The BBR has decided to bone Ganonciding.

[Bloodynite]

WHAT THE HELL!!! I DEMAND COPYRIGHT FOR THAT PIC SINCE I MADE IT D:<

http://allisbrawl.com/blogpost.aspx?id=79902 <-- Proof

 

[Vermanubis]

DON'T YOU MEAN WHAT THE HEAVEN?
q

 

[Bloodynite]

sorry i meant to say what the Purgatory

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

I'm still lol'ing that they're making whoever the game says wins. Let's listen to Sakurai now, the guy didn't even want the game to be competitive.

 

[T-block]

Not gonna lie, that picture made me laugh too.

The comparison isn't meant to be taken as literally as you're taking it. Obviously a suicide rule makes much more sense than the Warlock Punch rule.

 

[Noobicidal]

I'll be over here maining MK. Good luck guys.

 

[Ussi]

If we are allowed to buff characters, are we allowed to nerf others too?

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

Nubcakes avatar is perfect for this situation.

 

[Jigglymaster]

So this means when ganon's on his last life other ppl can force him to ganoncide them like how you intercept Jigglypuff's Rollout and Ike's Foward B in the air.

Also does this mean if we find a glitch that makes it go to the winners screen with your character winning does that mean we won? Because the game said we won and the games always right about who wins.

 

[DLA]

Though I understand what they're doing for this rule... I still disagree with it. I've thought about it for quite a while and I've come with a good way to describe my viewpoint.

Their view is that, without any rules on Ganonciding, you would still lose/tie if you Ganoncide. They're not nerfing Ganon; they're just not giving him an advantage. They don't claim to have the "authority" (for lack of a better word) to make a rule that says Ganonciding results in a win when it would normally result in a loss/tie.

My opinion is this: if they don't, then who does? There was obviously a coding oversight, considering Ganonciding results in a loss or a tie, while Bowserciding results in a win or a tie. Both moves do the exact same thing. There's no way that they can justify treating the moves differently, other than being overly dogmatic about staying true to the programming of the game.

If you want to be productively dogmatic, you must be dogmatic for the sake of fulfilling the game's intent through enforcement of the dogma. I'm probably using "dogma" too much, but my point is that it's counterproductive to enforce the programming of a move when the programming is obviously faulty, since the intent of Bowserciding is to give Bowser the win or tie (according to the developers). And Ganonciding accomplishes the same exact purpose as Bowserciding, yet it gives Ganon a loss or a tie.

Now I can make the argument that, if you use the game's programming as law regarding Ganonciding, then you should use the game's programming as law regarding the infinite dimensional cape. The game wasn't programmed for the intent of giving MK an infinite dimensional cape, but unfortunately, that's the way the game happens to be programmed. So if you apply the same level of dogmatism for the cape as you do with Ganonciding, then you can't justify banning infinite dimensional cape.

Of course, MK's cape wasn't programmed with the intent of giving MK an infinite stalling technique. The SBR recognized this when they banned the technique, looking past their tendency for "programming dogmatism" and banning it, because they knew that the cape's intent isn't to stall.

What I don't understand is why the SBR can't look past their "programming dogmatism" in this case and disregard Ganoncide's faulty programming. The devs themselves stated "Bowserciding is supposed to result in a win," so the intent of Bowserciding/Ganonciding is to make the player initiating the move win.

Is the SBR really going to be so stubbornly dogmatic that they disregard the programmer's intent and follow the game's faulty programming?

Even if you aren't convinced that the Devs intended both moves to result as a win... can't you look at the discrepancies between Bowserciding and Ganonciding and infer what their original intent was? It's really not difficult... it's just a matter of the SBR stepping up and doing their ****ing job and settling matters that can't be settled by asking the developers (due to the fact that we can't actually ask the developers anything).

 

[Z1GMA]

Thing is, the opponent can use this against us at some points.

Ganon & Diddy, both at around 120% damage, both at last stock.
Ganon uses Aerudo - Diddy gets caught and they both die,
thus creating a '1 stock 0%' Vs '1 stock 0%', which just benefits Diddy.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Oh my gosh guys, I'm having tons of fun in the discussion thread. It's hilarious.

