So there seems to be a recent freakout about the ICs because of Wobbles' performance at Evo.

[BarlessPianist]

I'm hearing a lot of people cry about how wobbling makes the Climbers a broken character, or that there's a reason the ICs are banned from many competitions, but let's look at them objectively.

First of, to even successfully wobble your opponent, you have to sync your climbers juuust right. I don't even know the timing for it, but I know there's more to it than a regular chain grab. Nana has to mimic Popo's actions a specific time after he does them. Getting into that state is hard enough, but setting up the grab AFTER that desync is even harder. Wobbling, I would even dare to say, isn't even a viable strat. Wobbles makes it look viable because, well, he invented it- but for normal players, it's not even worth the effort and the 3 stocks you'll lose before getting 1 wobble.

Now let's pretend you're going in with the Ice Climbers, competent with wobbling or not. You're comfortable with your character, you know ICs better than anyone- but there's an X factor than can make or break your game. The fate of the match rests in a level 1 CPU in the form of Nana. Without her, you lose a meat shield, a lot of extra damage, and the ability to wobble. This isn't to say that you can't win matches because Nana is a liability, but it's to say that a player with good target priority can leave you without your pink coated compadre- which leads me to my final point.

SoPo. I've yet to see a proficient SoPo anywhere in the smash community. Probably because SoPo is a crippled state of an already mid-tier character. With Nana and Popo together, the ICs are at least viable; but when Popo is left alone, you don't really need a full written explanation of why that stock is pretty much over. The Climbers can easily be crippled by someone who's priority is completely on point.

In a nutshell, there's much more to the ICs than wobbling, and just because they have a broken move doesn't mean they're a broken character. I know the knee jerk reaction to wobbling is to ban it from all tournies, but in my opinion, getting the wobble is difficult enough to merit a free stock. And beyond that, measures can easily be taken into place to prevent it from happening.

Thoughts?

 

[Sashimi]

I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) there was one match during EVO in which Wobbles actually forfeited his last stock as soon as he lost Nana. I think it was in Grand Finals. So yes, Wobbling is balanced by SoPo.

I've never played Ice Climbers, so I can't comment on how difficult it is to set up Wobbling, but from what I saw, it looks very specific and situational. Also, many of Wobbles' kills were not from Wobbling, so it's hard to argue that he made it as far as he did just because of a single broken technique. It took a lot of IC skill and a lot of general smash skill. I think that if an infinite is difficult enough, it doesn't ruin the game, even though it might seem unfair.

The only problem I really have with Wobbling is that it's awful boring to watch if you're not an IC player. This also goes for any infinite, I think. While this doesn't bother me, since I at least try to appreciate the significance of the technique the player is pulling off, I think it makes the game less exciting to the uninitiated. I'm sure players new to competitive Smash who were watching the EVO stream might not have understood the hype during those moments, and I wonder if they lost interest because of that.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

You're imagining a freakout so that you can take an intellectually superior position to the mindless, albeit imaginary, sheep who are just riding the Wobbles-hype wave. Kudos.

Nobody that matters thinks that ICs are a problem, so this thread is pointless.

 

[BarlessPianist]

You're imagining a freakout so that you can take an intellectually superior position to the mindless, albeit imaginary, sheep who are just riding the Wobbles-hype wave. Kudos.

Nobody that matters thinks that ICs are a problem, so this thread is pointless.

If you say so. If it bothers you that much I can take it down, but I've just been thinking about a few complaints that I *have* seen about people calling the ICs broken. I just wanted to write out some thoughts about some characters. That doesn't make me a pseudo intellectual douche.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I just calls it like I sees it

 

[BarlessPianist]

Nah. This, more than anything, was a poorly phrased, "Let me tell you a thing and then you tell me a thing about my thing" thread. I wanted it to just be a discussion, but looking back on the title, I did kinda come across as a bit haughty. Sorry about that :3

 

[Grim Tuesday]

A fun fact is that the only reason Wobbling looked so difficult to set up is because Wobbles wasn't consistent at the non-Wobbling chain-grabs at EVO. His tech-chases and follow-ups were often on-point (i.e. the platform grab combo he did on HBox after missing the hand-off), but a lot of the times he grabbed he could've guaranteed a wobble by doing a simpler, less position-based combo first to set up the opponent and re-sync Nana; but he didn't trust himself due to nerves and instead flubbed the combo or just waited for Nana to resync automatically and they broke out before he could do anything.

Ice Climbers are ridiculously difficult regardless due to how fragile they are (possibly the most fragile character in the game, they can consistently die to a single mistake), but yeah, they aren't difficult for the reasons people seem to think.

 

[exarch]

I have some things to tell you about your thing. (Wall o Text incoming!)

Icys are an immensely powerful (and difficult) character with the most underdeveloped metagame of any character in melee. They are also the least understood of all 26 characters by the community, as evidenced by the reaction Wobbles got to a nanapult which has been a technique known of and used since at least 2005. 8 years later and Prog hadn't seen it before (that he remembered.)

You should try playing icys before you attempt to judge how difficult individual techniques are. Wobbling is probably the flat-out easiest option they have in grabs, and it's not difficult to execute at all. (Especially if you've ever had any schooling in music and managed to reach an understanding of eighth notes--which is a lot of people.) All you have to do is hit the A button at a constant rate: twice for every grab attack. Play them some, learn what it's like to be able to do ~26% with every smash attack you have. Learn some of the chaingrabs (they're not hard to pick up.)

Wobbling is bad for the game and bad for the character.

