Taking another look at the Brawl ruleset

[xDD-Master]

We could as well just ban MK

...

 

[Asdioh]

BTW. I could as well see Item-CPing a viable option... but that doesnt help against the first-stage-winner-already-wins-the-set-problem.

If anybody would read the massive post I wrote, I think it fixes the "winner of the neutral has a major advantage in the set" problem.
Or at least alleviates it a bit.

 

[CaliburChamp]

Tournament Organizers, read this!!!!!!!!!!!!

Honestly, I would rather go to sudden death than being timed out. I would not be as mad, because there's a chance that I can still win, and the reward for timing people out is lessened to a greater extent for the person trying to time you out.


There should be a tournament organizer (TO) that should test this out, or the TO can make the time unlimited, it can be a local tournament kind of testing. More TO's need to experiment with the rules, despite what their smash community thinks, or best players in that region think. Don't fall into peer pressure, just experiment with the rules TO's!!!!

 

[Jack Kieser]

Honestly, I would rather go to sudden death than being timed out. I would not be as mad, because there's a chance that I can still win, and the reward for timing people out is lessened to a greater extent for the person trying to time you out.


There should be a tournament organizer (TO) that should test this out, or the TO can make the time unlimited, it can be a local tournament kind of testing. More TO's need to experiment with the rules, despite what their smash community thinks, or best players in that region think. Don't fall into peer pressure, just experiment with the rules TO's!!!!

This. I agree with this premise.

 

[Pierce7d]

No way. I'd be mad if I had a lead, and my opponent then camped me and took me to timer when I HAD THE LEAD AND WAS PLAYING AGGRESSIVELY, BUT COULD NOT SECURE THE FINAL KO.

Then I lost in sudden death, possibly to bull, after outplaying my opponent tremendously.

Also, you can plank in Sudden Death, and matches in tourney would go on endlessly. You can always add more rules, but that just shows how sudden death is bad.

The round needs to end, the tournament needs to advance.

I'd sooner advocate the old NYC rule where if you timed out your opponent and you were within 50% of each other, then you play a 1 stock match with 3 minutes, and if that went to time, person with less percent wins. This makes it MUCH harder to win by time out.

 

[Jack Kieser]

No way. I'd be mad if I had a lead, and my opponent then camped me and took me to timer when I HAD THE LEAD AND WAS PLAYING AGGRESSIVELY, BUT COULD NOT SECURE THE FINAL KO.

Then I lost in sudden death, possibly to bull, after outplaying my opponent tremendously.

Also, you can plank in Sudden Death, and matches in tourney would go on endlessly. You can always add more rules, but that just shows how sudden death is bad.

The round needs to end, the tournament needs to advance.

I'd sooner advocate the old NYC rule where if you timed out your opponent and you were within 50% of each other, then you play a 1 stock match with 3 minutes, and if that went to time, person with less percent wins. This makes it MUCH harder to win by time out.

That's not really dealing with the problem, though; that's just putting it off. Think about it; the only person who would ever take it to timer would be the one with % advantage, and if he can do it once, he can probably do it again. It's not really a deterrent to people taking it to timer, because to someone with that kind of patience, another 3 minutes is a minor inconvenience.

No, a real solution would be one that nearly eliminates taking a match to the timer in the first place. Something that makes it so hard or so impractical to take a match to the timer that there's no reason to do so in the first place.

Personally, I think we should get creative. This is just off the top of my head, so don't think I've actually thought about this, but an example of the kind of out-of-the-box thinking I'm talking about would be our own custom "Sudden Death". Something like a 1 stock, 2 minute fight on a custom stage that's nothing but a 4 block long by 5 block high platform that DQs BOTH players if it goes to time, played at 300%. The blast zone size is the smallest possible to make killing easier (as is the 300% damage), the stage size (4 x 5) is to discourage gliding characters from flying under the stage (I don't know if 5 blocks is high enough, but whatever), and the timer rule is to make sure that:

A ) no one in his right mind would take it to timer again, for any reason. As much as I may hate my opponent and want him to lose, I'd also lose any chance I got at the cash prize, so only a truly vindictive idiot would take the Sudden Death match to time.

B ) the match can't last long, so it puts the pressure on both players while making the time invested in the match as minimal as possible.

