Legality Tentative: MBR Official Ruleset for 2012

[FerrishTheFish]

Anyone who has ever CP'd japes wants to play a serious tournament match on japes ...

 

[Bones0]

That's not necessarily true. Plenty of people hate the cps, but still choose them because it's the stage most likely to net them a win.

 

[Merkuri]

It is my understanding that controller ports are decided by rock paper scissors. Some people cheat at that game by delaying there hand slightly after the other person has played there hand. Could we just decide port priority with Game and Watch hammers instead(higher number wins)? I think that is the most fair way to do it.

 

[Bones0]

Or you can flip a coin.

Or you can just request neutral ports, since that is vastly superior to random ports anyway.

 

[Merkuri]

Or you can flip a coin.

Or you can just request neutral ports, since that is vastly superior to random ports anyway.

While it's difficult, there are many established ways to cheat at coin flipping. I don't want leave the tournament feeling salty because my opponent cheated in the port selection method and I lost because of that. What do you mean by neutral ports? Doesn't 1st > 2nd > 3rd > 4th in terms of in game priority? Nothing about it can be neutral.

 

[Kal]

That aspect of port priority is more-or-less negligible. Bones is referring to starting positions on stages. For example, starting below the opponent as Marth can be regarded as a non-neutral position, since Marth is at an advantage.

 

[Merkuri]

That aspect of port priority is more-or-less negligible. Bones is referring to starting positions on stages. For example, starting below the opponent as Marth can be regarded as a non-neutral position, since Marth is at an advantage.

No it's not. If we grab at the sametime the perosn with the higher port priority wins, that can determine the outcome of a set, so don't say it's negligible.

Assigning it randomly is also wrong, because I could randomly start out above Marth, telling me that the disadvantage was assigned to me randomly doesn't change the fact that I got screwed over for no reason. We should be allowed to pick our ports, because so that I can minimize my disadvantage from the opposing player.

 

[Bones0]

I don't think you understand how incredibly rare it is for you and your opponent to grab each other (or the ledge) on the same frame... Starting positions matter a great deal more, and your initial paranoia about people cheating in RPS is hilarious. Do you also call double blinds vs. your 1st seed opponent in Winner's R1 and make them write their character down on paper just in case they want to 4-stock you with their secondary instead of their main? Honestly bro...

 

[Cactuar]

It is my understanding that controller ports are decided by rock paper scissors. Some people cheat at that game by delaying there hand slightly after the other person has played there hand. Could we just decide port priority with Game and Watch hammers instead(higher number wins)? I think that is the most fair way to do it.

If you can't tell when a person is delaying their hand, you deserve to lose the port priority.

DONE

 

[Varist]

It is my understanding that controller ports are decided by rock paper scissors. Some people cheat at that game by delaying there hand slightly after the other person has played there hand. Could we just decide port priority with Game and Watch hammers instead(higher number wins)? I think that is the most fair way to do it.

Could we just decide port priority with Game and Watch hammers instead(higher number wins)? I think that is the most fair way to do it.

Could we just decide port priority with Game and Watch hammers instead(higher number wins)?

decide port priority with Game and Watch hammers instead?

decide port with Game and Watch hammers?

decide port with Game and Watch?

get out scum don't turn this into brawl

 

[Kal]

No it's not. If we grab at the sametime the perosn with the higher port priority wins, that can determine the outcome of a set, so don't say it's negligible.

Assigning it randomly is also wrong, because I could randomly start out above Marth, telling me that the disadvantage was assigned to me randomly doesn't change the fact that I got screwed over for no reason. We should be allowed to pick our ports, because so that I can minimize my disadvantage from the opposing player.

Do you understand what it means for something to be negligible? The fact that the potential exists doesn't make it non-negligible. If that were the case, Peach's down-B would be banned, because being able to draw Bob-Bombs is ****ing broken. Why then, isn't it broken?

Because she doesn't draw it often enough to warrant a ban. The same holds for for port priority determining the outcome of a match (outside of starting position). It's incredibly unlikely that I'm ever, ever, ever going to win a match I would have lost because I chose a controller port more to the left than my opponent.