There is nothing you can do as an opponent once a wobble starts--there is no counterplay to the strategy at all. The characters who have 0-deaths CGs differ in two important ways: 1) There is a demand on those characters to execute once they achieve their grab. 2) They do not have 0-death CGs on every character in the game. Wobbling works on every character (I guess unless you're dittoing--though it works on sopo,) and it is the flat out easiest death combo in the game. In a game known for its demand on execution, wobbling does not fit with the rest of the meta; it is too easy. It is toxic gameplay. For space animals who hate being CGed, they'll pick up another character so they don't have to deal with it. There is no counterpick to wobbling. "Don't get grabbed" for some reason we seem to think is actual advice; how exactly is this significantly different from Isai's famous "Don't get hit"?

Wobbling is bad for the icys because they do not need to press their metagame. As long as wobbling remains, the icys will forever exclusively be "How do I get to Wobble my opponent?" They have enough chaingrab mixups to 0-death every character in the game (given the right selection and execution in each situation,) which is much more in line with the rest of melee than hitting A enough times at a constant enough rate. (Case in point here: How often did Wobbles grab under 40%, then do something that led him to a regrab at over 40%? He could do that again...and again...) They have fantastic priority and disjointedness in their hammers, giving them options for a very solid spacing game. They have great hitstun and damage, which easily lends itself into aerial juggles we've never seen before. They have an autocancelling projectile, which could even be used for a rushdown pressure time game third to falco and samus. Why don't we see this? We do. Watch Chu play. Watch wobbles play when he's not wobbling (or only looking for a grab.) You will see pieces of what I've described, although it is still underdeveloped because it's not as good as wobbling. It will never be as good as a free stock.

Icys are still a fantastic character when wobbling is banned. Better than CF. Yes I said it. Remember when we thought jigglypuff wasn't an incredible character? Remember when we thought peach was only high tier? (Maybe you don't remember.) We thought they were bad because no one good enough played them yet. Why don't we see as many players doing as well as wobbles with icys? Probably because there aren't many players as good as wobbles. There are very few players as good as Wobbles, and fewer still as good as the top echelon of smashers. Individual skill determines your results far far more than character selection.

--------
Asides: I have mained peach, so wobbling doesn't effect me much, as peach stomps/wins the matchup either way. I have also mained Roy, so wobbling does not effect that much either, because it's still a ~10-0 matchup in Icys' favor. (So whoever out there is going to say whine more noob, you can forget that.) I have lived within walking distance of a very good ice climbers player (Hozart) who beat DaShizWiz in winners and losers of Hozart's last tourney before 'retirement,'- when Shiz had a dominant grasp on the FL scene. I have seen how little banning and unbanning wobbling effects his results. I have also seen how much banning and unbanning wobbling effects his creativity.

Spoiler

Hey wait, are you saying that wobbles could've gotten 2nd without wobbling? Yes I am. Sadly we'll never know.

We, as a community, used to ban things that negatively effected the metagame--Hyrule Temple is a great example of that. Hell even the brawl section of our community banned planking. Wobbling negatively effects the metagame. I am deeply disappointed that this is the only discussion I have found on the boards that relates to this topic.

 

[BarlessPianist]

I have come to the conclusion that I've been talking out of my ass. I'll try not to do that in the future.

 

[Fly_Amanita]

Usually when I see a wall of text that brings nothing new to the table, I'll be lazy and let somebody else address it, but in this case, I'll spare somebody else the effort.

There is nothing you can do as an opponent once a wobble starts--there is no counterplay to the strategy at all. The characters who have 0-deaths CGs differ in two important ways: 1) There is a demand on those characters to execute once they achieve their grab. 2) They do not have 0-death CGs on every character in the game. Wobbling works on every character (I guess unless you're dittoing--though it works on sopo,) and it is the flat out easiest death combo in the game. In a game known for its demand on execution, wobbling does not fit with the rest of the meta; it is too easy. It is toxic gameplay. For space animals who hate being CGed, they'll pick up another character so they don't have to deal with it. There is no counterpick to wobbling. "Don't get grabbed" for some reason we seem to think is actual advice; how exactly is this significantly different from Isai's famous "Don't get hit"?

Is wobbling easy to execute and incredibly powerful? Sure. Is being easy and powerful a reasonable ban criterion? It'd be hard to justify that, as justifying ban criteria in general is difficult. The easiness really is a nonissue since technically proficient players will master whatever is necessary provided it is feasible. Some ICs players used to even do a more difficult variation of the infinite involving blizzard. If anything, though, a greater execution barrier here would just make things less interesting in my eyes since the basic decision-making involved in landing a grab would be the same, but more time would be wasted needed to learn the technique. While execution can be fun and all, I find it better when it's not arbitrarily shoved into places it has no business being. I don't know what to make of the "there is no counterpick to wobbling" remark. You can't prevent it when it starts, sure, but I don't view this as problematic provided there is some anti-stalling clause.

Wobbling is bad for the icys because they do not need to press their metagame. As long as wobbling remains, the icys will forever exclusively be "How do I get to Wobble my opponent?" They have enough chaingrab mixups to 0-death every character in the game (given the right selection and execution in each situation,) which is much more in line with the rest of melee than hitting A enough times at a constant enough rate. (Case in point here: How often did Wobbles grab under 40%, then do something that led him to a regrab at over 40%? He could do that again...and again...) They have fantastic priority and disjointedness in their hammers, giving them options for a very solid spacing game. They have great hitstun and damage, which easily lends itself into aerial juggles we've never seen before. They have an autocancelling projectile, which could even be used for a rushdown pressure time game third to falco and samus. Why don't we see this? We do. Watch Chu play. Watch wobbles play when he's not wobbling (or only looking for a grab.) You will see pieces of what I've described, although it is still underdeveloped because it's not as good as wobbling. It will never be as good as a free stock.