You don't have to worry about gay stuff from bombs (since they won't spawn), but you do have to worry about the second impending timer. You'd have to play aggressively.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

While I certainly don't think we need to worry about testing items in any way, I am very intrigued by your idea of having a longer match timer and then playing out sudden death. At first, it sounded surprisingly practical to me, actually, and seemed like it would be a good way to combat all of the people complaining about ledge grabs without enforcing something dumb like a ledge grab limit.

The main problem though is that whoever is "losing" might actually have better chances in a sudden death, and that might favor the person who is losing %-wise, versus the person who is winning. That seems unfair and is probably the nature of why we don't play out sudden deaths to begin with.

Probably not a good idea, but a very interesting suggestion, Stingers.

 

[Tin Man]

I'd think food on low promotes characters such as Sonic to be more based on timing out the opponent by never approaching (like they do anyway... but imagine if they're percent down they, aren't FORCED TO APPROACH).

10 minutes is a lot of time for a Sonic who maybe went all out and got the opponent to 50% whilst they're at 100% to use his over all superior mobility to get food.
Especially if as Kieser says, the sonic is fully aware of all spawn points of items.

Its sonic, he sucks, I doubt this will make him the best character in the game if food on low became the standard, food on low will also help other fast characters like falcon, fox, sheik, ZSS, MK (oh gawd D, pikachu, diddy (would **** with his ground control)marth, charizard. All these fast characters will benefit from food on low cause they have fast ground speed

BTW. I could as well see Item-CPing a viable option... but that doesnt help against the first-stage-winner-already-wins-the-set-problem.

I've had this idea for a while now, its best to explain it in an example

here is my solution to this problem

game 1, we all know the rules for it, double blind pick, stage strike neutrals w/e

assume smasher a wins game 1, smasher b now cp's for game 2

we all know the rules, smasher b says the stage, then a picks, b picks, etc

assume smasher b wins

GAME 3 SHOULD BE DETERMINED UNDER THE SAME RULES AS GAME 1

therefore, both players can do a double blind pick (because cping wont happen) after the characters have been chosen, u stage strike the neutrals, HOWEVER, ANY NEUTRALS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PLAYED ON IN THE SET CAN NOT BE CHOSEN

assume game 1 was fd, game 2 was BF, the only stages allowed are YI, SV and LC(PS1 in some areas)

if game 1 was FD and game 2 was FD, then the only stages allowed are BF, YI, SV, and LC(PS1 in some areas)

to determine who stage strikes 1st, u play rock-paper-scissors

If the set is bo5, then every time the set count is 1-1, or 2-2, entertain the "game 3" option I just explained

This should fix problems

 

[Remzi]

Planking won't be a problem if the ledge count is reduced to 35 or 40, and the match timer is set at 9 minutes.

That doesn't eliminate all timer related problems, though...

*EDIT: All sudden death does is make the losing player want to time out instead of the winning player. It also rewards the player who is losing which is silly.

 

[etecoon]

running the clock is a perfectly legitimate strategy so long as it isn't unbeatable/stupidly broken(planking), it's something you see in nearly any form of competition that involves a clock. planking needs to be dealt with, but I don't see why players using the clock to their advantage should be considered a problem.

 

[Rybaia]

Brawl TO just need to realize the fact that planking and gliding under the stage must be banned.
Melee had this problem too but the ruleset was made to prevent all the broken strategies to timing out matches and win in a ******** way, like peach bombing stall or pound stallig ecc.
Look at Amsah vs Jman. He just destroyed the match by shino stalling on the ledge. With a simple ledge grab rule this can be prevent.
The same thing can be done in Brawl. Put a ledge grab rule on every char (not only mk), or just ban planking and you 'll have less problems. Than ban that ****ing gliding under the stage, it's absolutely broken.


Sorry for my bad english.

 

[Mew2King]

9 minutes, at least 9 minutes for semifinals and finals, is my vote.

melee matches are way faster than brawl matches, and melee timer is 8 minutes. Why is Brawl 7-8 minutes? Stupid.

 

[MBlaze]

No way. I'd be mad if I had a lead, and my opponent then camped me and took me to timer when I HAD THE LEAD AND WAS PLAYING AGGRESSIVELY, BUT COULD NOT SECURE THE FINAL KO.

