The Atyeo Ruleset - a new alternate ruleset for brawl?

[luke_atyeo]

I was under the impression that the system would work with three matches, with a different character being used for each match. Not that stock would carry over from previous matches, because that would take far too long.

nah it works like a crew battle, so you carry your stocks over, it wouldnt take that much longer, a normal best of 3 set, if dragged out to the last game, see's each player with 9 stocks anyway.



mdu you make a valid point but skill can change things either way, also if one person sent out mk against a low tier, all that low tier has to do is take 1 stock, and then counter mk with a high tier giving him a good chance to take mk out, then all he has to do is beat 2 low tiers with a crippled high tier and a mid tier which isnt too bad.
alternativly you can be luigiking (hi lk!) and beat mk with luigi lololololol

I also orginally thought about having 7 points but I feel 6 works better, I kinda like ussi's idea though.

also as I said in the op, I think that having different amounts of stocks unbalances the game in a way we want to avoid, so no 6 stocks with 2 high tiers or 18 stocks with 6 low tiers.


no trill you cannot use the same character twice, dont you guys learn to read in perth lol.
scabe with 9 stocks (or 18 in the other suggestion) would be unbeatable!!!

How many points were you thinking of allocating to each player? Character selection becomes very different with just one point up or down here.

6 points, like I said in the op, if thats not what you mean then I have no idea what your asking.

as for timeouts

Tedeth's Rule: In the event of a time out, both players lose stock equal to the number the opponent has remaining.

so if player X had 3 stock remaining, and player y has 2 stock remaining, in the event of a timeout both players lose 2 stocks.

if your both on your last/the same amount of stocks, its percent as usual.


gords you really need to proof read your posts, you've really out done yourself this time

anyways

Do both people get to find out which three characters they're up against before the set? Or is it double blind pick, then loser's counter pick?

this is worth discussing, should it be pre-determined teams, if so do both people find out the teams at the start and then double blind the first character, or do we make it so you choose characters for your team as you go along mid match.

 

[Throwback]

I've got an issue with time, if you run it like regular crews (keep remaining stocks) then it will slow matches down, no question. There is also 0 possibility of a 2-0 victory - a minimum of 3 matches must be played.

 

[Silfa]

I haven't read the thread in detail (too busy yesterday/today), but I thought it was just three matches, with a different character used in each. That seemed a lot better to me than acting like a crew battle with a single person and different characters.

 

[luke_atyeo]

you dont have an issue with time yourself pie, we always run our tourneys on time, but yeah it'd probably take slightly longer then a normal bracket, except that grandfinals wont be a possible best of 10 2 hour double set.

 

[...Ellipsis...]

If you can only use your character in one match it makes MK absolutely unusable as you then have to use two low tiers. And what if you wasted MK on the other persons **** character due to blinds. The crew system works far better imo. I really don't see how it would take a lot longer as most games go through 9 stocks? and winners/losers/grand finals will be way faster.

 

[6Mizu]

This would a fun side-event but I don't think this'll work out for me and A LOT of other people.
This is because I like playing ROB, MK, and Snake. This equals to 9. I don't enjoy playing any other characters than those three in tourney. The problem I with it is that there are major restrictions to what 3 characters you can play.
Also, many people don't play more than 1 or 2 characters in tourney.

 

[Limeee]

i like the idea, except for the points idea

metaknight should not be worth 4 points when a high tier (lets say snake) and a lowtier (lets say mario) can deal out more damage/stocks

the problem is both of those have the same point value

but 3 char crews for 1 person sounds fun

 

[Throwback]

...wtf is that logic jujitsu? MK is #1 in the tier list because his kills:deaths ratio (ie DAMAGE PER STOCK) is better than everyone else.

 

[rPSIvysaur]

This only caters to certain members of the smash community. Several of them don't play the characters to fit the requirements to do well in this environment.
1)They simply don't play three characters. Did you ever stop to think that some people never picked them up. Now they got **** on because they took time to only master their character they play.
2)They characters they play may go above the total. They could end up just not meeting the requirements.
3)They may do horribly with their low tier characters. You're basically forcing them to play someone they don't want to play.
4)Some people may be overly dominant with Meta Knight that they just destroy the peoples low tiers as soon as they take out their high tier characters.

