Smash Balls = New Play Style, Second Tourney Ruling?

[MookieRah]

I don't go to tournaments, bu if I did, I would want there to Smash Balls on, but nothing else.

If you aren't going to show up, then don't try to influence our rulesets. It's a very simple thing... if you don't participate then you shouldn't have representation.

Smash Balls should be considered a strong attack, not an item. Because they act more like an attack then they do an item.

No... they don't. They act like a weird *** item that you have to break. The smash balls themselves are not the actual final smash. Smash balls ARE ITEMs.

 

[GhostAnime]

Smash Balls should be considered a strong attack, not an item.

then why does it take the item to use the attack?

 

[NES n00b]

See what I mean, just replace "strong attack" "with pretty and unique moveset" and you got yourself a better arguement.

I want them on so for the first time, Smash could actually have banned characters. *sniff*

Edit: Nobody ever answers that question.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I want them on so for the first time, Smash could actually have banned characters. *sniff*

No I don't want Marth to be banned he's my favorite character and not just because he was good but if he's too good he'll be banned NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

lol.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Ok, my mouse broke on me at the worst possible time. Technology is fun.

Now that I'm all caught up on the current arguments (actually, it's probably a good thing my mouse broke; Yuna and I were getting pretty heated and I'm sure I (at least) probably said some stuff that was out of line, in which case I apologize to anyone reading this thread.)... where were we?

Oh yeah. Smash Balls and tournament play. What I find interesting is that not many people (actually, close to no one) that I have seen are even considering that it might take a combination of items and Smash Balls to create a 'more balanced atmosphere' (honestly, I don't even know what that means anymore; from what I'm told and what I've observed watching many Melee tournaments, it seems like the most balanced thing possible is basically a mix between a reflex test and a staring contest, but hey... what do I know?). This is ultimately what I mean by experimentation. If we start (and therefore continue, because if history has proven anything, it's that humans are the most stubborn species alive) having a tournament setting that only condones the 'traditional' conservative style of play, then we'll never find out what combination of items and/or Smash Balls and/or stages make a fun and evenly matched setting. And I know: items are random spawns. Whee. We get it.

And correct me if I'm wrong (I believe I posted this in another thread, but I didn't see anyone answer me, so I still don't know), but wasn't a large portion of the reason items were banned because of exploding things (boxes, barrels, capsules), which can now be turned off?

The point I'm laboriously trying to get to is that the original poster had only mentioned the possibility of an alternate, i.e., not replacement, style of tournament, to which the majority of posters have stated, quite clearly, that it is, as far as they're concerned, a dumb idea, and no one in their right mind would ever, ever want to go to a tournament like that. Meanwhile, those in support have only argued that we should have an open mind.

Sure. We see, as I said earlier, that some stages, items, and Final Smashes are overpowered NOW... but if we stop looking (and I don't believe for a second that any competitive tournament-goer in his right mind would stop training in the traditional style so he can do good-hearted research for the rest of the smash community by playing in an alternate style. No one that I've ever met has ever showed a compulsion of any kind towards that kind of action, and why should they? It's not like item A, stage B, or playstyle C will ever be played competitively anyways?), and that's essentially what we're doing by not promoting, holding, and competing in alternate tournament styles, then we'll never find what combination of elements works in a tournament.

And, Yuna, as much as I'd love to believe you when you say that if anything is banned now it can still be unbanned in the future... that's simply not what observing the competitive community as a whole says could ever happen. If causal player Dave experiments and finds out that playstyle B is actually very, very tournament viable, the majority of competitive Smashers simply would not trust/believe him, especially if that playstyle involves items or, now, Final Smashes (I can hear the argument now... "Oh, Dave is a casual! He's just trying to make us play with items! What does he know?"). A very small (comparatively) subset of competitive Smashers would listen and would try it out once or twice... but the simple fact remains that, as it stands now, there is little to no chance of anyone changing their minds.

