Smashballs - much deeper than people think

[Yuna]

Final Smashes are balanced, once you take into account that those with weak FSs can usually get them easier.

Marth has one of the worst FSs. He has difficulty making more than 1 KO with it, is easy to dodge unless he gets in close, risking have the smash ball knocked out, and he suicides with it if he misses. He also isn't so good at getting it in the first place. I am VERY tired of hearing people say that it is awesome even though it has severe disadvantages that limit its potential.

Umm... yeah...

FYI, Marth only dies if he does it in the air and misses.

 

[DarkStraw]

Im not nessarily for smash balls in tournaments but i do like exploring the idea. So far everyones assuming that smash balls are set on low availablilty, why not try 5 stocks and medium or high availability. As far as smashballs being unfair... some characters might have significant advantages over other characters when using the smashball, but its very likely that will be the case without items as well, maby characters will end up just being crap and many will be really good. If smashballs were used and theres only 7-10 viable characters that are used then thats not too different from how no item brawl will turn out. either way i would like to see how tourneys turn out with smashballs, we can hypothosize all we want but unless its put to the test i guess we will never know.

The game is going to be unbalanced either way, its hard enough as is to correctly balance a game with 35 characters without taking into account different ways of playing, ie items/no items/smashballs
i think brawl will clearly be more unbalanced than melee. lets just hope theres alot of high teir characters.

 

[Yuna]

Im not nessarily for smash balls in tournaments but i do like exploring the idea. So far everyones assuming that smash balls are set on low availablilty, why not try 5 stocks and medium or high availability.

Why would we make the Smash Balls spawn with an even higher frequency?

As far as smashballs being unfair... some characters might have significant advantages over other characters when using the smashball, but its very likely that will be the case without items as well, maby characters will end up just being crap and many will be really good.

No, because no character has a one-hit-KO move which will kill at 0% and which has invincibility frames from the moment you start it (so if someone tries to approach you, you can just Final Smash their approach, making it really risky to approach them) and which can be comboed into.

Nor does someone have an attack during which they fly around the screen for 30 seconds, are a huge hitbox and during which they're entirely invincible.

It's much more balanced without Final Smashes.

If smashballs were used and theres only 7-10 viable characters that are used then thats not too different from how no item brawl will turn out. either way i would like to see how tourneys turn out with smashballs, we can hypothosize all we want but unless its put to the test i guess we will never know.

There's really only two viable characters with Final Smashes on. Because Olimar's isn't very good.

The game is going to be unbalanced either way, its hard enough as is to correctly balance a game with 35 characters without taking into account different ways of playing, ie items/no items/smashballs
i think brawl will clearly be more unbalanced than melee. lets just hope theres alot of high teir characters.

We don't know if the game will be unbalanced either way.

And I can say this for sure: The game will definitely be cataclysmically unbalanced with Final Smashes on.

There's 37 characters, BTW (not counting transformations and separate Poéballs)

 

[Metzger]

I'm going to have to side with Yuna on this topic.

There doesn't seem to be any real way to include Final Smashes in tournament play, particularly 1v1, and keep the environment balanced. All it will wind up doing is further narrowing the competitive character selection, no matter how you change the settings to better accommodate them. I think preventing further "tier" separation of characters takes precedence over introducing a new aspect of gameplay.

 

[Chrono Centaur]

LANDMASTER. D:

Impossible to DI out of, impossible to get around, and able to two-stock an opponent if used correctly. Just, no. No.

 

[technomancer]

Great post, except that the space animals still have the gay landmaster/laser trump card that takes multiple stocks.

 

[Demolisho]

Meh, tourneys never used items, I don't see why we would include FS, most of them are OHKOs.

 

[Maph]

I'm going to have to side with Yuna on this topic.

There doesn't seem to be any real way to include Final Smashes in tournament play, particularly 1v1, and keep the environment balanced. All it will wind up doing is further narrowing the competitive character selection, no matter how you change the settings to better accommodate them. I think preventing further "tier" separation of characters takes precedence over introducing a new aspect of gameplay.

Especially one that's caused so much debate.