This is at times naive and at times false. Even in a wobbling-legal world, there is much more to ICs than merely landing a grab and initiating an infinite. Regarding the CG comment, ICs cannot reasonably be expected to ztd a decent chunk of the cast most of the time. Handoffs by the edge will frequently lead to death, but that requires landing a grab in a very particular place. Almost everything else is very easily escapable with good SDI. Exceptions are the standard dthrow CG and its variants, but those generally don't last very long and are in some cases not feasible to do on reaction. There are some characters that get murdered by it, but they are outliers. Regarding the autocanceling projectile remark, ice blocks' autocanceling properties are generally only useful when passing onto a platform from below. The upwards bounce you get from using it generally renders it unusable in a fashion like Falco's lasers. If you really want to, you can use an ice block in the air and land on stage in a fashion that skips landfall or landfallspecial, in which case the ice block won't pop you up the next time you use it while airborne provided you don't trigger either of those two animations, but good luck actually setting that up mid-match and avoiding those two animations until you have a nice opportunity to use your descending ice block.

Icys are still a fantastic character when wobbling is banned. Better than CF. Yes I said it. Remember when we thought jigglypuff wasn't an incredible character? Remember when we thought peach was only high tier? (Maybe you don't remember.) We thought they were bad because no one good enough played them yet. Why don't we see as many players doing as well as wobbles with icys? Probably because there aren't many players as good as wobbles. There are very few players as good as Wobbles, and fewer still as good as the top echelon of smashers. Individual skill determines your results far far more than character selection.

And I don't view the fact that ICs are fine without wobbling as an excuse to nerf them.

 

[Strong Badam]

It is not, has never been, and never will be our prerogative to try to be making changes via ruleset to make the game better. We choose which stages are good for competition, not which tactics or abilities characters have that are "Smash enough" to not be banned.
Wobbling is bad for the game. So is Jigglypuff. Neither will be banned, because neither are broken. The sooner you accept this fact, the sooner you can work on getting better against ICs.

In short, your ban criteria isn't relevant. Wobbling is not bannable by any criteria that the community uses. Banning it is scrubby and introduces a double standard we can't possibly justify. I wish it didn't exist, but it does. Therefore, it will be used by Ice Climber players.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

^While this is what we should be doing, this community often bans things because we don't like them

 

[exarch]

NP Barless

@Fly: I would say that being very easy (could be done by a metronome), absurdly powerful (40-death vs everyone regardless of stage, character, position, skill level), and ridiculously low risk (you missed a grab!/they broke out!) is reason enough to ban it. Also in every other case I can think of when technical proficiency was mastered, we discovered some alternate technique which made it no longer guaranteed, or at the very least even more difficult; your opponent loses control of his character during a wobble so this will never exist. I am still waiting for the flawless multishining fox though. Ban wobbling and you increase execution AND decision making (which CG variation will the icy use this time, how will the opponent DI?) Also how you going to claim I added nothing new when you don't know how to respond to one of my remarks?

Yes there is more to IC than wobbling. But the character absolutely revolves around it (which was what I meant.)

"Regarding the CG comment, ICs cannot reasonably be expected to ztd a decent chunk of the cast most of the time...Exceptions are the standard dthrow CG and its variants, but those generally don't last very long and are in some cases not feasible to do on reaction."

Right. But I thought I said they can do it, not they can be expected to do it most of the time. How about we figure out ways to CG to move someone closer to an edge to lead into handoffs? Or we work on regrabs on platforms like a lot of other characters are doing? But we don't need to think like this because we've got wobble. Also, I think I heard once something about easiness being a nonissue because technically proficient players will... um I don't remember the rest. Sorry, nvm.

Why not use the iceblock on the way up? It cancels your jump. Use it as soon as you leave the ground, not after you start your fall.

And my comment about icys being fine without them is to say that by getting rid of this bad technique, we are not significantly detracting from their ability to be a good character. So keeping it legal because the icys need it to be significant is an irrelevant reasoning.

And Strongbad: Wobbling is bad for competition. It's not a double standard because it only applies to one case, and it is such an extreme case that deserves to be banned. Regardless, any criteria we had for banning has been slopped ever since Mute City was banned, which is why things like this don't get discussed anymore.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

NP Barless

@Fly: I would say that being very easy (could be done by a metronome), absurdly powerful (40-death vs everyone regardless of stage, character, position, skill level), and ridiculously low risk (you missed a grab!/they broke out!) is reason enough to ban it.

No, you don't understand how banning works. Ban criteria isn't some mystical, subjective force that is a combination of ease of use, strength, risk/reward, etc... It's simply something that makes the game uncompetitive, no other criteria makes any sense. For competition to occur, we need to be able to consistently determine who is better out of 2 or more players - ACTUALLY broken techniques (like, say, Meta Knight's infinite dimensional cape in Brawl) are so absurdly powerful that they make it impossible to determine the better player; any random joe off the street can learn a broken technique and win tournaments with it. Suddenly, the metagame is solved, this is exactly why Tic-Tac-Toe isn't played competitively, there is a set pattern you can use to never lose, so there are no 'best player(s)'... Almost everyone is equally the best.

Your ban criteria for wobbling is based on a collection of things that you feel are strong attributes - that doesn't mean **** if the technique that they add up to isn't broken though.

I'd suggest reading some of my thread on the topic; http://smashboards.com/threads/grims-views-on-stage-legality-the-competitive-criteria.315529/
It's Brawl-focused, but it goes into more depth than I did here.