And, before anyone says it, I'm not some 'let's put EVERYTHING in tournaments' purist. Far from it. I have, and do, play every style known to man. I play tournament style. I play casual style. I play with nearly ever combination of items possible. I play 1v1, 2v2, and FFA. I've played against competitive players, tournament level players (though I've never been around tournaments when they go on, so I've never been able to attend, though I'm hoping that Wi-Fi can fix part of that problem)... I enjoy anything, as long as its playing Smash, but I don't enjoy exclusiveness, and a lot of it has been bred from the Melee tournament scene, which was why I never wanted to participate in Melee tournaments. I'm simply in favor of progress, and every single sign I've seen in the largest community of Smashers in the known world says that progress just isn't going to happen. That is disconcerting, to say the least.

And, I'm sure more casuals, or just people in general, would like to attend tournaments... that is, if there wasn't such animosity between casuals and competitives as there is now. Again, look at the response this thread received, and I'm sure you can see why.

 

[Skler]

Wobbling on the Ice Climbers was banned for a long time, wasn't it? I believe the reason was that it allowed the person playing Ice Climbers to basically 0-to-death you if they could manage a single grab. I ask you, Mr. Tournament Savvy... is Wobbling banned now? Last time I checked, which just so happened to be here on Smashboards, the answer to that particular question was 'no, Wobbling is not banned'. I'm sure you know why, but for those reading who may not be tournament gurus like yourself: a workaround was discovered that allowed people to basically DI out of the attack at lower percentages, around 50% to be precise, thus negating the 'brokenness' of the technique.

I'm aware that I'm late to this thread, but something just needs to be said about the bolded section.

How the **** do you DI out of a ****ing grab. You can't get out of wobbling, it IS banned in several tournaments (it was banned at Pound 3) and you have no idea what you're talking about.

Kindly

 

[Jack Kieser]

True, I've never been the target of the technique myself, but as I said in the very post you quoted, I read that information here on Smashboards (although it was a little while ago, admittedly). It is very possible that I either misread, or that the post was faulty. It's also possible that I mistakenly confused wobbling with de-syncing. In either case, if you simply can't get out, then I'll never use the argument again. Simple as that; no need to get hateful. I'm trying to have a civil discussion, not demean anyone or downplay their opinions.

Like I (also) said in that post: I'm ascribed to the scientific method; if something can be proved to me, then I'll gladly change my position. I'm not against it or anything.

EDIT: Serious question - is there a way to ignore posts or parts of posts? Because the above gif is really distracting when you're trying to read...

 

[PXG]

Stop trying to encourage, suggest, force, command or tell us to use items/ smash balls in tournaments. Play however you want to play with your friends. But in a competitive setting (which typically involves MONEY), items and smash balls are just, simply, too random and unbalanced to be allowed in ANY skill based, competitive play. That's final.

Call me a "tourney ***" if you want. I am not against playing with items/ smash balls at all. They are fun and do make fights "interesting. But if I am playing for money, pride and/or ego, I don't want something that is horribly unfair and random ruining my match (even worse, making me lose).

 

[Jack Kieser]

*sigh*

Neither myself, nor anyone else in this thread, is telling or forcing anyone else to play a different way all the time, or even a portion of the time. I can't speak for anyone else, but personally, all I've been advocating is open-mindedness and a willingness to change, which is rare in fighting games once a competitive scene is established, as history has told us.

I don't see what's so terrible about keeping an open mind. About trying something different. As it has been said many times, no one is making you go to an alternate tournament... so what's wrong with the concept of holding them?

And, I'm not calling you a 'tourney***.' That term only applies to a very small percentage of people, in reality. And, like I said before, I'm not willing to say anything is final until adequate time has passed to do so. I feel that calling anything as concrete this early on is simply too arrogant.

 

[GhostAnime]

but wasn't a large portion of the reason items were banned because of exploding things (boxes, barrels, capsules), which can now be turned off?

that was simply one of the reasons. the biggest reason items were banned still remains.