 

[E.G.G.M.A.N.]

theres no reason to ban all items or ban FSes except that you are unable to adapt to a changing environment.

Scrubs say this takes away "skill" but really it makes it so that you can keep performing your tech-skill BS combos w/ "top tier" characters (top tier w/o items more like).

Melee is TWICE as much fun, and at least twice as complicated/engrossing when you play with items on (I turn off bombs, hammers, and hearts and tomatoes, as they are too powerful to be as easily accessible as other items). They aren't RANDOM they pop out at specific points, you don't want a bat to fall into your opponents hand? Dont let him stand under an item drop.

I havent played brawl yet (getting a copy in two hours =]) but unless theres something wacky and crazy going on that i havent been able to distinguish, FSes seem perfectly balanced. And if you turn off a handful of the more ******** items, theres no reason we cant have a lively, competitive scene w/ items.

PS. YOU GET MUCH BETTER AT THIS GAME IF YOU PLAY W/ ITEMS (just a hint)

Smash balls are even more powerful than any of those items you listed. Think about why you have chosen to turn off the hammer, and you will understand our reasoning behind not turning on smash balls.

Secondly, about the random spawning, even if you do know where the items spawn, you don't know when or at which spot.

All of you people who support smash balls in tournaments, don't forget that you can still enjoy smash balls all you want on your own time. I mean, come on, it isn't like any of you guys are going to be playing in tournaments every single day right? Would it kill you to just play with out them every once in a while? You guys make it sound like the game just falls apart without final smashes. It's not like no items matches can't ever be any fun at all.

 

[TheManaLord]

God, some rationality in the tourney scene? I am SHOCKED.

Way to generalize and make yourself look like a douche.

 

[JT_productions829]

Im not nessarily for smash balls in tournaments but i do like exploring the idea. So far everyones assuming that smash balls are set on low availablilty, why not try 5 stocks and medium or high availability.

If we do put 5 stock and medium/high availablilty, it would make the game revolve around the smash ball. All tactics would focus on getting the smash ball instead of simply fighting the opponent regularly like in melee.

 

[pesticide]

good read, real good. even though the smasball wont be in any major tourneys, im still gonna use it the first few matches i play

 

[skuzzel]

I disagree, no final smash is unusable in the situation, some simply require a great deal more care, and/or quick reflexes from your ally.

I don't think that any final smash will be good enough in 2v2 to make every other character's final smashes useless. But of course, this is something to be seen in the future, the game has only been available to play for a little while, and we're still waiting for US release, I would say that it's premature to make that decision. We have to wait and see what sort of doubles environment develops, and we have a couple of characters that are too overpowering in that environment, then we should ban, but don't just ban because there's a possibility it will unbalance the game.

Its debatable........

just as an example, lets compare Ness's FS vs Peaches....

With ness's your ally is in the exact same boat as your enemies. A good player can avoid Ness's FS altogether, well whatever, so in 2v2 its useless. Dont even try to say that your partner could try to move other players into the range of the attack, because both sides can do that, and there would be two of them against your partner, thus GIVING them the advantage.

Now peach's, you start the attack, everyone goes to sleep, you tap your partner, waking him up, you both gobble up all the health and then both use your best charge smash on both of your opponents.


When you put those side by side doesn't it make you think that ness would be garbage in any 2v2 fights?

 

[comboking]

we should use final smashes in tourneys!

 

[lengeta]

Sonic is faster than every other character, and has the best FS hands-down. I love the Smash Ball, it's a BLAST, but it doesn't belong in tournament play. Enjoy your Sonic camp-fest tournies.

 

[Wrath`]

I agree with you, FS is goin to be a chalenge

 

[SanjiWatsuki]

If you want Final Smashes, you'd need much more stock. Can't let a single Smash Ball change the entire game.

 

[Dark Sonic]

If you want Final Smashes, you'd need much more stock. Can't let a single Smash Ball change the entire game.

The smash ball just spawns too frequently. Having more lives won't help that.

 

[SanjiWatsuki]

The smash ball just spawns too frequently. Having more lives won't help that.