 

[Zeallyx]

Does anyone even take the BBR seriously at this point?

I never did.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Man, if I wasn't so addicted to debates, I'd quit arguing over there. But it's too much fun.

Too bad they don't have much logic over there though...

 

[PK-ow!]

Yes!


So now it's partly-player-port-influenced pseudorandomness!!!

Clearly superior to arbitrary suicide rules.


Not verbal irony. If there is a rhyme and reason to how it works that players can exploit, so much the better for them. If not, then rewriting the game's rules here amounted to a premature ban. Not a ban of a technique, a ban in the sense of removing and replacing rules, before you know you have to.


DLA, I'm ashamed. Dogma, intent... this entirely misses the point. It just misses the point. Nothing is about developer intent. Dimensional Cape is banned because it's broken, and if we allowed it, the game would be unplayable.

Who is to say what the developers intended Bowsercide and Ganoncide to do? And, more importantly, who gives a ****?
Playing the game to win is about figuring out what it does do.

The intent is that Sakurai wanted all of us - us competitive people - to rot and die, after raging at wifi and tripping for the hundredth time.


@jigglymaster: Yes. Yes it does.

That is how the game would work until such time as that technique was found in need of being banned. It might be banned for "not being part of the game." It might be banned for being too easy.
But if it made things more interesting being around, because it still had a risk-reward tradeoff, it could very well stay.




Ganon, guys... I thought we were manlier than this.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Hm. I guess I should post my train of logic in here. Not now though, I'm too lazy right now.

 

[thexsunrosered]

I was under the impression that the objective of the BBR was to manipulate the ruleset in order to bring balance to gameplay, in effect banning infinite dimensional cape, planking, etc. Ganonciding resulting in the win was the ideal way to balance a move that was clearly misprogrammed and obviously messed up. Removing the rule saying that Ganon's suicide does not result in the completely throws off the balance that I thought the BBR was there to create/enforce in the first place.

Seriously though, Ganon is on top of the enemy, falling to the bottom blast zone with their head in his hand. If it isn't completely obvious who the winner should be...

 

[DLA]

DLA, I'm ashamed. Dogma, intent... this entirely misses the point. It just misses the point. Nothing is about developer intent. Dimensional Cape is banned because it's broken, and if we allowed it, the game would be unplayable.

Who is to say what the developers intended Bowsercide and Ganoncide to do? And, more importantly, who gives a ****?
Playing the game to win is about figuring out what it does do.

The intent is that Sakurai wanted all of us - us competitive people - to rot and die, after raging at wifi and tripping for the hundredth time.

No, you're missing MY point.

There's a difference between "what the developers intended the game to be" and "what the developers intended the game's programming to be."

This isn't a philosophical argument about what Sakurai thinks of the competitive community. That's completely irrelevent.

My point is that, looking at all of the other suicide moves, Ganoncide's programming is obviously faulty. And even if you disagree (despite the evidence), the SBR is a committee of the "top minds" in the Brawl community. Why would they blindly follow programming that is likely faulty, instead of getting together like the committee they are and decide whether it is faulty or not?

Ganonciding/other suicide moves may not be AS game-breaking as infinite dimensional cape, but it is still game-breaking for a few specific characters, especially considering the fact they had to make a rule about it in the official ruleset. And I'm pretty appalled that they made the rule without ANY exploration or rational, logical comparison of the suicide moves.

Instead, they just opted for "we don't know the developer's intent, so we're going to ignore all of the evidence and follow obviously faulty programming."

 

[Z1GMA]

Seriously though, Ganon is on top of the enemy, falling to the bottom blast zone with their head in his hand. If it isn't completely obvious who the winner should be...

I was just about to write the same thing.

How could slamming an opponents backhead into the southern Blast Zone possibly NOT be full of win?

 

[ADHD]

Man, if I wasn't so addicted to debates, I'd quit arguing over there. But it's too much fun.