 

[Knight-errant]

No matter how you slice it, there's always a tiny amount of luck isnt there? For example, on corneria you might die from being shot by a plane. Another example is that the damage percents that any attack deals are slightly random (like, it might do 8% one time, but 9% the next). What if you just happen to do the higher percent every time during one match? Can your opponent say it was luck, because the high percentage hits always hit them? No, they can't. Part of being a skilled player is coming out of situation on top even though the other player got lucky.

So really the question really lies in: how lucky are we allowed to be? Should it just be in the tiniest ways, such as how much damage a given attack does, or all the way to other extreme with full on lukiness with bob-ombs, items, etc. Personally, I think that too muck luck is dumb, but I think that some is ok (obviously with the percent stuff and tripping, there's going to be a bit). So how much luck/randomness do any of you think should be allowed?

 

[sagemoon]

The idea of smashballs on in a tournament has already been tried in oregon with people like silent wolf, eggz, ka-master and other good players. After the tournament, they all unanimously agreed that it is a terrible idea. It makes battles too random.

 

[Losnar]

I agree with the banning of certain characters. It should've happened in melee, that way more of the characters become competitively useful. Top tier users suck axe.

 

[sagemoon]

wtf thats the most terrible idea i've ever heard.... You ban a top tier char then everyone is just gonna goto the next tier. As if there isnt already enough censoring in tournaments already.

 

[Xengri]

I’ve already gave my reasoning on this, and I still stand by it seeing as no one has argued otherwise.

However, I have a question.
We already have reasons as to why Items are off and how they deduct from competitive play.

My question is even if we did find a balanced and fair why to work items in, why even bother?
What’s the point of trying to work items into competitive play?
Why would one want to have items turned on when trying to measure skill?

 

[Dark Sonic]

So how much luck/randomness do any of you think should be allowed?

As little as possible. We try to minimize luck, and whatever we can't take out we are forced to tolerate.

 

[ShortAssassin]

I agree with the banning of certain characters. It should've happened in melee, that way more of the characters become competitively useful. Top tier users suck axe.

Lol. You ban the top tier characters....then high tier becomes the new top tier. You ban the high tier characters...then mid tier becomes the new top tier. See where I'm going with this?

 

[Jack Kieser]

I’ve already gave my reasoning on this, and I still stand by it seeing as no one has argued otherwise.

However, I have a question.
We already have reasons as to why Items are off and how they deduct from competitive play.

My question is even if we did find a balanced and fair why to work items in, why even bother?
What’s the point of trying to work items into competitive play?
Why would one want to have items turned on when trying to measure skill?

Well... I kind of have to say, that's really a short-sighted and selfish thing to say. Let's say (because I can't possibly estimate an accurate number, and neither can anyone else) one person wants to join in the tournament community, but really doesn't enjoy playing without items, although he still wants a challenge and a test of skill. Then, no, it would not be worth it to change the system for one person.

But, potentially hundreds of people would like to join in tournaments, barred only by a distaste for certain facets of playstyle, such as items (although it is usually more complicated than just that). What then? If it meant the drastic expansion of the Smash community, then I say what's the reason not to pursue new avenues of competitive play?

Why someone likes playing with items in a skill based match is irrelevant (as many people have argued, at length, how items are skill based as well, regardless of spawn times and locations, and their arguments are just as valid as anyone else's); if it means more people get/want to play, that should be reason enough. Gaming, and Smash in particular, should be a community built on inclusion, not exclusion.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Gaming, and Smash in particular, should be a community built on inclusion, not exclusion.

And yet at the same time, Competative gaming is completely devoted to testing one's skill. Anything that detracts from that should be removed if able. Competative gaming is, and always has been, very exclusive. Expanding the competative base is not worth destroying what compitive play is built upon.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Maybe that's the difference in concept: I think it would be possible to expand competitive Smash without destroying what it is a heart, an exercise in skill. It's a losing battle, though, if the Smash community WANTS to be exclusive, and if that's the case, then I have to agree that competitive Smash is about winning at all costs and being a d!ck rather than having fun, because only a d!ck would tell someone he can't play a game with him because the person isn't good enough.