In that case, it would appear that it is hard to make a strong case for Smash Balls at this point. In my post I was thinking of an unrealistic solution, along the lines of 20+ stock, which was far fetched within itself but now it seems even less likely.

 

[fr0st2k]

Increased stock:
How is this going to help anyone? Let's say we increase the stocks to 8. OK... so now Marth, Toon Link and the other really good characters with deadly FS:es will have even a greater lead.

The characters who don't have one hit KO-FS:es will still have to work really hard to get a stock off of Marth or Toon Link. Marth and Toon Link will still be able to combo, spam and KO quite easily. Marth's and Toon Link's FS:es will still rule while others won't.

It's just that it'll be an incredibly uphill battle for 8 stocks instead of 4 now. Statistically, the balance will tip even more in favour of Marth, Toon Link or any of the FS-top tiers.

Timed Matches:
Yeah, reaaaally bad idea. What time should we pick? 8-10 minutes per 3-4 stocks? That'd make for tournies that took ages, not to mention that people could just suicide when they think they'll die to save on points (but we could remedy that with making suicides worth two minus points, I guess). But then the tournaments would still take forever.

Set it on a lower time setting? 5 minutes? But the balance would shift to whoever can KO the fastest to rack up enough points in those 5.

And it'd still not change the balance fact. Whoever has the best FS:es will still win because of their imbalance. Marth and Toon Link would own up the place with their imbalanced FS:es that KO well and fast!


fr0st2k is an ardent supporter of Final Smashes in tournaments.

first off...both your arugements are moot. you arent arguing .. you are just saying, "that goes against the norm"

Increasing stock. You say that it will give a larger advantege to people who can obtain the ball easier. Ok, fair enough, maybe thats true, but i doubt you really have tested it.

Timed matches: This is where the metagame can change. This is where my post has merit (whether you believe it or not). Avoidance tactics have never been part of melee. However, its not to say that the game doesnt support that type of strategy. Why not change the way the game is played? Because its boring? I dont think it would be, but thats irrelevant anyway.
We dont need 8-10 minute matches either. If smash balls drop every 30 seconds... make the games go 3 minutes with an estimated 6 smash balls a game.
Avoidance becomes key, it becomes the strategy, and thus , the tiers would be change and a different type of game could be built around it.

Do you understand my idea? my post? how it isnt as stupid as your ignorant mouth spews it is?

Also, your last idiotic statement really sums up your ignorance(and no, im not using the word incorrectly, im calling you ignorant!)

I am not an ardent supported. My original post on this topic was asking if a new tourney set could be built. It was asking, and it provided examples. I personally havent seen good valid counter arguments as to why it wouldnt work. All i get, especially from you, Yuna, is that "i dont want to do it, it wasnt done in melee, wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

 

[OrlanduEX]

I agree with the idea that Final Smashes add depth to the game, but this does not mean that they are suitable for competitive play.

There is a great discrepancy between the effectiveness of FSs among characters. This is a fact.
Some characters like Ganondorf and Zelda have great ones while others like Jiggly and Zamus have crappy ones and there are many in between. While the "crappy" ones may be effective if used right, they still don't match up to the great ones because those take little to no skill to use.

There is also a discrepancy among characters in their ability to get to the ball. Some characters are good at getting to it, but not good at opening it, some are the opposite, some are both, some neither.

The problem lies in those characters who are good at everything. If it so happens that there is a character with a super strong FS who also happens to be great at opening/getting to it, that character will be the defining character in a metagame with Smash balls.
There goes all the other strategies in the game. The character or characters who are "good at everything" in terms of Smash Balls become the top tier and out shine the rest of the cast and we get a scenario much like Melee where an elite few rule the game. This isn't necessarily a bad thing though come to think of it and the game could end up like that anyway.
The point is that playing the game WITH FS will be very different from playing WITHOUT, but not necessarily for the better.

A simple solution would be to have tournaments in two formats: with FSs and without. This appeases both schools of thought concerning FSs especially if it turns out that FSs present a level of depth that makes them worth using.