Then I lost in sudden death, possibly to bull, after outplaying my opponent tremendously.

Also, you can plank in Sudden Death, and matches in tourney would go on endlessly. You can always add more rules, but that just shows how sudden death is bad.

The round needs to end, the tournament needs to advance.

I'd sooner advocate the old NYC rule where if you timed out your opponent and you were within 50% of each other, then you play a 1 stock match with 3 minutes, and if that went to time, person with less percent wins. This makes it MUCH harder to win by time out.

Only thing that I like out of this thread that I've read. Everything else is so ********.... Seriously sudden death settling a tourney match? Items which spawn randomly? We tryin to make this more or less competitive here, wtf?

Timer at 10 mins.. oh that's another genius one.... tourneys barley finish as it is and you wanna extend a single match of plaking and camping by 2 more minutes? Yeah that will work fine. lulz

 

[professor mgw]

If stalling is banned there should be like a 15 min timer. If im fighting a decent player that can perfect shield many of my attacks, Im gonna need some more timer, atleast about 10. A short timer kinda messes me up a little.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Only thing that I like out of this thread that I've read. Everything else is so ********.... Seriously sudden death settling a tourney match? Items which spawn randomly? We tryin to make this more or less competitive here, wtf?

Timer at 10 mins.. oh that's another genius one.... tourneys barley finish as it is and you wanna extend a single match of plaking and camping by 2 more minutes? Yeah that will work fine. lulz

Yeah, seriously! All that stuff is ********! I agree, you certainly don't have to add anything to the discussion or even provide reasoned arguments to defend your points in order to post in a thread. <_<

 

[Melomaniacal]

Sudden death is a horrible idea. There's no reason not to plank in sudden death. One hit KO? Bob-ombs? Yeah, I'm playing it safe and making him come to me.

One stock match sounds better than that to me.

 

[Remzi]

running the clock is a perfectly legitimate strategy so long as it isn't unbeatable/stupidly broken(planking), it's something you see in nearly any form of competition that involves a clock. planking needs to be dealt with, but I don't see why players using the clock to their advantage should be considered a problem.

Agreed 100%, nothing wrong with matches being timed out, so long as it's not with a method such as planking, or under the stage shenanigans that make it near impossible for the person who is losing to regain the lead.

 

[Liquid Gen]

Or we could suck it up and leave it as is.

I'm fine with that yeah.

 

[MBlaze]

Yeah, seriously! All that stuff is ********! I agree, you certainly don't have to add anything to the discussion or even provide reasoned arguments to defend your points in order to post in a thread. <_<

Oh joy, sarcasm. lmao Well if you really want it:

First off many tourneys don't have much easy times finishing on time, and you all complain about people getting timed out and ****. What do you think is going to happen with those 2 extra minutes on the timer? Just going to end up in a longer tourney and a much more irritating experience playing this game.

Sudden Death as a final decision for a tourney match? Coin flip? Are you serious? Why should my tourney match (as the non camper or planker) have to suffer to these kinds of conditions because of this especially after 10 minutes of suffering? And how will these results be accurate? That's right, the bombombs and 300% to go with it must really help the situation and really hurt the planking and MK off stage, exact, they won't. The time should remain the same and when a time out occurs and the two players are in range of 50% of each other or so, they should do 3 minutes, 1 stock on the the last stage they were playing on.

Items in tourneys, I don't give a **** what you try to do with this, it's not going to work. They randomly spawn and help out players at any given notice. How is this helping this game competitively? It's not, hurting it if anything. I'm about to win a match and someone gets a pokeball and a Kyogre comes out and pushes me to my death, yes that's getting very accurate results right there. How is this proving who's better and who should go on? There are many complaints about the competitive value on this game already and you want to insert MORE random factors into this game? Why don't you just triple the chances of tripping too since it's funny when a character falls?

Overall, you have a system that actually works for the most part, why would you wanna go and make drastic changes to throw everything out of wack? Making any sense here?

If anything should change it is aircamping and the planking situation. Only things I can suggest about that is that if the match gets timed, go to 1 stock, 3 mins. Have the TO observe the match and if there's excessive stalling/aircamping then theoffender should be declared the loser.