Again, if the tournament community tries to expand itself to be more inclusive, then problem solved. It doesn't seem like it wants to include people, though. I want to be wrong... but that's what it sounds like.

 

[ShortAssassin]

Well if the casual community is big enough they can and will form their own tournaments. Problem solved?

 

[GhostAnime]

how about the casuals just make their own casual community?

but wait, hardly any of the ones that do can because there aren't enough casuals who want to bother to play in a tournament.

that's not to mention that most of them would rather sit on an internet message board and spam tourney***.

 

[Xengri]

Well... I kind of have to say, that's really a short-sighted and selfish thing to say. Let's say (because I can't possibly estimate an accurate number, and neither can anyone else) one person wants to join in the tournament community, but really doesn't enjoy playing without items, although he still wants a challenge and a test of skill. Then, no, it would not be worth it to change the system for one person.

But, potentially hundreds of people would like to join in tournaments, barred only by a distaste for certain facets of playstyle, such as items (although it is usually more complicated than just that). What then? If it meant the drastic expansion of the Smash community, then I say what's the reason not to pursue new avenues of competitive play?

Why someone likes playing with items in a skill based match is irrelevant (as many people have argued, at length, how items are skill based as well, regardless of spawn times and locations, and their arguments are just as valid as anyone else's); if it means more people get/want to play, that should be reason enough. Gaming, and Smash in particular, should be a community built on inclusion, not exclusion.

Short-sighted and selfish huh. Ok, I can live with that one.

Here's the thing. If what you said was true and "potentially hundreds of people would like to join in tournaments, barred only by a distaste for certain facets of play style, such as items".

Then how come these "hundreds of people" didn't set up item tournaments in Melee? Item tournaments were barely heard of and, I'm sure that if there was hundreds interested in them, they would have been much more popular right?


I can see though, that Brawl has the option to turn exploding crates off, so that might make a difference.


Still, if these "hundreds of people” dislike the no item rule that will more then likely come back in Brawl play, why don’t they host there own tournaments.

If they want to hold tournaments with a “balanced set of items” on, then leave them to find this “balance set”.

However, coming here and saying that we have to use up our time to find a fair way to play with items when, most of us here can’t even see the benefits of them, sounds pretty foolish to me.

If someone feels that they will join tournaments once items are allowed, then it’s their job to find a fair play style with them, seeing as they will be the ones benefiting.

 

[Knight-errant]

I’ve already gave my reasoning on this, and I still stand by it seeing as no one has argued otherwise.

However, I have a question.
We already have reasons as to why Items are off and how they deduct from competitive play.

My question is even if we did find a balanced and fair why to work items in, why even bother?
What’s the point of trying to work items into competitive play?
Why would one want to have items turned on when trying to measure skill?

There are a couple different reasons. One is that it would give a new experience and make things interesting. Number two is that it *might* add some balance to low tier characters.

And also, saying that you have to have items turned off to measure skill is only your opinion, it's not necessarily true. **Note: I don't actually care whether items are allowed or not; I'm neutral.

 

[Jack Kieser]

how about the casuals just make their own casual community?

but wait, hardly any of the ones that do can because there aren't enough casuals who want to bother to play in a tournament.

that's not to mention that most of them would rather sit on an internet message board and spam tourney***.

Because, again, that's exclusive. Look at the Penny Arcade forums. They have Smash tournaments all the time. They will have a lot more when Brawl comes out thanks to Wi-Fi (I should know; I'm in two of them). Some of those players are as hardcore as the people here at Smashboards; the majority are not. But, a lot of them would like to join in the tournament scene as a whole. Why don't they?