 

[OrlanduEX]

first off...both your arugements are moot. you arent arguing .. you are just saying, "that goes against the norm"
Increasing stock. You say that it will give a larger advantege to people who can obtain the ball easier. Ok, fair enough, maybe thats true, but i doubt you really have tested it.

The first paragraph of your post says that BOTH of Yuna's arguments are moot then you immediately suggest that at least one of his points has merit. Way to contradict yourself...

Timed matches: This is where the metagame can change. This is where my post has merit (whether you believe it or not). Avoidance tactics have never been part of melee. However, its not to say that the game doesnt support that type of strategy. Why not change the way the game is played? Because its boring? I dont think it would be, but thats irrelevant anyway.
We dont need 8-10 minute matches either. If smash balls drop every 30 seconds... make the games go 3 minutes with an estimated 6 smash balls a game.
Avoidance becomes key, it becomes the strategy, and thus , the tiers would be change and a different type of game could be built around it.

Different =/= better. Making Brawl about avoidance tactics does not make it more competitive nor fun necessarily. What if we want to play normally but without having to avoid some super powerful attack by our opponents every now and then? See how changing the game doesn't necessarily make it better?

Do you understand my idea? my post? how it isnt as stupid as your ignorant mouth spews it is?

Also, your last idiotic statement really sums up your ignorance(and no, im not using the word incorrectly, im calling you ignorant!)

I am not an ardent supported. My original post on this topic was asking if a new tourney set could be built. It was asking, and it provided examples. I personally havent seen good valid counter arguments as to why it wouldnt work. All i get, especially from you, Yuna, is that "i dont want to do it, it wasnt done in melee, wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

You're being too emotional here. I'll chalk up your poor grammar and spelling to that.
Furthermore, you seem to perceive that Yuna is just being a troll though he is actually arguing against you with facts and reason, however negative or sarcastic he might be.
And do you even know what an "ardent supporter" is? Because you do definitely come across as someone who wants to play Brawl competitively with Smash balls.

Also, sorry for double post....

 

[Luthien]

Also, sorry for double post....

Forgiven, because I agree with everything you've just said.

 

[fr0st2k]

The first paragraph of your post says that BOTH of Yuna's arguments are moot then you immediately suggest that at least one of his points has merit. Way to contradict yourself...



.

It has merit, but it the idea that it was an argument is silly.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Increasing stock. You say that it will give a larger advantege to people who can obtain the ball easier. Ok, fair enough, maybe thats true, but i doubt you really have tested it.

Increasing stock does not change how often smashballs appear. They still appear approximately once around every 30 seconds on the lowest setting. Having more stock tips the game more in favor of the characters that get smashballs more easily (Marth, Sonic, Ike, ect.) There will be more smashballs in total, and thus the match is more likely to be determined by who's more likely to both get the FS, and kill with it.

Timed matches: This is where the metagame can change. This is where my post has merit (whether you believe it or not). Avoidance tactics have never been part of melee. However, its not to say that the game doesnt support that type of strategy. Why not change the way the game is played? Because its boring? I dont think it would be, but thats irrelevant anyway.

If the time limit is too small then it just promotes camping. If it's too large then the matches take too long. What we decided when making it 4 stock in melee was giving a large enough time limit that camping is no longer the best option (as there would be enough time for your opponent to eventually get you) and at the same time matches in general would be faster, but you could afford to prolong the match a little and wouldn't be so pressured by time.

We dont need 8-10 minute matches either. If smash balls drop every 30 seconds... make the games go 3 minutes with an estimated 6 smash balls a game.

And almost every kill will be determined by smashballs. And those smashballs spawn randomly. And some characters are better at getting final smashes. And some characters have really good final smashes. Do you see where I'm going here? It really is a disaster for game balance due to how final smashes were implemented.

Avoidance becomes key, it becomes the strategy, and thus , the tiers would be change and a different type of game could be built around it.