 

[stingers]

lol there are a billion arguments as to why "leave it up to the TO" doesn't really work dude. read the topic, I know someone has to have covered it

 

[MBlaze]

lol there are a billion arguments as to why "leave it up to the TO" doesn't really work dude. read the topic, I know someone has to have covered it

Then:

A. No stalling at all

B. Leave things the way they are instead of chaotic crap.

 

[stingers]

what do you mean with A? Like convince ppl to stop stalling? lol

and B is just furthering a dying game, so if thats the way people want things then I think I'm personally done with Brawl XD

 

[Syde7]

Why not just have a forced timeout mean a loss for whoever did it?

I mean, both players (and anyone watching) would be able to tell if someone was PURPOSEFULLY timing someone out (ledgegrabs, gliding, etc etc) as opposed to both people just spacing and playing cautiously. There's def a diff, and its noticeable.

Basically: Purposefully timing= loss while two people who are just playing cautiously = go to a 3 minute, 1 stock overtime.

Though, admittedly this could make Falco pretty broken, as some chars best strat is to take him to time since he has virtually no way to deal w/ it.

Again, just bouncing ideas around.

Edit: someone above mentioned practically the same thing. haha

 

[MBlaze]

what do you mean with A? Like convince ppl to stop stalling? lol

and B is just furthering a dying game, so if thats the way people want things then I think I'm personally done with Brawl XD

No, I meant put very strict limits on consecutive ledge grabs.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Oh joy, sarcasm. lmao Well if you really want it:

I do want it, and boy, did you give it... one of the most uninformed posts I've ever read, that is.

First off many tourneys don't have much easy times finishing on time, and you all complain about people getting timed out and ****. What do you think is going to happen with those 2 extra minutes on the timer? Just going to end up in a longer tourney and a much more irritating experience playing this game.

If you bothered to read at all, and if you had any real understanding of problem solving, you'd realize that just adding two minutes to the clock has already been established as a non-solution. I've already personally said that simple, easy fixes will not end over-stalling and planking, and that thinking outside of the box is what will work because people will continue to over-stall and plank until the incentives to do so are stripped away. Notice, you still don't give anything constructive here, just "I'm not willing to try that, but I don't have any ideas, either".

Sudden Death as a final decision for a tourney match? Coin flip? Are you serious? Why should my tourney match (as the non camper or planker) have to suffer to these kinds of conditions because of this especially after 10 minutes of suffering? And how will these results be accurate? That's right, the bombombs and 300% to go with it must really help the situation and really hurt the planking and MK off stage, exact, they won't. The time should remain the same and when a time out occurs and the two players are in range of 50% of each other or so, they should do 3 minutes, 1 stock on the the last stage they were playing on.

Or, we can not do sudden death as it is implemented in the game. If we open up our thinking, there are any number of ways we could create Sudden Death-like situations without using an obviously problematic default Sudden Death option; it's not like we don't change enough default options as it is.

Items in tourneys, I don't give a **** what you try to do with this, it's not going to work. They randomly spawn and help out players at any given notice. How is this helping this game competitively? It's not, hurting it if anything. I'm about to win a match and someone gets a pokeball and a Kyogre comes out and pushes me to my death, yes that's getting very accurate results right there. How is this proving who's better and who should go on? There are many complaints about the competitive value on this game already and you want to insert MORE random factors into this game? Why don't you just triple the chances of tripping too since it's funny when a character falls?

Yes, because Pokeballs would be on... except they're banned in any competitive items format that has ever been seriously played since the beginning of Brawl. You say that items are broken when there's already a counter to that (ban the broke ones) and you say they're random... but I've already given a pretty legit counter to that in this very thread, something you can, apparently, only counter by saying "well, yeah... but it's not good enough for me". Well done.

Overall, you have a system that actually works for the most part, why would you wanna go and make drastic changes to throw everything out of wack? Making any sense here?

If anything should change it is aircamping and the planking situation. Only things I can suggest about that is that if the match gets timed, go to 1 stock, 3 mins. Have the TO observe the match and if there's excessive stalling/aircamping then theoffender should be declared the loser.