Why should they? Few people here respect their kind of player. The majority here share your feelings that they should just go as far away from you as possible and play their version of Smash Bros. I know it doesn't seem like it from your perspective, but as someone who has toed the line between 'casual' and 'competitive' for many years (I prefer to think of myself as a 'competitive casual'), I can attest to the fact that many of the more moderate casual players, the ones that want to join in on the fun and progress as a player, do respect tournament players very much, but they don't see any tournament players making an active push to include them, so they just give up. Mind you, this is a different group than the minority that sit on the sidelines and yell 'tourney***s!'.

Then how come these "hundreds of people" didn't set up item tournaments in Melee? Item tournaments were barely heard of and, I'm sure that if there was hundreds interested in them, they would have been much more popular right?

Again, it's all about inclusiveness. A ) As a tournament player, I'm sure you know how difficult it is to set up a tournament. Now, look at things from a casual player's perspective. If the tournament community they want to play with in the first place is basically telling them to go away, and every one else around them is too disheartened to care anymore, why would they make a tournament scene? I know, I didn't explain that as well as I'd hoped, but I'm sure you understand my meaning. B ) The whole point is that people from both sets can sometimes (not always) come together to play. The inclusiveness aspect is undermined if they have to go sit in the corner by themselves and play 'gimped Smash'.

If they want to hold tournaments with a “balanced set of items” on, then leave them to find this “balance set”.

However, coming here and saying that we have to use up our time to find a fair way to play with items when, most of us here can’t even see the benefits of them, sounds pretty foolish to me.

If someone feels that they will join tournaments once items are allowed, then it’s their job to find a fair play style with them, seeing as they will be the ones benefiting.

If I remember correctly, the tournament community is the set of people with all the balance know-how and all the knowledge on how to make a fair fight. Why wouldn't the casual community want some help from you? Again, everything said is expressly designed to get the casual players as far from you as possible.

 

[GhostAnime]

why wouldn't they make a tourney scene? because there aren't enough of them. 'casual competitive' itself is a paradox. they're meant to play the game casually.

and guess what it leads to? indifference to anything outside of it.

competitive players want to go as far as they can. this is what got us here.

 

[cb_marth]

I like the idea.

 

[ThePUNK]

Adds to the game!

I agree with you, the smash ball adds an element to the game. I believe it adds chess like feel to the game. There are all sorts of positional games that you can play with your opponent knowing where the smash ball is and how to obtain it.

 

[Jack Kieser]

why wouldn't they make a tourney scene? because there aren't enough of them. 'casual competitive' itself is a paradox. they're meant to play the game casually.

and guess what it leads to? indifference to anything outside of it.

competitive players want to go as far as they can. this is what got us here.

I certainly don't agree with this sentiment at all.

First of all, 'competitive casual' is not an oxymoron in any sense: I play mainly casually, but I have a strong drive to compete, make my skills advance, and I sometimes enjoy a balls-to-the-wall test of skill.

And, not to seem conceded, because that's not what I'm trying to do, but I consider myself pretty good at Smash; not the best, but I can hold my own very well, and hell, just might make it a couple rounds in a traditional tournament. But that's not because I played to win all the time.

I get better because I don't want to be overshadowed by the people around me; if that happens, I don't have fun because I'm always getting creamed, and my opponent isn't having fun because I'm not a challenge. So, I push myself to improve not because I want to win at all costs, but because having and being a challenge is what makes the game fun. Winning is a pleasant bonus. Not everyone who plays Smash competitively is only concerned with winning. Hell, if I was in a money match (which is unlikely, because I'm not the betting sport), I would be happy to give my money up, if indeed I lose. Winning really isn't everything.

 

[PXG]

As little as possible. We try to minimize luck, and whatever we can't take out we are forced to tolerate.

Exactly. It doesn't get more simple than that.

 

[Xengri]

There are a couple different reasons. One is that it would give a new experience and make things interesting. Number two is that it *might* add some balance to low tier characters.