But the problem is that avoiding some Final Smashes is a lot harder than hitting with them. Final Smashes give you invincibility on startup, and thus halt any kind of approaching due to how eaisly your attack could be countered by a final smash. With your approach options pretty much gone, they are free to put the pressure on you and eventually force you into a situation where their final smash would be unavoidable (like comboing into it, catching a roll or spot dodge, forcing you onto a ledge, ect.)


How's those counter arguements for you?

 

[fr0st2k]

You're being too emotional here. I'll chalk up your poor grammar and spelling to that.
Furthermore, you seem to perceive that Yuna is just being a troll though he is actually arguing against you with facts and reason, however negative or sarcastic he might be.
And do you even know what an "ardent supporter" is? Because you do definitely come across as someone who wants to play Brawl competitively with Smash balls.

Also, sorry for double post....

I never said i wanted to, i just dont want ignorant melee fanboys to instantly chalk up a hatred for smashball because it goes against melee.

I have ALWAYS been an "ardent" supporter of testing extensively before making a final decision. when i decided to buy my LCD, i researched for over a month, and i am very happy with my decision.

I didnt try and use my knowledge of CRT tvs, or LCD monitors when i decided to buy a TV. I started new, and i learned everything i could about LCD TVs.

I am simply asking the community to do the same with Brawl. Don't use you melee experience with Brawl, its just going to detract from the overall experience and the final comeptiive ruleset.

YUNA, doesnt understand that, I hope you are mature enough to get it.

 

[E.G.G.M.A.N.]

I never said i wanted to, i just dont want ignorant melee fanboys to instantly chalk up a hatred for smashball because it goes against melee.

I have ALWAYS been an "ardent" supporter of testing extensively before making a final decision. when i decided to buy my LCD, i researched for over a month, and i am very happy with my decision.

I didnt try and use my knowledge of CRT tvs, or LCD monitors when i decided to buy a TV. I started new, and i learned everything i could about LCD TVs.

I am simply asking the community to do the same with Brawl. Don't use you melee experience with Brawl, its just going to detract from the overall experience and the final comeptiive ruleset.

YUNA, doesnt understand that, I hope you are mature enough to get it.

We do not "hate" smashballs. They're just too powerful. They are an extremley powerful item just like a bomb or hammer and should be treated as such. The visuals are different, but at their core, they're just bigger, flashier hammers (check the dojo description if you feel otherwise). They create a lot more work/hassle to implement them then they really give back. And anyways, if you don't plan on attending tournaments you shouldn't really get so worked up about it.

 

[OrlanduEX]

It has merit, but it the idea that it was an argument is silly.

*facepalm*

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/argument

argument - 4. a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point

Yuna's post contained two arguments by definition, which I might add you attempted (and failed) to refute.

Forgiven, because I agree with everything you've just said.

Much love.

I never said i wanted to, i just dont want ignorant melee fanboys to instantly chalk up a hatred for smashball because it goes against melee.

I have ALWAYS been an "ardent" supporter of testing extensively before making a final decision. when i decided to buy my LCD, i researched for over a month, and i am very happy with my decision.

I didnt try and use my knowledge of CRT tvs, or LCD monitors when i decided to buy a TV. I started new, and i learned everything i could about LCD TVs.

I am simply asking the community to do the same with Brawl. Don't use you melee experience with Brawl, its just going to detract from the overall experience and the final comeptiive ruleset.

YUNA, doesnt understand that, I hope you are mature enough to get it.

No one hates Smash balls. And we are testing Smash balls. And we will continue to.
The conclusion we are coming to based on this testing is that Smash Balls are unbalanced and that they will prove too much a distraction in matches.

If they prove worthy of playing with, we could always have tournaments in multiple formats to accommodate those who wish to play with them.

 

[Luthien]

first off...both your arugements are moot. you arent arguing .. you are just saying, "that goes against the norm"

Increased stock:
How is this going to help anyone? Let's say we increase the stocks to 8. OK... so now Marth, Toon Link and the other really good characters with deadly FS:es will have even a greater lead.

The characters who don't have one hit KO-FS:es will still have to work really hard to get a stock off of Marth or Toon Link. Marth and Toon Link will still be able to combo, spam and KO quite easily. Marth's and Toon Link's FS:es will still rule while others won't.