Too bad they don't have much logic over there though...

Everything the BBR does now is ********.


They're ****ing dumb and having a purple name is something that should be frowned upon.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Everything the BBR does now is ********.


They're ****ing dumb and having a purple name is something that should be frowned upon.

lol, I never know when you're serious or not.

Spoiler

But I suspect you're making fun of me....lol

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

The only thing I'm pleased about is that they FINALLY added Pokemon Stadium 2 to the stage list. Ganon can get-up attack > Fair camp on the conveyor belts. We can mix it up with downB, uair, and nair too. Plus we get a bonus. If we have RCO lag, we can just ledge-jump onto the very edge of the conveyor belt and cancel our RCO lag frames by being pushed off. We can wizkick cancel from the center of the stage during the electric phase and launch off the end into sweet edgeguards.

We can slide across the entire stage with DownB during Ice as well. Wind is ok, it's kind of wonky and you have to play in the wind a lot to do well in it, but we can SH double fair. Rock sucks though <_<

 

[mlorenzo]

All we have to do is to not follow that rule and they will have to change it. Whats the point of having a rule that no one follows. Florida will not follow the new ganon rule.

 

[Veggi]

I don't think the rule will change, but it doesn't matter because the list holds no value. I'll keep playing the way EVERYONE prefers and is already used to.

 

[*JuriHan*]

the stage list makes me cringe...

 

[Red Arremer]

Trying to clear up an apparently very popular misconception:
Ganonciding never had any rule covering it in former rulesets.

That it would cover Ganoncides was a (mis?)interpretation of most people because of how ambiguous the rule was worded, I'd think.

 

[Vermanubis]

It was inferred since it was considered the same as Klawmakaze. Even if the TO doesn't use the ruleset, people will ***** about it now in MMs and cry BBR rules. As far as I know, MMs aren't bound by regional rulesets.

 

[Zeallyx]

How can character A's attack make character B win?

It's silly.

 

[Vermanubis]

How can character A's attack make character B win?

It's silly.

Seriously. The only word that comes to mind to describe the BBR is pedantic and inconsistent. They don't apply their principles universally, only selectively, and instead of using their brains to discern unsurities, they focus on minute details that are completely impertinent to the nature of the move. No matter how pedantic one wants to be, the bottom line is that Klawmakazeing and Ganonciding and fundamentally similar in almost every relevant aspect, yet they have different win/loss/tie rates. What I want to know, is what separates the two enough, programming flaws aside, to reward them with different win/tie/loss rates? Such a make-or-break move should never be left to chance.

I'm just relieved New England isn't using any BBR rules. Looks like Apex is sticking by Ganonciding and Klawmakaze, too.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Trying to clear up an apparently very popular misconception:
Ganonciding never had any rule covering it in former rulesets.

That it would cover Ganoncides was a (mis?)interpretation of most people because of how ambiguous the rule was worded, I'd think.

But the BBR is still inconsistent with the "Stick to the results screen lol" crap.

(And this is where I post my logic from the thread...)

1) The BBR says they don't want to unnecessarily buff characters. They sad they'd rather remove a buff than apply a nerf (or something like that).

2) The BBR says they want to stick with the results screen.

3) However, the BBR says that if the time runs out and both characters are on their last stock, the character with lower percent wins.
-This rule was decided on other fighters, which are HP based
-This rule disregards the fact that even though one character has a higher percent, the other character may be much closer to dying (thanks to the fact that this game is based on getting the other character into the blast zones, as well as different weights and powers)
-Thus, this rule BUFFS campy characters and NERFS those characters that are more for direct combat
-Campy play is often considered degenerate, which is why we ban super large stages that support fast, campy characters, so why do we buff them with this rule?

4) When the game's time runs out, if both characters have the same number of stocks, regardless of percent, the game calls a sudden death
-If the BBR wants to honor the game's "decision," why is SD not played out?