And also, saying that you have to have items turned off to measure skill is only your opinion, it's not necessarily true. **Note: I don't actually care whether items are allowed or not; I'm neutral.

1. “a new experience and make things interesting”

The “make things interesting” part is opinion. So I’ll dismiss that.
I’d rather watch to players use their moveset as opposed to watching one camp and wait for a item that might take him out of the bind he’s in.
Some might thing otherwise, I don’t know.

And the new experience bit. How’s that? No one is stopping you from using items before. Want to host a item tournament? Go for it, why is that al of a sudden new?


2. *might* add some balance to low tier characters

How? Generally faster characters are high on the tier list. Being fast only makes it easier for you to get the item (provided luck is on your side, IE, you’re equally distant from the item/ not trying to recover).

If anything, it would create a larger gap between the tiers. (Fox and Marth, is fast, DK and Bowser are not).

3. “saying that you have to have items turned off to measure skill is only your opinion”

Any Opinion backed by the reasoning that less luck leaves more room for skill. A reasoning that is generally agreed with on these boards.

 

[GhostAnime]

I believe it adds chess like feel to the game. There are all sorts of positional games that you can play with your opponent knowing where the smash ball is and how to obtain it.

are you serious? have you ever played chess? are there ANY random elements in chess at all?

jack, i understand that you have the competitive drive despite playing in that fashion, but the fact remains that you are an extremely low minority. i'm not saying you can't be competitive; i'm saying why there can't really be a casual competitive community: because there isn't community.

 

[Jack Kieser]

are you serious? have you ever played chess? are there ANY random elements in chess at all?

jack, i understand that you have the competitive drive despite playing in that fashion, but the fact remains that you are an extremely low minority. i'm not saying you can't be competitive; i'm saying why there can't really be a casual competitive community: because there isn't community.

And what I'm saying is that the reason there isn't a community isn't because the numbers aren't there: it's because that style of play is literally frowned upon; like I said earlier, "Let the casuals go to their corner and play 'gimped Smash'."

An overwhelming majority of the casual players I've personally met, played with, and spent time discussing this with, have clearly stated that they want to play in tournaments, but are, frankly, too... embarrassed isn't the right word, but it's close. They feel inferior because of the arguments that have been presented by tournament players in this very thread. 'I don't want them playing that kind of Smash with us. We don't play like that."

And, I thank you for understanding my situation; I understand I'm a minority, and it's not always easy for people to get what I'm saying in that respect because they never hear it.

 

[ThePUNK]

Exactly. It doesn't get more simple than that.

Well Poker has lots of luck and is very competitive. The smash ball give good luck because even though the smash ball has just spawned next to your opponent, that doesn’t mean that your opponent will a) get the smash ball b) be able to use his or her final smash or c) be able to use his or her final smash effectively.

 

[GhostAnime]

it's because that style of play is literally frowned upon; like I said earlier, "Let the casuals go to their corner and play 'gimped Smash'."

you think we already aren't frowned upon for traveling hundreds of miles just to play a video game?

we don't bother anybody. we just play the way we want. the casuals can do the same thing. we aren't physically stopping them.

Well Poker has lots of luck and is very competitive.

poker isn't smash.

 

[mjaut]

i hoped this was a joke, but no... they are unbalanced, random and not very skill based. Over my dead body!

 

[Xengri]

Again, it's all about inclusiveness. A ) As a tournament player, I'm sure you know how difficult it is to set up a tournament. Now, look at things from a casual player's perspective. If the tournament community they want to play with in the first place is basically telling them to go away, and every one else around them is too disheartened to care anymore, why would they make a tournament scene? I know, I didn't explain that as well as I'd hoped, but I'm sure you understand my meaning. B ) The whole point is that people from both sets can sometimes (not always) come together to play. The inclusiveness aspect is undermined if they have to go sit in the corner by themselves and play 'gimped Smash'.