 

[Ussi]

this is why i suggested 7 points with A and B separate.

the best would be two B tiers and a low tier.

Since B tier is still high tier, you get two low high tiers to take out MK

 

[brningpyre]

I like it. It's like Jump Ultimate Stars panel setup, but with Brawl.

You allocate points to your characters, and what-not. Would make for a fun side-event.

 

[Throwback]

I can't believe 'waaaaah I don't know 3 characters that would fit in this system' is even being raised. Way to boost your post counts...

 

[Pete278]

Obviously this wouldn't work at the moment by just ramming it in place of a standard tournament, because then you would get lots of 'but I don't play 3 characters', so I don't think that really applies as an argument. In addition, while at first, this would hinder those people who did master their one character, it would eventually favour those who mastered their three characters, it would just take some time.

 

[luke_atyeo]

it doesnt so much reward people who can play multiple characters, but people who are smart and have solid fundamentals and overall skill.

if you cant play 3 characters, then learn them
the reason for the points and restrictions are to help balance out the tiers abit and stop mk from just rolling over everyone, if your a really skilled player that use's mk you can still win in this system, but if your a scrub who relies on mk your going to lose.

 

[LuigiKing]

Search bait

Haha <3 luke

Edit: Also this is a **** idea I might try this as a side tournament at the next local I host and post results n stuff.

 

[Nicks]

i like it luke i hope we try it at a VIC tourney instead of normal singles.
my opinion is bias tho coz i dont really like normal singles in the first place, doubles FTW!

 

[#HBC | J]

I like this idea and with the current tier list it seems I am perfectly set up

// so I get to use all my characters but poor Jiggs ;_;

However i could see some people getting a little screwed over =/

 

[Tiger Shark]

This only caters to certain members of the smash community. Several of them don't play the characters to fit the requirements to do well in this environment.
1)They simply don't play three characters. Did you ever stop to think that some people never picked them up. Now they got **** on because they took time to only master their character they play.
2)They characters they play may go above the total. They could end up just not meeting the requirements.
3)They may do horribly with their low tier characters. You're basically forcing them to play someone they don't want to play.
4)Some people may be overly dominant with Meta Knight that they just destroy the peoples low tiers as soon as they take out their high tier characters.

Some thoughts...

Firstly, one of the objectives of this ruleset is to encourage people to try their hand at using characters they don't normally play as, because it's new, interesting and fun.

1) The ruleset doesn't necessarily hinder people who only focus on one character. If someone spends all their time mastering one character instead of three, they should be able to take more of their opponent's stocks out with that character.

2) The probability that someone happens to end up "not meeting the requirements" perfectly is pretty good. There aren't many of these "certain members of the community" who focus exclusively on three characters that happen to fit these rules. If you don't "meet the requirements", and you have to go out of your comfort zone, there's a pretty good chance that your opponent will be going out of his/hers as well.

3) Maybe people don't want to play as low tiers, and will end up doing horribly with them. But, they will be doing something new that they're not used to, and, assuming they're not stubborn and whiney, will probably have a great time. They might even start liking some of the low tiers, which is awesome. On that note, the system is flexible enough such that, if you really despise low tiers that much, you don't even have to play them at all.

4) Notice Meta Knight's more costly than every other character?

 

[M]

4)Some people may be overly dominant with Meta Knight that they just destroy the peoples low tiers as soon as they take out their high tier characters.

Each character can only be played in one match of the set. So if the Meta Knight player beats the other players high tier, those players can't choose those repective characters for the rest of the set. This means the Meta Knight user has won the first round, but still has to beat a mid and low tier character with his two low tiers.

 

[Scabe]

Each character can only be played in one match of the set. So if the Meta Knight player beats the other players high tier, those players can't choose those repective characters for the rest of the set. This means the Meta Knight user has won the first round, but still has to beat a mid and low tier character with his two low tiers.

Wait really?

I thought it was going to be like a crew match where If Metaknight two stocks the opponent's first character, the next match the Metaknight starts off with two stocks and so on.

 

[M]

If the game was played out like a crew battle, each match would drag out exceedingly long.

