-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Sudden Death Viability for Tournament Play
- Thread starter Sucumbio
- Start date
OP, if you're a tourney host, you can implement it yourself in one of your tourneys if you want to see what would happen at higher levels of play. You as the host have the final say if it should be done or not. But we're warning you: it's not worth it.
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
I still don't understand why matches should last longer than 8 minutes w/ quality players. DMG is good, yet why Razer didn't ban Brinstar is beyond me. And those matches STILL weren't 8 minutes.
Time Ups can happen but they shouldn't w/ smart players.
@Alfa, I forgot about tourney schedules. But you should still SD in Friendlies.
Time Ups can happen but they shouldn't w/ smart players.
@Alfa, I forgot about tourney schedules. But you should still SD in Friendlies.
Jigglymaster
Smash Hero
Basically if we have sudden death that means the loser can plank and run away until time runs out to get a sudden death instead of losing.
Gunmaster, that was just one match. DMG has timed out many players in Brinstar by doing what he did in that video, while using Wario. Why can't you believe that? : /
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
Who would the loser be? the one @ 150%? Cause comebacks happen, not consistency, but they happen. I'm sick of invalid points.
@Kew, I gotta go, cya later...
@Kew, I gotta go, cya later...
gm jack
Smash Lord
But he is losing at the end of a predetermined time limit. Comebacks do happen, but if we are to have a timed system, you have to pick the person winning at the end of that time.Who would the loser be? the one @ 150%? Cause comebacks happen, not consistency, but they happen. I'm sick of invalid points.
@Kew, I gotta go, cya later...
Otherwise, you would have to do it if there is a difference in stocks as well. Down a stock or two? Plank the match away to get on even terms again. Hardly a fair system which punishes you for winning, as to try and capitalise on any lead gained, you have to put yourself in a very bad situation. Extreme, but it can be done, and if it is the best strategy, it will be done.
zeldspazz
Smash Master
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,432
I think a player is very smart if they can go eight minutes without getting killed 3 times while maintaning a lead the whole time.I still don't understand why matches should last longer than 8 minutes w/ quality players. DMG is good, yet why Razer didn't ban Brinstar is beyond me. And those matches STILL weren't 8 minutes.
Time Ups can happen but they shouldn't w/ smart players.
@Alfa, I forgot about tourney schedules. But you should still SD in Friendlies.
You call that top play? I call that cheap. If all you're going to do is nothing, then respond to the other's .. boredom on waiting on you, never once committing to your own action, you're only doing 1/2 the job. Risk/reward is the game, not wait-n-see. This mentality is indeed at the heart of my OP. I see a terrible trend in brawls from recorded tourney play. Lots of mediocre players who get by because they cheap their way to victory, by banking on the timer, banking of planks, camps, defensive strategy in general... it's crap. True not everyone can be as exciting as Ally vs M2K, but... should that not be the goal of every competitive brawler? To be that ... "cool" or whatever.
The goal of this is to prevent "running of the timer." You're supposed to be in there brawling, not running away so that you auto-win. This isn't basketball. Fighting games are -supposed- to be the competitive style match that separates them from sports like Basketball. The metagame's become "who can run away the best, and default-win at 8 min." Its bull****, and favors mediocre play. Not mediocre skill, mediocre play.
By arbitrary you're suggesting that the current status quo is ... also arbitrary? That's good to know. Also, if you don't mind explaining, why would it encourage rather than discourage you to be a campy opponent? Are you REALLY good at 300% brawling? Even w/bob-ombs?
<><><><><><>
Haha well it looks like I have 1 supporter in this whole idea. ^^
Overall this idea is not fool proof, as has been made clearly evident, and I appreciate everyone's contributions to this deliberation. Most players at tourney would be disgusted to find out they could lose their prize money on a bob-omb. So yeah, this wouldn't -really- fly. But I hope it has opened up some minds to the possibility that -something- should be done to force the metagame away from stalling tactics. "Stalling is banned" yeah on paper, but as we have learned in this thread, it's still done, just in a round-about way.
Elyssa Xey Hexen
Broken!
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 19,346
Biggest reason for being against this.
Time.
The whole idea of a time limit in the first place was to make sure that tournaments could be done in a resonable amount of time. Even then, some major tournaments go well into the next day they weren't schduled for. If your adding in SD matches (albeit how rare they are anyway) they can go on for an extremely long time. And pretty much, the only way to live on certain stages like FD is to ledge camp once the appearence of Bom-ombs show up. However, there are two ledges. And given both players could do this indefinitlely with no time limit in the SD match means it would disrupt the time flow of a tournament.
Plus, the matches are extremely boring to play, and watch. You would be yelled to death by the people waiting in behind you to use the console for their next match.
Time.