And I don't think anyone advocates random port choice.

 

[CloneHat]

So, uh, when's the coaching rule coming in? Audience members should keep a reasonable distance from players or something?

 

[Merkuri]

I don't think you understand how incredibly rare it is for you and your opponent to grab each other (or the ledge) on the same frame... Starting positions matter a great deal more, and your initial paranoia about people cheating in RPS is hilarious. Do you also call double blinds vs. your 1st seed opponent in Winner's R1 and make them write their character down on paper just in case they want to 4-stock you with their secondary instead of their main? Honestly bro...

The fact that people can cheat in RPS is enough to disqualify as a legitimate port decider. I'm arguing for a port decider where neither player can cheat, I don't see how the method which cannot be cheated is not finitely superior to the alternative.

Do you understand what it means for something to be negligible? The fact that the potential exists doesn't make it non-negligible. If that were the case, Peach's down-B would be banned, because being able to draw Bob-Bombs is ****ing broken. Why then, isn't it broken?

Because she doesn't draw it often enough to warrant a ban. The same holds for for port priority determining the outcome of a match (outside of starting position). It's incredibly unlikely that I'm ever, ever, ever going to win a match I would have lost because I chose a controller port more to the left than my opponent.

And I don't think anyone advocates random port choice.

If that were the case Peach's down b would not be broken. It's a 100 in 100 chance of drawing a bomb, that is a part of the technique's strength. What we're talking about in the case of port priority is one layer receiving an unfair advantage over the other. It's obvious that as much precautions as possible should be taken so that players aren't able to cheat in order to give themself an unfair advantage over their opponent.

 

[Strong Badam]

Lol watching the japanese Brawlers try to determine port was pretty cool. One of them just pointed to G&W on the character select screen and it was just understood.

I think Judgment is a better method than RPS.

 

[Kal]

Merkuri, the advantage you gain from port priority, in the sense of having priority default to you for something like a grab, is negligible. It has virtually no effect on gameplay because it happens with such low frequency. The point I made with Peach is that being able to occur does not make the effect non-negligible.

 

[Merkuri]

Merkuri, the advantage you gain from port priority, in the sense of having priority default to you for something like a grab, is negligible. It has virtually no effect on gameplay because it happens with such low frequency. The point I made with Peach is that being able to occur does not make the effect non-negligible.

Firstly I don't see what frequency of any phenomena has to do with constructing the proper rules mitigate it in a tourney scene. If it can affect unfairly affect gameplay then it should be accounted for.

Secondly (as I was trying to explain) your point about Peach doesn't stand, it doesn't stand not because of how infrequently she draws bombs, but in that she is SUPPOSED to draw bombs roughly once every 100 pulls, there is nothing to account for.

Neglige or not, the optimal rules should be in place to prevent players from cheating to gain an unfair advantage over their opponent.

Edit: Also two players grabbing the ledge at the sametime happens a lot more than people realize. It happens a lot when a player is trying to recover and the other is trying to edge hog, they both get there at the same time but port priority dictates that only one of them will remain on that ledge.

 

[Divinokage]

And what unfair advantage is that?

 

[Kal]

Frequency matters, plain and simple. We're not going to address issues that never come up just because they can potentially happen. And way to misunderstand the point about Peach's down-B again.

Honestly, I haven't even disagreed with you over anything. I didn't say that frequency should be a factor when creating a ruleset (though it obviously should). I've only pointed out that worrying about who gets the lower-numbered ports over issues like grab priority is silly, because it almost never happens. Now, worrying about port choice over starting position is entirely fine, because that can have a very significant impact on the outcome of a match. Just keep in mind that you called me out on why port choice is negligible with regard to priority of attacks and the like, and I explained that it's negligible because of frequency. Not that there shouldn't be a methodology for determining port choice.

And really, why am I discussing anything with somebody whose signature is a Taylor Swift quote?

 

[Merkuri]

Frequency matters, plain and simple. We're not going to address issues that never come up just because they can potentially happen. And way to misunderstand the point about Peach's down-B again.

