Suggestion To the SBR: A Teams Construction Guide

[cutter]

While we're at it, let's also take SBR's recommendation on King Dedede's infinite, which also must have not been proven to be broken in tournament play.

Since when has Dedede's infinite devolved the game into "play Dedede or lose?"

 

[Ray_Kalm]

It plays a huge role in "being broken". Contradicting to what Overswarm had mentioned.

 

[adumbrodeus]

No sarcasm, do it.


DDD's infinite works on 1 character prior to death percents anyway. The reason we ban stages because DDD 0-deaths on them is that IT WORKS ON 2/3s OF THE CAST.

 

[Meru.]

I like how this discussion turned to 'so... what do you think of the SBR?'. '

I like Peach & Zelda btw.

 

[DoonKoon]

I'm with Ray on this one. I really dont understand how hard it is to ban something uber broken?

 

[cutter]

It plays a huge role in "being broken". Contradicting to what Overswarm had mentioned.

So an infinite that works on one character at non-death percents is considered broken?

Why should we cater to specific characters?

 

[Overswarm]

While we're at it, let's also take SBR's recommendation on King Dedede's infinite, which also must have not been proven to be broken in tournament play.

Er.... we have no recommendation taht I know of, other than it needs to end at 300% or its stalling.

Besides, it hasn't proven itself to be broken. D3 is a hard counter to characters he can infinite, just like ICs are a hard counter to Ganon, Pika is a hard counter to Fox, ZSS is a hard counter to Fox, etc., etc., etc.

It's the naaaaaaaaaame of the game

 

[adumbrodeus]

I'm with Ray on this one. I really dont understand how hard it is to ban something uber broken?

Why is it broken?

Seriously? DDD hard counters DK instead of 60-40ing him.


Mario, Samus, and Luigi can mash out prior to like 130 I think it was due to his slow pummel. He should just take the chaingrab and be happy.


Bowser isn't infinited, and from what I understand, can avoid being grabbed very well thank you very much. Generally it doesn't last too long except on final D which has it's own Bowser advantages in the MU IIRC.

 

[Ray_Kalm]

Both of you have totally missed my point. I'm not trying to convert this thread into a "King Dedede's Infinite" thread. Just try and understand what I'm saying.

So an infinite that works on one character at non-death percents is considered broken?

Why should we cater to specific characters?

A character who'd place much higher in tournaments and on the tier list. A character who'd be legit in tournament levels of play with just the ban of the infinite alone.

Er.... we have no recommendation taht I know of, other than it needs to end at 300% or its stalling.

Besides, it hasn't proven itself to be broken. D3 is a hard counter to characters he can infinite, just like ICs are a hard counter to Ganon, Pika is a hard counter to Fox, ZSS is a hard counter to Fox, etc., etc., etc.

It's the naaaaaaaaaame of the game

How so? A technique that takes 3 minutes to learn is considered a "hard counter" on said character?

 

[adumbrodeus]

Both of you had totally missed my point. I'm not trying to convert this thread into a "King Dedede's Infinite" thread. Just try and understand my point.



A character who'd place much higher in tournaments and on the tier list.



How so? A "technique" that takes 3 minutes to learn is considered a "hard counter" to said character?

Let me put it this way, it's an extremely controversial issue and there's valid reasons for having it remain legal, so why is it their bad for not wading into this?



From the note of "I'm anti-ban for this", I play marth, I c-stick forward, I just performed forward air, how many characters did I just invalidate?

I see no reason to perform match-up surgery to save one or two characters, there's plenty of other examples of characters being doomed by one thing, why treat this differently?

 

[Overswarm]

How so? A technique that takes 3 minutes to learn is considered a "hard counter" on said character?

Took me less to learn to use the B button with MK.

 

[Ray_Kalm]

Let me put it this way, it's an extremely controversial issue and there's valid reasons for having it remain legal, so why is it their bad for not wading into this?



From the note of "I'm anti-ban for this", I play marth, I c-stick forward, I just performed forward air, how many characters did I just invalidate?

I see no reason to perform match-up surgery to save one or two characters, there's plenty of other examples of characters being doomed by one thing, why treat this differently?