The whole idea of a time limit in the first place was to make sure that tournaments could be done in a resonable amount of time. Even then, some major tournaments go well into the next day they weren't schduled for. If your adding in SD matches (albeit how rare they are anyway) they can go on for an extremely long time. And pretty much, the only way to live on certain stages like FD is to ledge camp once the appearence of Bom-ombs show up. However, there are two ledges. And given both players could do this indefinitlely with no time limit in the SD match means it would disrupt the time flow of a tournament.
Plus, the matches are extremely boring to play, and watch. You would be yelled to death by the people waiting in behind you to use the console for their next match.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,860
Let's take a look at some of the reasons this isn't a good idea.
1. You're deciding the ending of a game by playing a TOTALLY different one. It's like deciding who wins a tie in regulation of a game of Soccer by playing another 5 minute round of the same thing... but you can use your hands... and... we'll raise the goals, and call it Football. Is that what professional Soccer players want to do to decide who wins a tie in regulation? Play Football? If we wanted to play competitive Brawl with bomb-oms we'd play with items on... but most of us don't, and very simply because we don't like them.
2. The rule in place right now promotes the idea that the best player should win most of their matches (an intrinsically competitive standard), while also heeding to everything else a competitive tournament needs, such considering time constraints and the like. This rule you're proposing goes against that.
If you're behind or ahead at ANY point in a match, so long as you have the same stock count, you're assured that you'll at least even out the playing field if you can get the time to run out. Then once you time out your opponent it's up to the bombs... or tripping to decide who wins and loses.
Also, if you don't mind explaining, why would it encourage rather than discourage you to be a campy opponent?
Ex.
You play MK and you're fighting say... a D3 player on Smashville. At the start of the match he manages to grab you. He reads your tech roll towards you and grabs again. He dthrows again, reads a double jump and backairs you... LATER in the match you're down 110% to his 15% on the first stock. Point is, you're losing pretty badly, but you're still tied in stock. You figure that he's a much better player than you and knows the matchup well enough to beat you- a player that doesn't know the matchup- pretty handily.
You therefore decide to circle camp the rest of the match to time him out and bring you both to sudden death. He trips while you're zoning him and you manage to get a dsmash in. That or you just circle camped until the bombs came. He got hit because you're luckier or he can't fly under the stage the entire time or something. Point is, you won...
...So why not play all of your matches up until you're at a kill percent... and then stall the rest of the match? Or why not just circle camp straight from the beginning of the match? You don't even need a lead under this rule to leave the match to a one hit game- a game which very clearly cannot support competitive players well enough to keep us interested.
Man of Popsicle
Smash Lord
Some characters break sudden death.
(Ness) PK Thunder.
(Ness) PK Thunder.
theunabletable
Smash Lord
lolMeepvsM2K
It's not your decision about how the game should be played. You're supposed to play the game in any manor that gives you the highest chance of winning within the confines of the game.
You could say the exact same thing about Football. You should be out their passing the ball/running the ball/tackling stuff, not kneeling to run out the time.
But people do that and they DON'T complain about people kneeling in Football. Why would someone complain about someone running away to win in SSBB? I can understand if it's a friendly and your opponent is just wasting time by timing you out. I'd understand being mad about that, as it is just a waste of time.
And, NO, SD being legal would NOT help stop planking. It would make it worse, as as long as we're on the same stock I can time you out, then wait for you to get Bob-bomb ***** by planking during SD.
Several times I've thought to myself "Hmm I'd try timing him out, but he has the % lead so I can't do that". And I've lost a match where I've lost the % lead in the last 20 seconds and lost because of it. If SD was legal I could have timed them out, WHILE GETTING OUTPLAYED, and won because a Bob-bomb appeared near my opponent.
Also, "No johns" is NOT a good reason for it to be legal. By that logic there is no reason to not have items on period.
Running the timer is a perfectly legit way to try and win. You see it in Football, you see it in Basketball, you see it in Street Fighter. SSBB is by no means an exception. Sure it's boring, but that DOESN'T MATTER when you are trying to win by all means possible within the game.
Yell at people for doing it in friendlies. That makes sense as watching an 8 minute match waiting for a console is just stupid when you're not playing to win/playing for money.
There is no reason to ban the current way that people generally stall.
SBR ban stalling, as in performing an action that makes the game unplayable.
Planking and DAir camping and gliding around the stage as MK don't make the game unplayable, and if it is ever discovered that there is NO way around it, then it will be banned.
But clearly you can get around it, and it doesn't overcentralize the metagame as we see people like Ally winning tournaments (over people like M2K).
I agree, he summed up pretty much everyone's points well.
Actually I DO complain about this tactic, and its one of the reasons I don't watch football.
===================
Alas,. my quest to find a way around campiness by rule modification has failed. I don't actually even play this game competitively, lol I just thought a while back "why don't they play SD at these tournaments?" and couldn't rationalize it, but once again I appreciate everyone's feedback!
theunabletable
Smash Lord
...Well then...