FURTHER MORE, Wobbling is not low risk. The risk is that you picked a character who isn't as good as Fox/Falco/Peach/etc... That's ignoring the fact that a missed grab can lead to a stock loss with ICs, and that it doesn't matter if something is low risk:high reward (shine, anyone? Sheik's grab? Marth's grab?)

Also in every other case I can think of when technical proficiency was mastered, we discovered some alternate technique which made it no longer guaranteed, or at the very least even more difficult; your opponent loses control of his character during a wobble so this will never exist. I am still waiting for the flawless multishining fox though. Ban wobbling and you increase execution AND decision making (which CG variation will the icy use this time, how will the opponent DI?) Also how you going to claim I added nothing new when you don't know how to respond to one of my remarks?

If you ban Sheik's chain-grab you increase execution and decision making as well, bravo. We aren't trying to engineer this game to be better, we'd end up with a rulebook instead of a ruleset if we did that.

The counter technique to Wobbling is to not get grabbed, there are lots of situations where you lose control of your character (i.e. any time you're in hitstun after choosing your DI direction); your problem with Wobbling is that you lose control for a longer period of time, which doesn't actually mean anything or make it any more banworthy under any logical ban criteria.

Yes there is more to IC than wobbling. But the character absolutely revolves around it (which was what I meant.) Right. But I thought I said they can do it, not they can be expected to do it most of the time. How about we figure out ways to CG to move someone closer to an edge to lead into h nonissue becaandoffs? Or we work on regrabs on platforms like a lot of other characters are doing? But we don't need to think like this because we've got wobble. Also, I think I heard once something about easiness being ause technically proficient players will... um I don't remember the rest. Sorry, nvm.

Again, ban Sheik's chain-grab if you want to make this game better. Ganondorf's can go as well actually... Ooh, if we ban Falco from lasering against DK he becomes more viable too! :D

 

[exarch]

I didn't get very far in your post (at first) because I came across this

Dedede gains such a high reward from landing a grab that he has much less incentive to use tactics that do not involve grabs or grab set-ups; on the other hand, Donkey Kong is punished so hard for making a mistake that he has much less incentive to make "risky" decisions. All in all, the match-up calls for far less effectively different situations than a standard match-up and is less competitive because of it.

To review here: a matchup where one character can 0-death with one grab regardless of what another character does is less competitive than a standard matchup. Fantastic. Thank you for being on my side. Also, ironically, you seem to be talking about risk reward in this very section... I thought that didn't have anything to do with competitiveness?

Still reading... stuff about arbitrary line... sounds exactly right...Skipped the stuff on individual levels. Hope that's ok.

I was making a counterpoint to Fly's statement that you only increase execution with wobbling banned so it makes the game less interesting to him. But you don't just increase execution, so it would make the game more interesting for him. Also, you still influence your characters trajectory when in hitstun.

And since we're being uppity and condescending now, I'm kinda a bit tired of the strawman and slipperyslope fallacies going on in here.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

To review here: a matchup where one character can 0-death with one grab regardless of what another character does is less competitive than a standard matchup. Fantastic. Thank you for being on my side. Also, ironically, you seem to be talking about risk reward in this very section... I thought that didn't have anything to do with competitiveness?

You will also notice that I don't call for the infinite on Donkey Kong to be banned anywhere in my thread, and I was actually just using it as an example for the concept of a skill ceiling and comparing two situations based on their 'competitiveness'. I also never said that risk:reward has nothing to do with competitiveness, no strawmen plz.

Still reading... stuff about arbitrary line... sounds exactly right...Skipped the stuff on individual levels. Hope that's ok.

Yep, the line is arbitrary, that means that you can put the line after Wobbling if you want (and, therefore, Wobbling would be banned). But this is a line, and not a squiggle, so everything that is after our line would have to be banned as well (and seeing as wobbling isn't actually uncompetitive, and only lowers the skill ceiling in a very minor way, that would include a lot of things like, as I mentioned, Sheik's chain-grab).

I was making a counterpoint to Fly's statement that you only increase execution with wobbling banned so it makes the game less interesting to him. But you don't just increase execution, so it would make the game more interesting for him. Also, you still influence your characters trajectory when in hitstun.

I can't know what you're responding to if you don't use quotes. And I mentioned DI, there is no other way to influence your trajectory while in hitstun.

And since we're being uppity and condescending now, I'm kinda a bit tired of the strawman and slipperyslope fallacies going on in here.

Pointing out a double standard is not the same as a slippery slope fallacy. Slippery slope is when you say that event x has occurred, therefore, event y will also occur (when event y is extreme and unrealistic) - I'm not saying that if we ban Wobbling, "The next thing you know we'll be banning Sheik's chain grab!" I'm saying that it makes no sense to ban one and not the other because they fall under the same criteria.

So as long as we're being uppity and condescending, at least do it right

 

[exarch]

Sheik's CG: On the characters it does happen to, it's usually only for ~50% assuming they cannot DI off the level, there are no platforms for them to tech onto, and the sheik does not mess up due to their DI.
Wobble: Guaranteed blast KO from 40% up regardless of everything. Ok well if you messup and fsmash early you get only like 100% and an edgeguard regardless of everything.

Sheik's CG has significantly less reward to it than the Wobble. Therefore Sheik has less incentive to do nothing but focus on grabs, and the other characters have more incentive to do risky maneuvers. So Sheik CG matches are more competitive than Wobble IC matchups. I'm not drawing with squiggles here. No double standard. I am saying it makes plenty of sense to ban one but not the other. So my condescension was accurate from my view.