5) The BBR also says that in the case of Sudden Death due to suicide moves, a one stock 3 minute game will be played.
-Why is this not the same case for time outs? Why is there the difference in standards, especially when this rule HINDERS the recovery of one character and the attacks of a few other characters, but the other rule BUFFS the few ultra campy characters?

Thus, the BBR is inconsistent. On one hand they say that they want to honor the results screen and not buff characters unnecessarily, but on the other they buff the characters that cause semidegenerative play and nerf a handful of characters that already do not need to be nerfed.

Now, I heard that there is a difference in these two rules because in one case the match has run its course and the minimatch would lengthen the time of a set unnecessarily. However, if the suicide is performed in the last 3 minutes of a match, then the 1 stock 3 minute match could run over the original time. This is also inconsistent.

Lastly, I also heard a comparison to Peach pulling out a bomb and killing both herself and her opponent. Firstly, if this happens the Peach should have spaced better. Secondly, if the opponent did not allow her to space better so that he could cause Peach to die as well, the Peach got outplayed (same for catching and throwing back or reflecting the bomb). Thirdly, the Peach could have DIed better to give herself a bit more time. The Peach has full control over this situation, whereas Ganonciding does not.

Aerudo is an integral part of Ganon's recovery. If we cannot use this to recover on our last stock because we will lose the match, we're already at a far worse chance of winning. The game calls players to KO their opponents and do what you can to make sure you aren't KOed. Aerudo does both of these, yet the BBR decides that it should reverse the spirit of the game to honor the results screen (which the BBR only does some of the time to begin with).

All in all, whether or not the rule was there for Ganonciding in the first place, it SHOULD be included. It is a small buff compared to the large nerf that is already in place. The BBR should be a consistent, logical group of intelligent smashers (and TOs), and by being inconsistent you place your reputation for reliability on the line.

Spoiler

If a fellow Ganon main feels that there's a better way to organize this or has an additional point that would fit in here, feel free to let me know. I feel like I have left out something or made my organization a bit confused.

 

[Red Arremer]

I do agree with you guys about this, honestly. =/
I already brought it up, but I don't know if it will be changed.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Haha, I guess that's about as much as we can ask for right now. Sorry for the low-cut attacks; in no way were they directed at you personally (or any specific member of the BBR).

As for my last paragraph, I feel the need to revise it to this:

"Whether or not Ganonciding is ruled as the win for Ganon all the time or not, the BBRs decision should be consistent with its other rules concerning ties and the results screen, as well as the spirit of the game. The BBR should be a consistent, logical group of intelligent smashers (and TOs), and by being inconsistent you place your reputation for reliability on the line."

I'll leave the original there just for the sake of having it though.

 

[Red Arremer]

I have proposed a sort of compromise - that if the game goes to SD, it would be a replay, and if the game goes to result screen, Ganon would be the winner. We will be discussing this issue further. As said, I do agree with you guys about that rule.

1) The BBR says they don't want to unnecessarily buff characters. They sad they'd rather remove a buff than apply a nerf (or something like that).

I guess that makes sense - removing an arbitrary way to strengthen a character than to arbitrarily weaken them.

2) The BBR says they want to stick with the results screen.

Yes, but SD isn't a results screen, mind you.

3) However, the BBR says that if the time runs out and both characters are on their last stock, the character with lower percent wins.
-This rule was decided on other fighters, which are HP based

Which doesn't mean it is necessarily bad.

-This rule disregards the fact that even though one character has a higher percent, the other character may be much closer to dying (thanks to the fact that this game is based on getting the other character into the blast zones, as well as different weights and powers)

I have to disagree here. Causing damage does show the progress. While it is true that a Snake at 100% will most likely survive longer than a Jigglypuff at 100%, the damage is actually data we can read, and is a factual indication we have.
What if the Snake is a bad player who doesn't know how to DI? Would he survive as long as a Jiggs with perfect DI?
Using weight-basis as indicator favors players (!) with heavier characters, while only damage only favors lighter characters slightly. And we don't know whether the player of the heavier character DIs well or not. We have no data we can use to make decisions upon in this case.
If you feel at a disadvantage due to this rule, you are free to play a light(er) character yourself.