I agree with this. But, if it was not for the fact that Donkey Kong gets crippled so hard with the allowing of the infinite, he literally turns from a good character to a bad character at tournament levels of play. You could describe it as, let's say, avoiding the chance to make Ganon as good as Wolf. Though, it really doesn't matter. Most TO's don't follow this 'recommendation' anyways.

 

[Overswarm]

I agree with this. But, if it was not for the fact that Donkey Kong gets crippled so hard with the allowing of the infinite, he literally turns from a good character to a bad character at tournament levels of play. You could describe it as, let's say, avoiding the chance to make Ganon as good as Wolf. Though, it really doesn't matter. Most TO's don't follow this 'recommendation' anyways.

Why are we supposed to save DK?


Can we ban Falco's lasers and CG so D3 can compete? He'd be a good character otherwise.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I agree with this. But, if it was not for the fact that Donkey Kong gets crippled so hard with the allowing of the infinite, he literally turns from a good character to a bad character at tournament levels of play. You could describe it as, let's say, avoiding the chance to make Ganon as good as Wolf. Though, it really doesn't matter. Most TO's don't follow this 'recommendation' anyways.

I don't care if turned marth from bottom tier to the top tier, banning to make one character viable is never legitimate.



And the fact that our community is so quick to ban has always been one of my major disappointments in the Smash community overall. This time the SBR made the right call.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Wouldn't allowing one match-up completely ruin a character with one small technique be considered degenerate gameplay, seeing as it pretty much boils down to that one technique?

It doesn't seem much different to circle camping on a stage. Given that one stage, characters can completely shut down another character by running in circles. Given chaingrabbing, DK goes from good to bad.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Wouldn't allowing one match-up completely ruin a character with one small technique be considered degenerate gameplay, seeing as it pretty much boils down to that one technique?

It doesn't seem much different to circle camping on a stage. Given that one stage, characters can completely shut down another character by running in circles. Given chaingrabbing, DK goes from good to bad.

One character not being viable does not overcentralize the metagame, if we had to correct that sort of thing for every MU... well let's just say half of the cast's moves would be banned.


DK got the short end of the stick MU-wise, but at least not as bad as Ganon.

 

[Ray_Kalm]

One character not being viable does not overcentralize the metagame, if we had to correct that sort of thing for every MU... well let's just say half of the cast's moves would be banned.


DK got the short end of the stick MU-wise, but at least not as bad as Ganon.

You're wrong. Only about 15 characters out of 37 can compete at highest levels of play. Banning the infinite can help increase that number by one.

 

[Dekar173]

Limit infinites/hardcore chaingrabs (except for ICs, as this takes tech-skill) to 5 iterations, then they must either throw away or allow their opponent to do something else (if they spotdodge then get grabbed again, there's 5 more grabs!)

The D3 infinite not only encourages secondaries, it absolutely discourages people from maining certain mid-tier characters.

Ganon doesn't count, he's trash-tier in regular tourneys, but is decent in low-tiers.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You're wrong. Only about 15 characters out of 37 can compete at highest levels of play. Banning the infinite can help increase that number by one.

And banning MK's tornado would probably increase it a heck of a lot more.


In fact there are plenty of character we could propose for MU surgery like this, by the time we finish, perfect balance, right?

What's wrong, I want Zelda viable too!




And the number is actually lower, realistically what characters win regionals? What about Nationals? Even place in the money for that matter?

Limit infinites/hardcore chaingrabs (except for ICs, as this takes tech-skill) to 5 iterations, then they must either throw away or allow their opponent to do something else (if they spotdodge then get grabbed again, there's 5 more grabs!)

The D3 infinite not only encourages secondaries, it absolutely discourages people from maining certain mid-tier characters.

Ganon doesn't count, he's trash-tier in regular tourneys, but is decent in low-tiers.

Why is tech skill relevant? People will skill do it, and if it breaks the metagame it's still as relevant.

Tech skill is a means to an end, perfect control of your character, requiring more tech skill just artificially increases the entrance barrier without effecting the top of the metagame unless it's not humanly possible.


Again, I'll say, why are we performing MU surgery, and why can't my characters get it? I want MK's tornado banned!