I try not to quote when I think it's unnecessary because posts frequently tend to increase in length as discussion continue. I try my best to avoid this. While it is not the best practice, I think what I and others gain outweighs temporary misunderstandings.

You can continue to influence your DI as you fly through the air even during hitstun. You are still controlling your character. Maybe I misunderstood when you said "after DI" originally.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Nah you were right to misunderstand my DI thing, I was derping

Wobbling is to death, Sheik's is to 50% (I'm going to ignore your stipulations because you ignored that you need Nana alive and synced to Wobble, which basically evens out with the conditions for Sheik's CG), sure. I accept that wobbling, overall, has less competitive merit than Sheik's chain-grab and it makes sense to ban one and not the other.

However,Sheik's chain-grab is still less competitive than her tech-chase and you don't want it banned, so I can then assume that you:
a) Agree with the ban criteria I suggested; competitive merit
b) Don't think that we should make rule changes just because they make the game more competitive
c) Believe that banning wobbling makes the game more competitive to a degree that makes it worth banning
[If I'm wrong on any of those assumptions, tell me]

So if we find a rule to implement that also adds as much competitive depth as the wobbling ban does, you would agree to it? For example, using the handicap system to buff low tiers? If not, why not?

 

[exarch]

I do tend to ignore nana's positioning, though I don't agree it evens out the conditions for sheik's cg. I'll think on this some.


And to your question: No, because wobbling is a specific case. I'm concerned with absolute competitiveness, and not relative. Plus we could take a combination of rules which would increase competitive depth similar to banning wobbling, by banning sheik CG and sheik fair. The icys are the problem, wobbling is the problem. Not other things.

I'm guessing that question is probably bait of some kind, but I'm kinda losing it here at 4:40 am. So I'll check later today after I sleep.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I don't understand what you mean by wobbling being a 'specific case'?

The point is that while, yes, we can remove it to make the game more competitive, it opens up the window to a lot of other silliness. That's why I personally only support banning things which are decidedly uncompetitive and actually kill competition.

 

[Dark Lady]

Alrighty, my two cents; i'm gonna compare this to League of Legends because it's a competitive game, like Smash.


In League, there is a champion named Twisted Fate. He has a move that is widely considered to be the most ridiculously broken ability in the entire game. Because of this, he has a 100% Pick or Ban rate in S.Korea. But the team behind League, Riot Games, refuses to remove that ability in a game that is CONSTANTLY re-balanced. Their justification? Twisted Fate's ability can be abused in high skill games; but with the casual and mediocre players, he's virtually useless.

In Brawl, they temporarily banned Meta Knight. Why? He had such a low skill cap, that anyone who could mash B, flick their C-Stick down, and hit Up-B were suddenly a huge threat to people who were a lot better than them skill-wise. This, I admit, was completely poisonous until the meta shifted, allowing people to powershield and counter the tornado.


Ice Climbers are more like example one. There is no reason to extinguish their Wobbling ability because it takes a higher skilled player to take full advantage of it; and killing Secondary Climber eliminates this option entirely (Much like after Twisted Fate procs his ult, it's on Cooldown. For a loooong time.) And a missed grab from IC's CAN be punished in higher skill matches where the wobble becomes viable. And, scrubby IC's nubs will lose like 2-3 lives for every one wobble they might possibly get. Then they'll drop timings and suck.

@Exarch: A lot of moves can be timed with a met in this game. I've found this out by experimenting when I discovered the wobble timing. Met measures time. Frames measure time. Therefore, met measures frames.

 

[exarch]

Ninja'd

It doesn't open the window to lots of other silliness because everything else we've banned doesn't open the window to more silliness. Removing wobbling leads to nothing more than than removing the infinite dimensional cape, freeze glitch, or planking has led to. Say that I've looked at all the legal techniques characters can do in smash brothers melee, and wobbling is by itself on the tier 0 competitiveness (which doesn't mean it is competitive or not, just that it is the least competitive of all techniques.) Banning tier 0 doesn't mean we also have to ban tier 1-3 too, just like it does with stages.

We can't say when something becomes competitive or noncompetitive, that's using an arbitrary line, we can only be sure that some things are more or less competitive than other things, assuming we agree on the reasoning behind them. Also this feels a lot like a slippery slope concern here; don't worry friend, banning wobbling doesn't ruin the game by opening doors.

 

[Dark Lady]

Ninja'd

It doesn't open the window to lots of other silliness because everything else we've banned doesn't open the window to more silliness. Removing wobbling leads to nothing more than than removing the infinite dimensional cape, freeze glitch, or planking has led to. Say that I've looked at all the legal techniques characters can do in smash brothers melee, and wobbling is by itself on the tier 0 competitiveness (which doesn't mean it is competitive or not, just that it is the least competitive of all techniques.) Banning tier 0 doesn't mean we also have to ban tier 1-3 too, just like it does with stages.

We can't say when something becomes competitive or noncompetitive, that's using an arbitrary line, we can only be sure that some things are more or less competitive than other things, assuming we agree on the reasoning behind them. Also this feels a lot like a slippery slope concern here; don't worry friend, banning wobbling doesn't ruin the game by opening doors.

Sorry for the Ninja; XD
I'm not saying that taking it away ruins anything, but rather that it just feels unnecessary. It's just strong punish, really, and they aren't the only ones with an infinite; theirs is just lower skill cap and higher risk/reward. But it doesn't automatically make a player super good by merely learning the technique.