It's just that it'll be an incredibly uphill battle for 8 stocks instead of 4 now. Statistically, the balance will tip even more in favour of Marth, Toon Link or any of the FS-top tiers.

I fail to see how this states 'that goes against the norm.'

Increasing stock. You say that it will give a larger advantege to people who can obtain the ball easier. Ok, fair enough, maybe thats true, but i doubt you really have tested it.

We don't need to test it. We can see it. It's like asking for me to provide proof that the sky is blue. Do I have to post a picture in this thread to give you evidence? No. Just take a look outside for yourself. Everyone else can see it, so you can too. My point: Yuna doesn't need to test it. There are many accounts and videos in his favour. His point still stands.

Timed matches: This is where the metagame can change. This is where my post has merit (whether you believe it or not). Avoidance tactics have never been part of melee. However, its not to say that the game doesnt support that type of strategy. Why not change the way the game is played? Because its boring? I dont think it would be, but thats irrelevant anyway.

*Replicates Sonic Wave's post*

We dont need 8-10 minute matches either. If smash balls drop every 30 seconds... make the games go 3 minutes with an estimated 6 smash balls a game.
Avoidance becomes key, it becomes the strategy, and thus , the tiers would be change and a different type of game could be built around it.

You seem to have ignored the rest of that post. Here, I'll type it again:

And it'd still not change the balance fact. Whoever has the best FS:es will still win because of their imbalance. Marth and Toon Link would own up the place with their imbalanced FS:es that KO well and fast!

All i get, especially from you, Yuna, is that "i dont want to do it, it wasnt done in melee, wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

I'm sorry, wait. I have yet to see Yuna post anything relatively like that. In fact, I don't recall Yuna posting the word "Melee" in this thread.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I never said i wanted to, i just dont want ignorant melee fanboys to instantly chalk up a hatred for smashball because it goes against melee.

I have ALWAYS been an "ardent" supporter of testing extensively before making a final decision. when i decided to buy my LCD, i researched for over a month, and i am very happy with my decision.

I didnt try and use my knowledge of CRT tvs, or LCD monitors when i decided to buy a TV. I started new, and i learned everything i could about LCD TVs.

I am simply asking the community to do the same with Brawl. Don't use you melee experience with Brawl, its just going to detract from the overall experience and the final comeptiive ruleset.

YUNA, doesnt understand that, I hope you are mature enough to get it.

Why should we go through another full 2 years of testing when the primary reason that items were banned in melee has not changed. Why should we have to test items again, only to find that randomness is still bad, when we already know that from general gaming experience. We're not going to extensively test it again, because it hasn't changed. Exploding capsules were mearly the extremes of what randomness can bring, and is the most obvious example of it determining a match. Exploding capsules, however, are not the reason that items were banned. Items were banned on principle, that being the fact that a player should never randomly be given an advantage over another player during a match. All advantages must be earned, and we strive for that kind of fairness in tournaments. Thus, we remove anything that detracts from that if able.

Also, my arguements from a page back still stand. Until those cases are refuted, items can't even be considered for professional tournaments.

 

[Luthien]

Why should we go through another full 2 years of testing when the primary reason that items were banned in melee has not changed. Why should we have to test items again, only to find that randomness is still bad, when we already know that from general gaming experience. We're not going to extensively test it again, because it hasn't changed. Exploding capsules were mearly the extremes of what randomness can bring, and is the most obvious example of it determining a match. Exploding capsules, however, are not the reason that items were banned. Items were banned on principle, that being the fact that a player should never randomly be given an advantage over another player during a match. All advantages must be earned, and we strive for that kind of fairness in tournaments. Thus, we remove anything that detracts from that if able.

Also, my arguements from a page back still stand. Until those cases are refuted, items can't even be considered for professional tournaments.

I would like to multiply this post five hundred times, but that would take too long. So I'll just quote it so it's that much harder to miss.

Tournaments are tests of skill, to determine who is better than another. Not a test of luck. Tournaments strive to be controlled experiments. Remember, those things you were taught how to do in Science 8? You should only have one independant variable (skill), and one dependant variable (placings).