Except that we've tried a bunch of stuff to try to stop planking and aircamping, and none of the obvious "solutions" have any effect. So, of course, when people start trying more radical approaches, the only logical thing to do is stop trying for fear of changing things too much... especially when the aim of finding a solution is explicitly to change things. If anything, this debate has shown more problems than just planking, like holes in the CP system (for example). Either way, you're certainly not adding anything to the debate; next time, try reading moar and submitting your own ideas.

 

[stingers]

ledge grabs are honestly not even the biggest problem, solutions exist to that like a consecutive ledge grab rule like you mentioned. there are just too many other ways to time people out. platform camping is very effective and virtually un-stoppable. characters like MK and Kirby can air camp on FD, safely. then we have character specific things like infiniting characters to the maximum allowed % to waste time. etcetc.

dull, that's just too arbitrary. leaving it up to the TO to DQ people for playing campy won't work out. this is brawl, not judo :/

 

[Throwback]

how about reversing the time-out rule?

If you have the percent/stock lead and the time runs out, you lose.

If you try to camp while behind on percent/stocks, you won't have the option of counter-attacking your opponent, making planking extremely difficult.

 

[stingers]

Lol, I can see people rushing off trying to suicide their stock before the timer goes out so they don't have the % lead in your scenario

 

[Jack Kieser]

Lol, I can see people rushing off trying to suicide their stock before the timer goes out so they don't have the % lead in your scenario

...why does everything we think of have to have a weakness?! *sigh*

 

[stingers]

Brawl just isn't meant to be competitive in the same way Melee was. If you want competition, you're going to have to throw some random events in there. I stand by my opinion that Items are a great anti-camping tool for many characters...and I think people would be more afraid to camp the platforms and ledges if they knew they were just making it more difficult to 1. Get items and 2. Would be at a larger risk of dying to them (stage spike on the ledge, platforms put you closer to the sides/ceiling)

 

[xDD-Master]

We could as well just ban stalling (I know it already is somehow)... but in every means. That includes excessive trying of timing someone out, planking, going under the stage etc.

Going under the stage one or two times isnt a problem, but doing it the whole match, or doing it like every 20 seconds is obviously a try to stall...

Grabbing the ledge twice or 3/4 times isnt a problem, but doing it 10 times, or after every hit, is obviously stalling.

I dunno, why we cant make it like that, maybe some Side-TOs (Special people who were choosen by the TO) just go around when they dont have matches and as soon as they see someone stalling, they give them an warning, than tell it to the TO, if it happens a second time and someone see's it, they just count this as a lost for that player.

Something like that. It really isnt that hard.

 

[Throwback]

Lol, I can see people rushing off trying to suicide their stock before the timer goes out so they don't have the % lead in your scenario

Of course they would. But there's nothing to stop their opponent suiciding either.

 

[Flayl]

How do you people feel about having 2 stocks instead of 3? If we need 10 minutes for 3 stocks to be "balanced", can't we have 7 for 2 stocks? 10 minutes is pretty long. And let's face it, comebacks in Brawl involve mostly % and not stocks.

Just an idea.

 

[Melomaniacal]

How do you people feel about having 2 stocks instead of 3? If we need 10 minutes for 3 stocks to be "balanced", can't we have 7 for 2 stocks? 10 minutes is pretty long. And let's face it, comebacks in Brawl involve mostly % and not stocks.

Just an idea.

And thus Lucario is bottom tier.

 

[Mr. Escalator]

And nothing was lost.

2 stocks is interesting, I'll admit.

 

[6Mizu]

I agree with the 10 minutes instead of 8 min, because for some characters/some player....timing some one out is too easy.
I do not agree with the item tough.

 

[Flayl]

% helps Lucario waaay more than stocks though, right?

What helps more, 40% or one stock?

 

[MBlaze]

Pokeballs were only an example and my own ideas? This was just me typing what I felt about it. Really stupid to put any kind of item in. rofl

And about me not having any ideas? False, here's one. Shut the **** up and play. thx.

 

[Raffi815]

Black terry is right you guys don't use your heads

 

[Melomaniacal]

% helps Lucario waaay more than stocks though, right?

What helps more, 40% or one stock?

The point is that if Lucario dies first, it's pretty much hopeless. He'll have an extremely hard time being able to kill until mid-high percents on his last stock.