 

[Nintendude]

How exactly does one ban wobbling?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Dark Lady do you have any idea how Brawl works and why MK was banned lol

 

[Fenrir VII]

I think people are drastically overstating how difficult it is to play IC's... I understand they are among the most complicated characters, but to state that they are risking death to try to land a grab (when they have pretty great setups) is ridiculous. Also, as a non-IC player, I can safely say that handoffs into wobbling are not hard (i.e. I can do it with relative ease)... a basic understanding of desyncs is all that's really required.

Also, regarding the "slippery slope" arguments... there are examples all over the history of the ruleset of banning stages, etc to reduce the advantage of a small number of characters (read: "nerf" those characters). How would banning wobbling be any different than that precedent?

Wobbling is a tech that has no counter once it is started, so 1 grab = death for any player with nominal skill, regardless of character matchup or opponent input. The only other example of this in the game (that I can think of, at least) is waveshining on walk-off stages (which were .... banned for that very reason). We have set the precedent that certain aspects of the game should be banned to reduce the advantage of a relatively small number of characters, so I really don't understand how this is any different, when wobbling impacts a matchup/tournament more than a stage like Brinstar, RC, or Mute City.

As for actually controlling the rule, it would be similar to planking, etc... a player is allowed 3 seconds of grab attacks before a throw, etc... something similar to that.

 

[Nintendude]

Whoa it's TMG!

 

[Pi]

let's bring back walled stages and ban waveshining against walls

 

[exarch]

Spoiler

Alright let's use examples from LoL. Riot bans or changes things they consider toxic gameplay, which they define more or less as something which have minimal to no counterplay. Akali is currently being looked at to be changed significantly due to her ability to 100% instagib someone before they can react to it, and regardless of what they do (Akali can kill someone before your team can react with a pinkward and kill her back.) Apparently "Be ahead of akali" or "Don't get close enough to her to let her ulti you" is not significant enough counterplay. All of that sounds extremely similar to the Icys capability with wobbling, and "don't get grabbed" sounds a lot like "be ahead of akali" and the like.

You've also not mentioned the repeated (and I mean repeated) nerfs to TF, which have been happening since the game was in Alpha. Those who play know that Riot can be stubborn about keeping certain kits in order (as evidenced by their insistence that this new Karma kit is better than the old,) Riot doesn't want to remove what makes TF TF, but they have nerfed him into oblivion since his release. I would be fine with wobbling if their was significant damage decay in smash brothers, but we can't go in and change that programming like Riot can. Riot also has the amazing catchall where you get to ban 6 characters every game, so it's ok if 1/112 of the champions is super ridiculously OP. This doesn't work with smash brothers.

Also I currently have like 30 normal wins (normals suck) but that doesn't mean I don't understand TF is incredible and should get even more nerfs. Even if I can't use him to his potential, doesn't mean his potential shouldn't be nerfed. In smash brothers we've always balanced and tiered to the highest level of play, which is why Roy isn't high tier. Anyway most of this was for fun, but I hope you get my understanding with these analogies. (Sidenote, first time I've been glad I play LoL on the boards. ^_^)

"Low Risk" I keep using the phrase "low risk" to contrast to one significant move in smash brothers. Rest. For as many combos as Icys have into grab, Jiggs can do the same with Rest. Rest and wobbling are very close to the same reward: You get a stock. Percentage is almost irrelevant to both of them (be over 40%.) Stage position is almost irrelevant. Execution is irrelevant (Tap A consistently enough, hit down B once at the right time.) Skill level is irrelevant (being a better player doesn't help you survive rests or wobbles.) Rest is the closest comparable technique to wobbling in the game.

What's the big difference? Rest takes 249 frames, Icy grab takes 30 or 40 frames (or 7-8 if you hit it.) So for those counting, 219 frames of lag is the difference. The game designers knew that a move that basically took a stock for free needed to have enormous cooldown, to balance the reward with some risk. Icys wobbling has obviously broken this equation. This is what I mean by low risk. You can lose a stock for missing a grab, but how much more often do you lose a stock for missing a rest? Similarly, how often do you lose a stock for HITTING a rest? This is what I mean by low risk. 12% of the cooldown of rest is not fair, is not healthy, is not competitive, and should be banned. (Acknowledging here that jigglypuff doesn't need a nana with her to rest someone, but to balance that out jigglypuff gets rest removed as an option in certain cases where she is behind the other person, or even ahead eg.; 50% 1stock jiggs doesn't rest 100% 2stock fox; 50% 4stock jiggs doesn't rest 160% 4stock fox.) [/lowrisk]

We banned walled stages because how free the damage was for fox, but it's harder for fox to waveshine against walls than for icys to wobble someone once the grab happens. (And there is significant counterplay for those being shined, you can DI to push the fox away. And there is a much higher demand on execution.) I actually think we should be retesting stages like PPC, but that's kind of a different topic.

 

[Strong Badam]

And Strongbad: Wobbling is bad for competition. It's not a double standard because it only applies to one case, and it is such an extreme case that deserves to be banned. Regardless, any criteria we had for banning has been slopped ever since Mute City was banned, which is why things like this don't get discussed anymore.

if it isn't obvious to you that this community uses completely different ban criteria for stages/items than they do for characters/aspects of characters, this discussion is pointless.

 

[Fenrir VII]

if it isn't obvious to you that this community uses completely different ban criteria for stages/items than they do for characters/aspects of characters, this discussion is pointless.

This is kind of a cop-out.

There are stages that were banned only to stop fox's wave shine tactics against walls and off walk offs. That was our mitigation against his infinite.