(Just in case someone decides to argue that there's more than one factor difference in a tournament match, I'll try to explain my reasoning. The fact that there are different characters used in a match (usually) is irrelivent, because whoever used the weaker character chose the weaker character, despite the fact it wasn't the smartest thing to do. Therefore, characters aren't true factors in placings. You can't complain that you're really better because you chose a worse character, because choosing that character was a stupid thing to do. It just shows how stupid you are.)

Basically, adding randomness of any kind keeps the match (experiment) from being controlled, and thus defeats the purpose of having placings and ranks. Some randomness is tolerable, but that doesn't mean it's good. As far as determining skill goes (meaning: having proffesional tournaments), we should strive to be as controlled as possible.

 

[IceEmblem]

will this lead to the dreaded, FS Tournament?

 

[OrlanduEX]

will this lead to the dreaded, FS Tournament?

Those could work, but I doubt that that will be the only format people play. But seeing as Brawl may not turn out to be that deep competitively, FS tournaments may be deeper than "normal" ones.

 

[Yuna]

Its debatable........

just as an example, lets compare Ness's FS vs Peaches....

With ness's your ally is in the exact same boat as your enemies. A good player can avoid Ness's FS altogether, well whatever, so in 2v2 its useless. Dont even try to say that your partner could try to move other players into the range of the attack, because both sides can do that, and there would be two of them against your partner, thus GIVING them the advantage.

Now peach's, you start the attack, everyone goes to sleep, you tap your partner, waking him up, you both gobble up all the health and then both use your best charge smash on both of your opponents.

Ness' FS is garbage in 1vs1 too.

If you want Final Smashes, you'd need much more stock. Can't let a single Smash Ball change the entire game.

This will only make it harder to beat people with good FS:es. Lucario vs. Marth. Lucario works really hard to KO Marth for 8 stocks with a crappy FS. Lucario's FS never hits, Marth's FS means one stock. Marth has a bigger advantage.

first off...both your arugements are moot. you arent arguing .. you are just saying, "that goes against the norm",

Where in my post did I say anything that sounds like "goes against the norm"?! I presented very valid arguments why More Stock and Time won't work!

Anyone who thinks logically would grasp my arguments!

Increasing stock. You say that it will give a larger advantege to people who can obtain the ball easier. Ok, fair enough, maybe thats true, but i doubt you really have tested it.

No I didn't. It gives a larger advantage to those who have good FS:es. And of course, those with good FS:es and who can obtain it easier (it's not much of an advantage that Ness can grab it easily if his sucks, now is it?).

Timed matches: This is where the metagame can change. This is where my post has merit (whether you believe it or not). Avoidance tactics have never been part of melee. However, its not to say that the game doesnt support that type of strategy. Why not change the way the game is played? Because its boring? I dont think it would be, but thats irrelevant anyway.
We dont need 8-10 minute matches either. If smash balls drop every 30 seconds... make the games go 3 minutes with an estimated 6 smash balls a game.

* Yes it has.
* Yes it does.
* Because camping is not competitive. Marth grabs the FS. He camps. How could you possibly approach him without a good projectile without serious risking of eating his FS, which has invincibility frames from the frame he taps B?! You try to approach me with anything, I tap B. Or I block it, shielddrop and tap B. Or I combo you into B.

With less time, the game will be unbalanced and everyone will play Marth. Who can rack up damage, KO easily even without FS:es? Marth. Who also has a godly FS which can be comboed into? Marth. Everyone would be forced to play Marth or Toon Link to even stand a chance of winning since you need fast KO's and a good FS.

Either way, competitive gaming loses.

I've already presented you with all of these arguments before. You ignored them then and now you're providing inane counter-arguments.

Avoidance becomes key, it becomes the strategy, and thus , the tiers would be change and a different type of game could be built around it.

Camping is not competitive. Because Marth would win using camping alone.

Do you understand my idea? my post? how it isnt as stupid as your ignorant mouth spews it is?