 

[Ussi]

I don't see how crews would take long.. Unless you're doing a Wario/Sonic/Some other mid tier who can time out.. it shouldn't take long

 

[cHeWe]

how would PT work in this, i mean say i beat my opponent i had 2 stocks left and i was charizard. Would i have to start as charizard next match or could i change? If i did have to stay as the pokemon i finished with, in the few seconds in which my opponent was dying if i managed to change to squirtle in time do i get to start of next match as squirtle?

Either way is it just me or would PT be a lot better in this ruleset because even if you dont get to choose who you come back as in the next match all your pokemon would be refreshed

p.s i absolutly luv this idea

 

[Throwback]

....have you noticed that PT is completely broken in crews? He's at least A-tier, maybe even S-tier. Also I think it's unfair that after you take a stock you have enough time to switch pokemanz, when they're fresh they're sooooooo OP.

Also you should definitely be restricted about which pokemon you start with if you win the 1st match (and let's face it, you're about 90% certain to do that with those rigged freaks). It's not as though the concept of the PT character inherently suggests you should be able to start with whatever pokemon you like.

 

[Aglow]

This is really cool. And I don't know where the PT hype is coming from.

 

[Throwback]

please tell me you didn't think my post was serious.

Also luke what is your ruling on zelda/sheik. And change the thread title, it looks like you are advocating a different game to brawl, which you're not.

 

[...Ellipsis...]

If the game was played out like a crew battle, each match would drag out exceedingly long.

Um pretty sure Luke said it was like a crew battle. Look in the ACT thread.

Also PT is broken for this.

 

[luke_atyeo]

I've said about 3 times in this thread that it works EXACTLY like a crew battle, except that is 1 v 1 with 3 characters each, and there are team restrictions to balance our the tiers between your team.

in short, yes its crews, no it wont take that long, cant take much longer the a normal best of 3 set thats dragged out to the last game, since that would involve both players having 9 stocks, which is the same as this system.


also PT has different rules, charizard costs 4 points (1 frame rocksmash OMG!!!)
dirtle costs 1000000 points
and ivysaur costs infinte points.

 

[Scabe]

But seriously how much is PT.

Are you going to set restrictions for Samus changing to ZSS if it ever happens and Zelda and Sheik and whatever else characters have that changing gimmick.

 

[luke_atyeo]

pt is mid tier right? so 2 points.

zelda shiek is simple, if you pay for zelda (1) you can only use zelda, if you pay for shiek (2, she/he/it is midtier now right?) then you can transform back and forth since shiek is more expensive then zelda.

similar process for zss/sss (**** suit samus)

 

[SofaKingdom]

The points thing is really gay.

 

[luke_atyeo]

the points thing is the whole point of the ruleset, to try to balance out the tiers and characters in a fair way that doesnt mega gay anyone.

because, I dont know about you, but I'd prefer not to get mega gay'd any day of the week, EVEN wednesday.

 

[Tiger Shark]

The points thing is really gay.

Cool story bro.


Seriously though, elaborate maybe?

 

[luke_atyeo]

how about a kingdom ruled over by a sofa, it'd be about that level of gay right?

 

[C~Dog]

how about a kingdom ruled over by a sofa, it'd be about that level of gay right?

Depends, what are this sofa's ideals, goals and methods?

 

[Ussi]

If there weren't points a lot of people would have done MK, Snake, and [insert high tier character of choice] teams

 

[Throwback]

That HAS to be deliberate flame-bait. No-one could possibly be stupid enough to post it as a serious comment.

Yes Ussi, I'm talking about your post.

 

[rathy Aro]

I don't see any glaring problem with this ruleset; what bothers me is that you made a new ruleset to begin with. There may be some advantages to this ruleset over Crow's, but now Crow's might have some competition before it even has a chance to get popular. It might not be so bad with 2 different rulesets out there, but this will likely encourage other rulesets that may all be good, but will never be as successful as they could be because of all the others. I think it'd be best to stick with one alternate ruleset and then reconstruct it as we test it rather than have a split similar to brawl+/brawl-/balanced brawl (and soon project M).

 

[luke_atyeo]

oh ok, sorry for being creative and trying to provide valid and good alternatives to things.

while we're at it, why dont we kill off all the other races of people except for one, so that race can become a super race, otherwise there might be too much competition and people will never evolve.

 

[Throwback]

....there are other races of humans?

Spoiler

sorry couldn't help myself lol