Honestly, I haven't even disagreed with you over anything. I've only pointed out that worrying about who gets the lower-numbered ports over issues like grab priority is silly, because it almost never happens. Now, worrying about port choice over starting position is entirely fine, because that can have a very significant impact on the outcome of a match.

And really, why am I discussing anything with somebody whose signature is a Taylor Swift quote?

You're either blind or dumb. I've explained how port priority affects recovery and ledge hogging, that's a big deal. It's goes large unnoticed, because when two players grab the ledge at the sametime it's often(sometimes rightfully so) mistakenly chucked up to being that one grabbed the ledge. Neither one of us have been discussing an issue that never comes up.

I also don't understand why you need to be a douche and insult Taylor Swift like that....but whatever.

 

[Kal]

First, let me explain that Taylor Swift is awful because she's neither a pop artist nor a country artist. She's some terrible hybrid. And, regardless of genre, she is ****ing awful:

"Cause you were Romeo, I was a scarlet letter," combined with the absurdly upbeat deus ex machina ending, suggests an unbelievable level of illiteracy. Though her music is admittedly pretty catchy.

Second, I'm neither blind nor dumb. The issue you've mentioned hasn't been demonstrated to actually occur with any real frequency as a result of port priority (all you're doing is speculating that it is port priority when it could very well be one player grabbing the edge first). Once you've demonstrated it, all you've done is reinforce my ****ing point: frequency matters. And, while I would drop it being a negligible issue, you have to concede that there is no adequate way to compensate; one player will always have lower priority than the other, and this can't be made up for.

 

[Merkuri]

First, let me explain that Taylor Swift is awful because she's neither a pop artist nor a country artist. She's some terrible hybrid. And, regardless of genre, she is ****ing awful:

"Cause you were Romeo, I was a scarlet letter," combined with the absurdly upbeat deus ex machina ending, suggests an unbelievable level of illiteracy. Though her music is admittedly pretty catchy.

Second, I'm neither blind nor dumb. The issue you've mentioned hasn't been demonstrated to actually occur with any real frequency as a result of port priority (all you're doing is speculating that it is port priority when it could very well be one player grabbing the edge first). Once you've demonstrated it, all you've done is reinforce my ****ing point: frequency matters. And, while I would drop it being a negligible issue, you have to concede that there is no adequate way to compensate; one player will always have lower priority than the other, and this can't be made up for.

Part of the reason why Taylor Swift is great is because she is a pop/country hybrid, and thus her music appeals to a wider spectrum of people. Moreover an artists' worth could never be measured by what genre of music they perform. Swift is so great because she has great vocal ability, amazing personality and above all else her music is relatable and extremely moving. Swift is also the only current artist I know who shares that high level of popularity who writes her own music, that speaks volumes in and of itself. Most of her songs are perfect in grammar and syntax, and having poor of either doesn't matter at all if the meaning of the lyric is kept in tact, especially in the example you gave where the janky syntax aids in getting a specific meaning across(despite being very catchy I'll admit Love Story is one of my least favorite songs by her).

Sametime ledge grabbing happens all the time, and given the necessary precision of ledge hogging in today's metagame it would be stupid for you to think otherwise. You can slow youtube vids down(I recommend then the vids AJP anton uploads since they're frame by frame quality is great) to see two players grabbing the same ledge at the sametime. Yes, there is no way to completely remove the advantage(not what I'm arguing), I'm arguing that we should have a less abusable method of deciding who gets port priority, in which case: Mr game and watch judgment hammers > Rock paper scissors

 

[Varist]

no gtfo no more brawl **** coming into melee we roshambo like men

 

[Kal]

If you think I was criticizing the syntactical structure then you missed the point altogether. I think we should move this discussion into a private message, but I was emphasizing that Romeo and Juliet was a tragedy and that the scarlet letter she references is a symbol of adultery (a big scarlet "A" she would understand if she had actually read the book). It's not correct to write "I was a Scarlet Letter" to mean that she was a pariah. In other words, she clearly hasn't ever read "Romeo and Juliet" or "The Scarlet Letter."

It's hard to believe that you actually like her. Like, you have to be a super troll. I mean, watch this. It would be cute if she didn't **** the **** out of the chorus. And the whole song. And an entire genre two genres three genres of music.

