( and experience ) why they shouldn't be in tournaments.

 

[SoaringDive]

Smash Balls should be allowed during Mega Man dittos. The fact that he's a more ranged character means that where it randomly spawns isn't that big of a deal, and that final smash is just pure hype every time.

But of all items, they would be the first to be taken off the list. There is no balance between final smashes, and usually the characters that have an easy time breaking the smash ball have the strongest final smash.

 

[Phaazoid]

There wasn't any context to make what you said make sense. Reread your post. You said how the game is becoming more item orientated...said how it's a big part of the game...then down the road on a separate point you said items aren't game changing.

My assumptions are valid. That's the point of items - why would you pick it up if it didn't give you the advantage? If the item didn't give you a net advantage you simply won't pick it up. And even looking at SSBB item list, most of the items don't give that advantage/disadvantage balance that you claim. Even the weaker items are mainly things that have a "I'll just use it and maybe it will work" mentality but hardly put you at the disadvantage.

My point was that I don't want to watch a match where someone who was clearly going to lose ends up winning due to an item. You can't always "handle" an item. And I don't think those few examples of characters with item specific abilities is enough to warrant them in tournaments - and would result in the game being more balanced as a result.

It's still Smash Bros, still plays similarly. We've seen tons of footage already - I think people are right to infer ( and experience ) why they shouldn't be in tournaments.

I just can't take any of your assumptions seriously when you are arguing to ignore a large portion of a game that hasn't come out yet based on some beta footage and habits of previous iterations of the game. This tells me that you are rooting this less in logic and more in dislike of change. I'm not saying I think items should definitely be in tournaments in smash 4. I'm saying the research needs to be done anew, that we can't throw them out right away without testing. And sure, maybe it'll be decided that they aren't suited for tournament play. I wouldn't argue. I'm not biased towards items. I fully support them being removed in melee. But the science needs to happen. If we cut off opportunities without even trying, we could be missing out without ever knowing.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

I just can't take any of your assumptions seriously when you are arguing to ignore a large portion of a game that hasn't come out yet based on some beta footage and habits of previous iterations of the game. This tells me that you are rooting this less in logic and more in dislike of change. I'm not saying I think items should definitely be in tournaments in smash 4. I'm saying the research needs to be done anew, that we can't throw them out right away without testing. And sure, maybe it'll be decided that they aren't suited for tournament play. I wouldn't argue. I'm not biased towards items. I fully support them being removed in melee. But the science needs to happen. If we cut off opportunities without even trying, we could be missing out without ever knowing.

Lolz. It's not that I dislike change. We have had 3 Smash games already come out. In all of those games items have been turned off.

The newest iteration doesn't change up the formula to either the game or items enough. Sakurai would have to do some major overhauling to the way items work for them to be viable. And from what we have seen, played, and heard - it's not there. I really don't like how people act like because it's a new game somehow everything we know about it needs to be reproved.

Do the testing - but I don't think the people here are biased against items. They understand it didn't work in past games - and they see that the current games handles them in a similar vein to previous ones.

 

[Malex]

I just can't take any of your assumptions seriously when you are arguing to ignore a large portion of a game that hasn't come out yet based on some beta footage and habits of previous iterations of the game. This tells me that you are rooting this less in logic and more in dislike of change. I'm not saying I think items should definitely be in tournaments in smash 4. I'm saying the research needs to be done anew, that we can't throw them out right away without testing. And sure, maybe it'll be decided that they aren't suited for tournament play. I wouldn't argue. I'm not biased towards items. I fully support them being removed in melee. But the science needs to happen. If we cut off opportunities without even trying, we could be missing out without ever knowing.

There will be a dedicated group who do testing. Just like every other version of the game. They will make a great contribution to creating a standardized rule set for items. Just like when Brawl came out. (Jack Kaiser) If it is truly the better test of skill, then it will eventually become the standard. Assuming history repeats itself, it isn't going to happen, unless there have been drastic changes made to items that we are currently unaware of. (The introduction of an item-use button instead of replacing Attack, for example.)

For it to become standard, TOs need to run it. It needs to draw large crowds. It needs to have matches streamed/uploaded that will be evaluated by players and, hopefully, generate interest in the rule set and grow the participants. Based on past experiences, current evidence, and the type of interactions with items that we expect, this will most likely not happen.

 

[Raetah]

There are two principal problems with items in Smash:
1) Most of the items are designed to give an excessive advantage to the user.
2) Items spawn in the map at random time and place.

Basically most of the items are designed to be overpowered and in top of that they apear randomly.

Actually if:
1) Items were something complementary to the character moveset, rather than an ultimately key victory.
2) Items apeared in specific areas in specific times.

Those two conditions would make items something fair in competive play, but that is something that this Smash does not feature. And probably smash will not feature this in any time.

 

[LiteralGrill]

In our research the one thing that damned balls and items alike is that they preferentially spawn towards the losing player. Sometimes smash balls would literally hover around the losing player the entire time. Between that and the tendency for items to spawn while you hit players (thus forcing an item grab or explosion if you hit an item spawning while you're in the middle of an attack) led us to ban items in Brawl. Given the second tendency, even without researching to see if item spawns favor the loser, I don't believe item legality needs to be explored in Smash 4 again.

Just wanna make this clear, items don't actually spawn towards the losing player. that was eventually proven to not be the case. None of the it goes closer to the losing player thing is true. It was bad research.

Were you in the backroom back then? Because if you were you'd see entire essays written by people like Overswarm and myself regarding every little issue on the ruleset. Smash wasn't in EVO because Mr Wizard thought the same thing you did which was WRONG.

Things no one else could read too. Plus, the Back Room has no relevance. When no one pays attention to the rulesets it posts, the rulesets it posts mean just about nothing. I really do hate dissing the group like that, but it's honestly true. People only care about what the backroom has to say if they agree with it. Plus I've heard TONS of things about votes being made on subjects with ZERO research by some members, made just from bias, and much worse. I'm sorry, but the opinions of the backroom mean little to me even with me wishing some day I could be a member.

Hell, we even did tournaments with 2 stocks instead of 3 and different counterpick or selecting methods. Thats how striking became commonplace by the way. Its actually pretty upsetting that you don't believe we did anything at all because I for one put a LOT of work into the issue.

Well ya don goofed up on that one. Starter/counterpick is a flawed system at the core, List Striking is the superior option. Though I know that that option wasn't really an idea on the time from what I have been able to read, so I forgive on that one. (Was striking from the full list of legal stages tested? If so why in the world wasn't it chosen?)

(IE: KDJ intentionally running into Megaman's Final Smash to hype the crowd).

He confirmed that it wasn't on purpose actually. That rumor needs to die. Misinformation running so rampant is seriously a huge issue the community has all the time.

the demand for item tournies just isn't there. For all the casuals who harp on about wanting to see item tournies, barely any of them have any interest in attending them. And of course, the majority of players who already attend tournies aren't going to want items thrown in. Item tournies would be made up of a new audience instead of the existing tournament-attending community. It's too different to be replacing the no-item format, so it'd have to be its own thing.

But it never becomes its own thing even after the founding of ISP because in reality, there really aren't that many people interested.

It's honestly true. I've offered that if there really are people interested in items events that I'd host them for Sm4sh and keep ISP going in several threads. I've gotten zero responses of enthusiasm. Items play could actually eclipse what we have now, but there would need to be more people who actually want to play with them.

However the serious lack of information about items and especially the MISINFORMATION about them is criminal. If they are going to be banned, let's do it for the right reasons and test them again to be absolutely sure we're right. At worst, we end up with ISP which even if it's unpopular allows those who want to try it an option.