Now IC's have an infinite. If it were stage dependent AT ALL, it's pretty obvious from our past decisions that those stages would be banned. So it has nothing to do with how "fair" wobbling is, IMO... And the only reason it's not banned is because we can't ban another aspect of the game to deal with it.

In my opinion, this is broken thinking.. (We would ban it only if it were stage dependent) There's no reason we couldn't have banned waveshine infinites as opposed to stages, but we chose the easier method. This time, we don't have the easier method, so we're forced to ban the tactic only. I don't see why that is different.

At its core, we have taken steps and banned aspects of the game only to prevent infinites / unfair 0-deaths in the past. We should do so again. The ONLY difference here is that wobbling is not stage dependent (which btw makes it worse for competition than fox's), so the actual tech should be banned, instead of banning other aspects of the game.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

It's worth mentioning that this discussion changed my mind about wobbling.

I still don't think it should be banned, but I don't think it's stupid to ban it either.

 

[Strong Badam]

Fenrir, those stages are detrimental to competitive play whether Fox exists or not. They are not banned because Fox can infinite some characters on them, they are banned because they centralize strategies around camping the dividing walls or walkoffs because of the skewed risk/reward that positioning grants, regardless of match-up. Preventing infinites was simply a side effect that most people would agree is positive. Their banning is not relevant to this discussion.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Why exactly does high risk:high reward centralize strategies around camping walk-offs?

I imagine the worse player would camp walk-offs if they had to play someone they'd never normally beat (and that's stupid), but if both players were similarly skilled what is the incentive to use walk-offs?

 

[Fenrir VII]

Fenrir, those stages are detrimental to competitive play whether Fox exists or not. They are not banned because Fox can infinite some characters on them, they are banned because they centralize strategies around camping the dividing walls or walkoffs because of the skewed risk/reward that positioning grants, regardless of match-up. Preventing infinites was simply a side effect that most people would agree is positive. Their banning is not relevant to this discussion.

Eh, I disagree with this... mainly because I was around for the discussions about banning those stages originally...

I personally played tournament matches on MKII, PPC, Onett, Green Greens (at MLG no less), etc.. and I watched as each stage was banned. The original reason for at least 3 of those 4 (not sure about MKII) was to reduce Fox's advantage, due to waveshine infinites (and low ceilings in the case of GG). Now in subsequent discussions, maybe other criteria were selected to keep the stages banned (although it's much harder to unban a stage), but a large part of the original argument was Fox.
And honestly since Brinstar, Mute City, PF, and RC were banned, I don't understand the current stage ruleset..but I really don't want to turn this into a stagelist discussion

Also, I'm trying really hard to leave Brawl's ruleset out of this, but I think we've made the same decisions with that game. ban stages to "ban" tactics like DDD's CG, etc... and then we banned planking because we couldn't ban stages with edges.

My point is that we've "banned" other infinites by removing the stages where they can be used... So why should we vehemently oppose banning another infinite?

 

[krazyzyko]

Hmm... what if the IC player has the same or more stocks and wobbles until time
runs out?
That sounds bannable IMO. At least for singles.

 

[Removed By Request]

Getting slightly off topic here with discussion about stages... It seems to me that the arguments for banning wobbling are that it makes the game "less competitive" and that it's not "as risky" as other techniques that usually lead to death when performed correctly (such as rest). But the thing is that while performing it is relatively easy, the criteria for performing it is not as easy. If wobbling really were so broken that anyone with "nominal skill" could instantly 40%-death whenever they felt like it, Icies would win every tournament. In order to successfully execute a wobble, you need Nana alive and synced. This is 2013. Any decently high-level competitive player is capable of separating the Ice Climbers and gimping Nana. In Brawl, Icies can 0%-death anyone provided the player knows the correct timings for the opponent's weight class. Why aren't Icies winning every tournament in Brawl? For the exact same reason: Nana is stupidly easy to gimp.

You guys want a counter to wobbling? Switch to Peach and separate them with dsmash. Icies can't wobble because Nana's not synced. Pretty much every character has a move that can separate the Icies, and then it's just a matter of gimping a level 1 CPU while keeping SoPo from getting too close. Hell, even killing Nana can be unnecessary. So long as she's not right next to Popo when he grabs, you won't get wobbled. Everyone's making such a big deal over a technique that is hard to set up and easy to prevent. We're discussing banning wobbling, of all things, after the proponent of the technique and its best user just lost in Evo? If Icies were winning every major tournament and it was due to wobbling, then this discussion might be somewhat relevant, but it's just silly to watch people talking about how "broken" it is when the tournament data isn't backing them up at all. Isn't the tournament the standard of competitiveness? That's where all of the best players of their respective characters battle it out. If wobbling clearly isn't making a major difference in tournaments (i.e. noobs who only know how to wobble aren't winning, and even professional Icies who can wobble aren't winning), then I don't think that it actually has much of an impact on how "competitive" the game is.

 

[FlamingForce]

IIRC it's exactly the characters that possess some sort of stupidly "broken" move/mechanic that are considered high tier/competitive.
If Risk/Reward or ease of use is reason for banning I suggest we ban Peach's d-smash :\

 

[DrkRoxas]

Hmm... what if the IC player has the same or more stocks and wobbles until time
runs out?
That sounds bannable IMO. At least for singles.

That IS banned, when Wobbling is legal they always put a % cap, unless it enters the category of stalling.