Ignorant? Any competitive player will know that I know what I speak of while you do not. Why do you keep pretending to know what Competitive play and game balance is all about when you so clearly do not?

And this is yet another example of you using outright flames in an attempt to mask your inane arguments.

Also, your last idiotic statement really sums up your ignorance(and no, im not using the word incorrectly, im calling you ignorant!)

The fact that it's true and you're wrong makes you the ignorant one.

I am not an ardent supported. My original post on this topic was asking if a new tourney set could be built. It was asking, and it provided examples. I personally havent seen good valid counter arguments as to why it wouldnt work. All i get, especially from you, Yuna, is that "i dont want to do it, it wasnt done in melee, wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

Do you know what "ardent supporter" means? It means "Someone who strongly supports something". Don't feel insulted just because your grasp of the English language is inferior to mine (English is my 3rd language).

I've been doing it since forever. You've ignored them all or you're too illogical to understand them.

Have you played Brawl (not that I know of)? Have you played any game on a competitive level (I see you ignored my challenge to prove that you were any good at the games you claimed to be "great at")? Do you know much about Competitive gaming, game balance or even Final Smashes at all? Do you know anything?

A tip when discussing something: Research your facts.

 

[otter]

I think Brawl without Smash Balls would be similar to Street Fighter III without super moves.

Yun's Super Art will tear you apart in one combo, so people play him or deal with it. Alot of the people crying are going to tier ***** Marth either way

Seriously. Alot of you guys need to get some balls and just learn the game, play Melee if you want Melee. Can anyone tell me why wavedashing is cool and this isn't? More button presses?

 

[Yuna]

Seriously. Alot of you guys need to get some balls and just learn the game, play Melee if you want Melee. Can anyone tell me why wavedashing is cool and this isn't? More button presses?

What? Final Smashes? Because Wavedashing never 1 hit KO.ed someone at 0% while others would never hit anyone.

 

[Hitzel]

heres a crazy thought.

increase stock or maybe make it a timed game?

How will that change anything? That's not going to magically change the item spawn timer.

 

[skuzzel]

Seriously. Alot of you guys need to get some balls and just learn the game,

First of all, I would like to point out that by and far, the people arguing against FS in competitive play would own just about everyone arguing for it in just about any match type, brawl, 64, or melee. You give us a timed, FS on match, then we are going to pick marth. It would be foolish to do otherwise. Then when we win, you will say we suck because we have to pick marth to win, when in fact, FSs suck BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PICK MARTH TO WIN..

play Melee if you want Melee.

I DO play Melee. The fact that you do not see the implications of that for the brawl metagame and overall competitive scene is awe inspiring.

Can anyone tell me why wavedashing is cool and this isn't? More button presses?

Because wave dashing did not give one character a "large" advantage over another, and it did give one player an advantage over another. (that would be the point of competitive smash BTW)

 

[adumbrodeus]

Its debatable........

just as an example, lets compare Ness's FS vs Peaches....

With ness's your ally is in the exact same boat as your enemies. A good player can avoid Ness's FS altogether, well whatever, so in 2v2 its useless. Dont even try to say that your partner could try to move other players into the range of the attack, because both sides can do that, and there would be two of them against your partner, thus GIVING them the advantage.

Now peach's, you start the attack, everyone goes to sleep, you tap your partner, waking him up, you both gobble up all the health and then both use your best charge smash on both of your opponents.


When you put those side by side doesn't it make you think that ness would be garbage in any 2v2 fights?

There's a difference between being useless and being less useful, which was the distinction I was making.

Again, it requires a lot more care, and your ally better be practiced in dodging it,however, said other player can also force opponents into the stars, so there's little doubt dodging it will be as easy as in 1v1.

However, Peach's final smash will probably be more useful overall.

 

[ThaDirtyG]

I agree that there is a level of depth due to smashballs, my only real complaint against them is that they don't seem balanced at all. Some character's FS's are WAY easier to use than others and can kill much more easily.

If everyone's FS was a guaranteed 1 kill (for the sake of normalizing the effectiveness of each characters FS) I think things could be different.