A) So what you're basically say is that we have to knell and conform to them just so why have more people?
The competitve smash scene may only make up about 1% of smash players but I have been to a good amount of fair sized turnements.
Guess it's cause I live in Orlando...
B) They don't have to play "gimped smash". They can play however they want, that's what the setting are there for.
Now, if no one wants to play with them (vary rare and doubt it)... Maybe they should look at the way they are playing, or where they are playing.

If I remember correctly, the tournament community is the set of people with all the balance know-how and all the knowledge on how to make a fair fight. Why wouldn't the casual community want some help from you? Again, everything said is expressly designed to get the casual players as far from you as possible.

You're wrong. Everything said is NOT expressly designed to get the casual players as far from us as possible. Why would we go out of our way to do that?
Everything is designed to keep as much skill involved and as much luck expelled from a match. It has nothing to do with us sunning casuals.

As for “Why wouldn't the casual community want some help from you?” bit.
You tell me?
We gave them the advice that we believe items subtracts from a measure of skill?
If they want to try otherwise, they can but, we did give them advice.

 

[Libomasus]

When you think of the Competitive scene, you have to assume everybody is a top player in some way. In this regard, Smash Balls will just widen the gap and matches may be prolonged for no reason at all. The other player has two options, run away, or go up and try to dodge. The latter is a tough feat to do with FS's giving you invincibility frames and such.

As for excluding people by banning items/Smashballs, I'm okay with that. To say we aren't making any progress though, is a bit unfair. If people decide not to come because they're intimidated by strict rules and defensive people, then I think its really their fault for not experiencing the difference themselves.

 

[Jack Kieser]

you think we already aren't frowned upon for traveling hundreds of miles just to play a video game?

we don't bother anybody. we just play the way we want. the casuals can do the same thing. we aren't physically stopping them.

Who is frowning upon you? Family? Friends? Society? Is it anybody that matters?

See, to the people we're discussing, the tournament scene is what they look up to, what they respect and want to be a part of... but if the tournament community frowns upon them, it's much more devastating than some random guy on the street heckling you. He means nothing to your community; your community means something to them.

Again, you seem to be missing my main point, which is inclusion. In every one of your posts, you have said nothing about inclusion; all you want is for them to not play with you. You don't see that as selfish in the slightest? I understand if you don't like playing their style... but if they can't even form a subset in your community, if they have to form their own community altogether, especially when there is a Smash community thousands strong already... you don't see the problem with this?

Now, if no one wants to play with them (vary rare and doubt it)... Maybe they should look at the way they are playing, or where they are playing.

That is terribly arrogant of you to say that they have to rethink what they think is fun just because a bunch of tournament players don't agree. I do agree that people aren't always as lucky as you to be in a place like Orlando that has Smash gatherings often... but wow. I may not agree with someone here, but I'm not about to tell them that I have no chance of being wrong. I hope I'm just misconstruing your meaning.

 

[Knight-errant]

1. “a new experience and make things interesting”

The “make things interesting” part is opinion. So I’ll dismiss that.
I’d rather watch to players use their moveset as opposed to watching one camp and wait for a item that might take him out of the bind he’s in.
Some might thing otherwise, I don’t know.

And the new experience bit. How’s that? No one is stopping you from using items before. Want to host a item tournament? Go for it, why is that al of a sudden new?


2. *might* add some balance to low tier characters

How? Generally faster characters are high on the tier list. Being fast only makes it easier for you to get the item (provided luck is on your side, IE, you’re equally distant from the item/ not trying to recover).

If anything, it would create a larger gap between the tiers. (Fox and Marth, is fast, DK and Bowser are not).

3. “saying that you have to have items turned off to measure skill is only your opinion”

Any Opinion backed by the reasoning that less luck leaves more room for skill. A reasoning that is generally agreed with on these boards.

Sheesh, you don't have to hate me. I was just giving you the reasons I've heard. I don't actually support the use of items, I'm more on the neutral side of things (although at home I rarely play with items...so maybe I'm more anti-item, I don't know).