People just want to ban wobbling because it's an infinite, and since it's an infinite it gets instant hate, but have you looked at the arsenal of the other characters? I'm not even going to point all of them since this discussion is frankly pretty old and the community hasn't banned wobbling for a reason, still with it, the top tiers wreck the ICs in the majority, with the exception of sheik (ICs favor), Marth and Jiggz (50/50 tho I really think Jiggz has advantage)
Many people say that it is sooo easy to start a wobble and that even non ICs players can do it, of course, I can pull it 100% of the time agains a cpu while standing in front of it and starting the grab, A lot of the time when an ICs can grab a good player it will be with nana at least a little desynched, which makes the grab a lot harder.

4 ICs were in evo, only one got to GFs, all of them were wobbling, and don't you people tell me that the other were just not good and you could make it to GFs if you could wobble. I just can't see the reason for banning.

EDIT: X pretty much explais it, Nana is a lvl 1 CPU, she just tries to recover with her jump, has no DI and her AI can mess her up a lot of times she could've be saved (Going for Randall in Yoshi's)

 

[Fenrir VII]

Getting slightly off topic here with discussion about stages... It seems to me that the arguments for banning wobbling are that it makes the game "less competitive" and that it's not "as risky" as other techniques that usually lead to death when performed correctly (such as rest). But the thing is that while performing it is relatively easy, the criteria for performing it is not as easy. If wobbling really were so broken that anyone with "nominal skill" could instantly 40%-death whenever they felt like it, Icies would win every tournament.

except for the fact that there are characters who can deal with it, which is the same as Fox's waveshine infinite, which has been effectively banned.

In order to successfully execute a wobble, you need Nana alive and synced. This is 2013. Any decently high-level competitive player is capable of separating the Ice Climbers and gimping Nana.

This is 2013. Any decently high-level competitive IC player is capable of landing grabs, given the IC's pretty great setups. Also btw, Popo has solo CG setups on some characters to allow Nana more time to get back to him, so it's not like they have to always be synced at the start.

In Brawl, Icies can 0%-death anyone provided the player knows the correct timings for the opponent's weight class. Why aren't Icies winning every tournament in Brawl? For the exact same reason: Nana is stupidly easy to gimp.

1. This isn't Brawl.
2. MK exists in brawl... that's a similar situation to if Peach were the best character in Melee.

You guys want a counter to wobbling? Switch to Peach and separate them with dsmash. Icies can't wobble because Nana's not synced.

Now THAT is a slippery slope... suggesting that every player must now second Peach to counter an infinite is a ridiculous argument.

Pretty much every character has a move that can separate the Icies, and then it's just a matter of gimping a level 1 CPU while keeping SoPo from getting too close. Hell, even killing Nana can be unnecessary. So long as she's not right next to Popo when he grabs, you won't get wobbled. Everyone's making such a big deal over a technique that is hard to set up and easy to prevent.

and IC's can pretty much grab any character... IC's are a complicated character, I get that. But it isn't nearly as hard as you say to setup grabs with them. And it's not like we're saying Kirby has an infinite here... IC's have legitimately good pressure and setups that work amazingly well on MOST of the cast. Because Fox, Peach, and a couple other characters can manage against them and separate them ok doesn't mean that the tech isn't game-breaking in nearly every other matchup

We're discussing banning wobbling, of all things, after the proponent of the technique and its best user just lost in Evo?

whoa whoa... winning winner's finals and getting 2nd place is not a "loss" at Evo.. because 1 player out of 700 figured out a way to beat it (by playing the best character in the game, btw) doesn't mean that the tech isn't broken..

If Icies were winning every major tournament and it was due to wobbling, then this discussion might be somewhat relevant, but it's just silly to watch people talking about how "broken" it is when the tournament data isn't backing them up at all. Isn't the tournament the standard of competitiveness? That's where all of the best players of their respective characters battle it out. If wobbling clearly isn't making a major difference in tournaments (i.e. noobs who only know how to wobble aren't winning, and even professional Icies who can wobble aren't winning), then I don't think that it actually has much of an impact on how "competitive" the game is.

How is "winning every tournament" suddenly the basis of labeling a tech broken? Placing top ten in a tournament of 700 primarily because of an infinite (when no other character is allowed to have infinites) is exactly an example of tournament data "backing it up". Again, 2nd place is not a "loss"..

People just want to ban wobbling because it's an infinite, and since it's an infinite it gets instant hate, but have you looked at the arsenal of the other characters? I'm not even going to point all of them since this discussion is frankly pretty old and the community hasn't banned wobbling for a reason, still with it, the top tiers wreck the ICs in the majority, with the exception of sheik (ICs favor), Marth and Jiggz (50/50 tho I really think Jiggz has advantage)

1. Rules should be able to change given updated data throughout the game's life (such as wobbling pretty much handing a player 2nd place at a 700 person tournament)
2. Top tiers "wreck" IC's? What is one match that's worse than a 6-4, except maybe Peach?

Many people say that it is sooo easy to start a wobble and that even non ICs players can do it, of course, I can pull it 100% of the time agains a cpu while standing in front of it and starting the grab, A lot of the time when an ICs can grab a good player it will be with nana at least a little desynched, which makes the grab a lot harder.

It's also hard to waveshine. And like I said before, Popo has solo wobble setups against some characters, to allow Nana more time to get resynced

4 ICs were in evo, only one got to GFs, all of them were wobbling, and don't you people tell me that the other were just not good and you could make it to GFs if you could wobble. I just can't see the reason for banning.

23 Fox players made it to the bracket. 4 made it to top 16. 1 made it to grand finals... and people still consider him to be the best character in the game.
I'm not saying the IC's don't take skill to play... obviously Wobblez played the best IC's in the tournament.

I am saying that infinites hurt the competition, and we've actively taken steps in the past to ban another infinite in the game by removing stages. This time, we can't remove stages, but why is preferential treatment given to the IC's infinite?