 

[TP]

The difference between the D3 infinite and MK's tornado (as an example) is that the tornado has lots of uses. It's used for pressure, for punishing, for escaping, and for recovery. When you do a downthrow with DDD and then press grab right after, there's only one reason you're doing it. Banning MK's tornado would have unforeseen consequences. Banning the D3 infinite would not. It purely changes one matchup and no other, and there is no chance of the infinite accidentally happening (people would occasionally hit Tornado even if it were banned, just like how I accidentally Warlock Punch from time to time). Sure, it's MU surgery, but this one particular case is so simple and easy to enforce AND relevant to viability that it has a much better argument than similar bans.

 

[adumbrodeus]

The difference between the D3 infinite and MK's tornado (as an example) is that the tornado has lots of uses. It's used for pressure, for punishing, for escaping, and for recovery. When you do a downthrow with DDD and then press grab right after, there's only one reason you're doing it. Banning MK's tornado would have unforeseen consequences. Banning the D3 infinite would not. It purely changes one matchup and no other, and there is no chance of the infinite accidentally happening (people would occasionally hit Tornado even if it were banned, just like how I accidentally Warlock Punch from time to time). Sure, it's MU surgery, but this one particular case is so simple and easy to enforce AND relevant to viability that it has a much better argument than similar bans.

But you're missing the point? Why do it? Why just DK? Those variable tornado attributes are exactly what makes it so powerful, and honestly if a person accidentally does something banned, they're **** out of luck, it's always been your responsibility to know your character. Of course you can always convince your opponent not to report it, but if it's banned, no johns.

So again I ask, why just DK? There's plenty of other MU surgery we could perform using the same basic justification.

The only answer people are giving me is "because we can".

 

[Zankoku]

We make rules to ensure a competitive environment, not to attempt to balance the game. Whether it's a minor change (ban Dedede's infinite) or a major one (ban Meta Knight), if its main point is forced game balance rather than fixing/preventing an actual problem in present tournament environment (everyone will circle camp on Temple; Wario Ware heavily promotes completely random wins), then the BBR will most likely be against that action.

 

[Flayl]

Firstly, Bowser is truly infinited by Dedede. You small step chaingrab him near a ledge and then just do the regular infinite, decay does nothing.

Secondly, I used to be against the infinite but then I found out about just how many godawful stupid inifinites/high % locks/high % chaingrabs there are in this game and said **** it. Dedede's, Wario's, Marth's, IC's, Pikachu's, Shiek's, the ones on ROB...

Brawl is a piece of **** balance-wise, live with it.

 

[Red Arremer]

I agree with adumbrodeus on the matter.

If Fox wouldn't be so easily CP'ed (Pikachu DThrow Infinite, GGs), he'd be very easily a great character with a shot on B Tier, maybe even higher.

So... if we already make Donkey Kong more viable, why don't we do it for Fox, too? What makes Donkey Kong more important than Fox so that we perform match-up surgery for former and not latter? In that train of thought, why stop with Fox? What makes Donkey Kong so much more important than other characters?

 

[Overswarm]

lol @ IC infinite requiring tech skill. You can pikc that stuff up in a day. I used to spend hours practicing against computers to learn combos and follow-ups and to just "know" my characters in Melee. In Brawl I did that for a bit to learn the physics, and I did it once with ICs to learn the CG.... but it's boring and you don't learn much.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Why is it broken?

Seriously? DDD hard counters DK instead of 60-40ing him.


Mario, Samus, and Luigi can mash out prior to like 130 I think it was due to his slow pummel. He should just take the chaingrab and be happy.


Bowser isn't infinited, and from what I understand, can avoid being grabbed very well thank you very much. Generally it doesn't last too long except on final D which has it's own Bowser advantages in the MU IIRC.

I agree with adumbrodeus on the matter.

If Fox wouldn't be so easily CP'ed (Pikachu DThrow Infinite, GGs), he'd be very easily a great character with a shot on B Tier, maybe even higher.

So... if we already make Donkey Kong more viable, why don't we do it for Fox, too? What makes Donkey Kong more important than Fox so that we perform match-up surgery for former and not latter? In that train of thought, why stop with Fox? What makes Donkey Kong so much more important than other characters?