 

[Divinokage]

Kal, you are clearly wasting your time, no matter what he says it's not gonna change anything. It's ok.

 

[Kal]

Asking me not to convince him that Taylor Swift is awful is like asking a Christian not to try and preach Jesus's message. Except here, I am actually right.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

This thread is ****ing win.

Smooth Criminal

 

[ShroudedOne]

Taylor Swift? Kal? Really?

....

 

[Divinokage]

Uhh you mean Merkuri? lol.

 

[ShroudedOne]

I'm surprised at the fact that Kal engaged him in a debate about her.

 

[Divinokage]

Lmao, I'm sure it was all in good fun.

 

[Kal]

No, it was 100% serious. I am stomping in front of my PC because the guy hasn't responded yet. Also **** Taylor Swift.

ShroudedOne, have you ever seen me not engage in a debate? I would argue with a wall if it had anything to say.

 

[Merkuri]

If you think I was criticizing the syntactical structure then you missed the point altogether. I think we should move this discussion into a private message, but I was emphasizing that Romeo and Juliet was a tragedy and that the scarlet letter she references is a symbol of adultery (a big scarlet "A" she would understand if she had actually read the book). It's not correct to write "I was a Scarlet Letter" to mean that she was a pariah. In other words, she clearly hasn't ever read "Romeo and Juliet" or "The Scarlet Letter."

It's hard to believe that you actually like her. Like, you have to be a super troll. I mean, watch this. It would be cute if she didn't **** the **** out of the chorus. And the whole song. And an entire genre two genres three genres of music.

You're talking about the incorrect meaning of her referencing love stories, specifically Romeo and Juliet and the Scarlet letter? Lol, the point very obviously is that they are doing a forbidden love(like in both stories) except this time(as she explains multiple time in the song) it will have a happy ending(unlike both those stories).

I did like her'' Lose Yourself'' cover, because it shows her artistry and how she is able to cover a song so far removed from her comfort zone. Was it better than the original version? Of course not, because she didn't cover the entire song, which is very often the case when an artist does a live cover of any song(especially a family friendly artist covering an urban artist as controversial Eminem) You keep referencing these isolated obtuse examples which re supposed to be an evidence poor worth as an artist and I just think that is sooo stupid. If your point was that she is incapable of covering a song without making a mockery of it(something that cannot be deduced from a live example she did as fan-service) then you're wrong. This is her cover of break my heart slow http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1Y3pBGRbag, which I find to be much better than the original for the fact that her pitch and the music actually fits the lyrics of the song, the original version is way too cheery and upbeat, it lack any actual emotional pain.

I think you're reasons for disliking Taylor Swift are either misguided or petty.

Edit: It cannot be hard to belive that I or anyone else actually like her considering that she is one of the most popular and successful U.S artists of the past decade.

 

[Kal]

Wow, you're really taking this argument to heart. I was mostly kidding. Her music is garbage, but that is obviously subjective. Except not really because "I was a scarlet letter" is still bull **** writing, and her cover of "Lose Yourself" is objectively bad.

At least you're no longer ranting about cheating at RPS, I guess.

 

[Merkuri]

hmph...guess it was a waste of time arguing with you. I don't like how you deflect your poorly formed argument into ''mostly kidding''...but whatever.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Kal you are my hero

 

[Kal]

**** you Sveet. You led me on with all this bull **** about being Facebook friends and you still haven't accepted my friend request. But I do take pride in this trolling being especially successful, while still having enough truth behind it to be worthwhile. Seriously, you can't call yourself a scarlet letter just because your boyfriend's family doesn't like you.

Edit: nevermind, apparently we are friends. The Facebook is trying to ruin it by not telling me.

 

[Geenareeno]

Wtf, Taylor Swift is garbage. I like how this srs thread has deteriorated us discussing whether or not Taylor Swift is good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF1plJBeoyg

 

[Kal]

This thread hasn't been serious for 51 pages.

 

[Strong Badam]

Kal I find your dislike for Taylor Swift to be entirely arbitrary and I think you should instead like her.

 

[Kal]

It is definitely subjective, so I won't ban her at my tournaments.