Spiritbomb
Smash Rookie
I don't think there is a magic solution that will be "fair". the only fair thing would be to remove timelimits, but then the tournaments could last way too long.
I agree with :
Tournament finals imo should not have timelimits.
Even if SDs are not completely fair there COULD be tournaments with them and they surely would be worth playing!
I agree with :
Tournament finals imo should not have timelimits.
Even if SDs are not completely fair there COULD be tournaments with them and they surely would be worth playing!
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
There are exclusions, yet No Johns is still an argument.
SBR can do whatever they want. They don't need to listen to us.
SBR can do whatever they want. They don't need to listen to us.
1048576
Smash Master
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2006
- Messages
- 3,417
Durr hurr why not play random characters. The ability to adapt to a situation and control more than one character is a part of player skill that should be measured.
Cons: you might get a bad matchup
Yarp my rebuttal is NO JOHNS.
Tru fax I was playing some dude in game 3 of winners finals in melee and we both agreed to random characters. M2 vs Kirby ftw.
Cons: you might get a bad matchup
Yarp my rebuttal is NO JOHNS.
Tru fax I was playing some dude in game 3 of winners finals in melee and we both agreed to random characters. M2 vs Kirby ftw.
Awesome post. I lol'd.
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
Epic win. I used to try and use only 3 characters but now I'll try and 7 like I did when I got the game.
theunabletable
Smash Lord
No it isn't.
If it was truly a valid argument we'd play with all items on high.
Smash Ball appeared right next to your opponent? No Johns.
Bobomb spawned on top of you? No Johns.
Just because you can say No Johns doesn't mean it isn't stupid as ****ing hell.
Llumys
Smash Champion
If it weren't for the bob-ombs falling in completely random places, sudden death could begin to be considered viable.
AgentJGV
Smash Journeyman
Thats not true. Johns are when we make an excuse using something irrelevant to justify our loss. Example being "he was touching my shoulder." or "I was tired this match." Albeit we as smashers take this to extremes sometimes as a joke even when something WAS relivant to the match.
Rather than saying that No Johns means, "Take responsibility for your own loss." you're making it mean, "Hey. Life sucks. Deal with it."
Woozle
Smash Journeyman
Cool story bro.
wow, this thread just won't die! better hurry up, or it'll go to SD and a bob-omb will land on it and nuke all of us D:
Plus at the time I'd heard a rumor that Nintendo was going to host some tournaments, but that it would only employ FD or BF, and that items would be on default setting.
As it turned out they DID do a mini tourney when the game launched, but I have yet to learn which stages they allowed, and what items settings they used.
I used to say that until I realized that Brawl is so poorly balanced that it really -is- unreasonable to expect 2 good brawlers to have a fair fight if on any stage using any character both picked at random. "no johns" can't apply here, there's just too much data to the contrary.
I also used to think tournaments should be played using the default - items set to "medium" and "all" but the Smash Ball killed that idea, it is definitely too unbalancing, despite the fact that one -can- get good at predicting item drop locations, and item drop types, based on current character percentages and moves done to that point during a brawl (which are indeed at the heart of the "random" item-drop generation script).
Plus at the time I'd heard a rumor that Nintendo was going to host some tournaments, but that it would only employ FD or BF, and that items would be on default setting.
As it turned out they DID do a mini tourney when the game launched, but I have yet to learn which stages they allowed, and what items settings they used.
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
It started around the Midnight Launch. They used items on medium, 2:00 timed matches and only FD and BF.
highfive
Smash Lord
no no no no.
Everyone talks about character skill and who has the most of it. If you were really good you would have beat the hell out of the other person before the timer went off.
Screw sudden death for tournament play
Everyone talks about character skill and who has the most of it. If you were really good you would have beat the hell out of the other person before the timer went off.
Screw sudden death for tournament play
Ha! I knew it, I kinda thought that was the case, cause most of the WA matches I play are exactly that, lol. It explains so much. Why FD all the time, why items on even if I turn mine off... yeah.It started around the Midnight Launch. They used items on medium, 2:00 timed matches and only FD and BF.
But hey, it was Nintendo, they made the game for all intents and purposes. If they thought a proper tournament was viable with those settings, maybe they're right and we're doing everything wrong? There's been some recent speculation that Melee was done right in terms of tournament-making (starting w/items, then eliminating that, choosing 3 stocks... the time limits, etc.), but by jumping right into Brawl w/Melee's rules might not have been so good a choice. I wouldn't put it past Sakurai to develop his baby in such a way as to completely screw over anyone that played it in the fashion that suited Melee.
Actually, Sakurai himself said he didn't want Brawl to be a competitive game, that he wanted it to be balanced, and that everyone could enjoy it and be good at it.
... Well, maybe not those exact words, but the first two statements are true.