Exactly. The SBR has no ruling on it and it should stay that way. DeDeDe's standing infinite is NOT broken and does NOT need to be banned. People are just whiney and don't understand that hard counters are a part of every game and so is counter-picking.

 

[Ray_Kalm]

People are whiny? What if I were to say people like you are biased?

 

[Overswarm]

He'd say that he cannot possibly be biased because he's not promoting a change that hasn't warranted it except in the most specific of circumstances.


Or something to that effect.

 

[adumbrodeus]

And on that note, could we move back on topic....


Ummm, oh wait, we finished the topic didn't we...?


How about we talk about Kage's forward air?

 

[Ray_Kalm]

I find he's being hypocritical.

 

[swordgard]

I find he's being hypocritical.

You might want to back up your statements with... eh how do you call it again...I tend to forget.



Oh yeah, logic.

 

[FaWa]

I'm going to be one of those folks and say that I think the SBR should be made Read Only to normal users? Why? Because...

1. We could see what the **** they were thinking instead of guessing.
2. We could actually trust they care/are doing enough. (Yeeaaa, this is the biggie)
3. Certain BRoomers could be catagorized as uhh, I dunno, awful? Then the forum could have a backlash and actually get their way.
4. lolbroomersdoingthings

 

[swordgard]

I'm going to be one of those folks and say that I think the SBR should be made Read Only to normal users? Why? Because...

1. We could see what the **** they were thinking instead of guessing.
2. We could actually trust they care/are doing enough. (Yeeaaa, this is the biggie)
3. Certain BRoomers could be catagorized as uhh, I dunno, awful? Then the forum could have a backlash and actually get their way.
4. lolbroomersdoingthings

Some of these complaints might get an answer soon enough.

 

[FaWa]

Some of these complaints might get an answer soon enough.

Vague post was vague.

...But I bet you meant it to be, didn't you?

 

[highfive]

He's in SBR. Of course he won't tell you the point.

EDIT- By the way swordgard, that's a pretty dang cool alias. I rank that up there with OverSwarm and JUDGE.

 

[Red Arremer]

This topic has been discussed multiple times.

One problem with transparency is that it would cause an influx of threads which are:
a.) Direct responses to BBR topics
b.) "Call-outs" in order to attack one or more BRoomer or his/their opinion
c.) "Why is X in the BR and I'm not? I know much more about Y than he does!"
d.) Any possible combination of the above

Making the BBR public for viewing would result in a s***storm of ungrounded backlash.

 

[FaWa]

Making the BBR public for viewing would result in a s***storm of ungrounded backlash.

Which means that the community wouldn't like what they saw in the back room?

Just saying, secrecy won't solve any problems.

 

[highfive]

This topic has been discussed multiple times.

One problem with transparency is that it would cause an influx of threads which are:
a.) Direct responses to BBR topics
b.) "Call-outs" in order to attack one or more BRoomer or his/their opinion
c.) "Why is X in the BR and I'm not? I know much more about Y than he does!"
d.) Any possible combination of the above

Making the BBR public for viewing would result in a s***storm of ungrounded backlash.

Would it be safe to have it open for members that have you know, more than a certain amount of time on smashboards along with a reasonable amount of posts supporting their knowledge for the meta game? The posts would prevent trolls leaving their account for a year then coming back simply to troll the rest of smashboards.

 

[Red Arremer]

@FaWa:
Considering how many self-proclaimed experts there are running around this forums, yes.

Furthermore, the pressure of not making any mistakes (which is there because each and every mistake WILL be called out in public and ridiculed, instead of getting corrected by someone else in the BBR) will result in nobody wanting to post any of their experiences or opinions, which will cause the BBR to stale, which will end up in the BBR getting disbanded.

Just what I would predict here.

 

[FaWa]

@FaWa:
Considering how many self-proclaimed experts there are running around this forums, yes.

Furthermore, the pressure of not making any mistakes (which is there because each and every mistake WILL be called out in public, instead of getting corrected by someone else in the BBR) will result in nobody wanting to post any of their experiences or opinions, which will cause the BBR to stale, which will end up in the BBR getting disbanded.

Just what I would predict here.

I can understand a bunch of rowdy users being ******* like that, but does that really make it so reasonable to cut off the communities understanding of the SBR's decisions?