-Thus, this rule BUFFS campy characters and NERFS those characters that are more for direct combat

Timeout is a standard way to find results. If you remove the timeout as solution, you are BUFFING characters that are more for direct combat and NERF campy characters.

-Campy play is often considered degenerate, which is why we ban super large stages that support fast, campy characters, so why do we buff them with this rule?

Wrong. We aren't banning big stages due to fast characters who camp well. We ban them due to circle stalling.

4) When the game's time runs out, if both characters have the same number of stocks, regardless of percent, the game calls a sudden death
-If the BBR wants to honor the game's "decision," why is SD not played out?

As said, Sudden Death isn't a result screen.

The last part I cannot answer, as it doesn't make too much sense to me either.

 

[Ganonsburg]

I have proposed a sort of compromise - that if the game goes to SD, it would be a replay, and if the game goes to result screen, Ganon would be the winner. We will be discussing this issue further. As said, I do agree with you guys about that rule.

This sounds sensible to me.

Yes, but SD isn't a results screen, mind you.
...
As said, Sudden Death isn't a result screen.

Right, but it is the games way of saying that the match was a tie, with my point being that all sudden deaths should be treated the same.

I have to disagree here. Causing damage does show the progress. While it is true that a Snake at 100% will most likely survive longer than a Jigglypuff at 100%, the damage is actually data we can read, and is a factual indication we have.
What if the Snake is a bad player who doesn't know how to DI? Would he survive as long as a Jiggs with perfect DI?
Using weight-basis as indicator favors players (!) with heavier characters, while only damage only favors lighter characters slightly. And we don't know whether the player of the heavier character DIs well or not. We have no data we can use to make decisions upon in this case.
If you feel at a disadvantage due to this rule, you are free to play a light(er) character yourself.

No, by no means was I suggesting that we go and judge these matches on weight classes and such. It was just a point about how that rule favored one set of characters over another, and that the rematch would be the fairer option.

Timeout is a standard way to find results. If you remove the timeout as solution, you are BUFFING characters that are more for direct combat and NERF campy characters.

Fair point. It seems like there's no way to settle this as a problem at this time.

Wrong. We aren't banning big stages due to fast characters who camp well. We ban them due to circle stalling.

I admit, this was a rather weak point on my part.

The last part I cannot answer, as it doesn't make too much sense to me either.

Okay. I'm satisfied with the answers you've provided; especially in comparison to the lackluster responses from the official discussion (which I know is a bad place to attempt to get answers from, considering all the activity). Thank you!

 

[Damage Points]

Lol people upset that the worst character in the game is getting "nerfed".

 

[Zeallyx]

Lol people upset that the worst character in the game is getting "nerfed".

Not seeing that that ganon is the worst character makes it all the more worth to fight is entertainin'

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

Lol people upset that the worst character in the game is getting "nerfed".

Yes, Ganon player's opinions don't matter because nobody cares aboot the worst character in the game. Way to use "Grade School Bully" logic.

 

[Red Arremer]

Just as a small update, I have brought up the situation in a new thread, but it currently doesn't look very bright for you guys, I'm sorry. =/

 

[Ganonsburg]

Just as a small update, I have brought up the situation in a new thread, but it currently doesn't look very bright for you guys, I'm sorry. =/

I wish some of the better Ganons would show up and give their input. I personally wouldn't mind losing our Ganoncide wins as long as the BBR fixed up the other inconsistencies. But I know that these boards (myself included) are trying to help Ganon and get the right to have a rule (or compromise). Of course, as Verm and others have said, most tournaments will just have the suicide rule anyway.

But thank you for trying.

 

[Z1GMA]

Ok, take it away from us...
Then you can also take away MK's 'Nado and his Shuttle Loop.
Hid Side+b & Down+b should be the only allowed B-moves of his, lol.

If a MK-player uses Up+b or Neutral B, he should get a warning.
If he uses any of 'em again - Disqualification.

.

.

>_>