The EVO-ruleset (continued...)

[Wobbles]

Well if I'm the only person who shows up, I win by default. Hooray.

Anyhow, more testing.

I ran another test to see if the amount of the lead made a difference in item drops, and these are the numbers.

Green shells on high, 4 minute match, Mario 2 is 5 SDs behind.

Mario 1: 17
Mario 2: 9
Neutral: 4

Again, having control of the middle of the stage clearly gives more access to the items. This time Mario 2 gets a few more, but if the item drops are truly random, then this is expected. The difference does not seem strong enough to chalk up to the score difference. Even if it does, there will never be a 5 stock deficit in tournament matches.

Now for another fun test: how often do items spawn on Medium? The answer is about every 8-14 seconds.

Test 1: 4 minute match, Franklin badges on medium. Two players are just chilling on FD, doing nothing.

Items drop at 3:50, 3:40, 3:32, 3:19, 3:07, 2:59, 2:47, 2:34, 2:22, 2:13, 2:03, 1:54, 1:44, 1:35, 1:21, 1:10, 1:00, 0:47, 0:34, 0:21, 0:13, 0:04. No item ever drops later than 14 seconds after the previous drop, or sooner than 8 seconds after the previous drop.

Test 2: I did the same data, and it pretty much showed the same result. I really don't feel like typing in a bunch of numbers.

So there's a fairly consistent drop rate, and having control over the middle of the level does drastically increase the chance that you'll get items. SRK arguments are not entirely without merit.

Right now I'm actually leaning to the pro-item, at least for ONE tournament, just because of the way Brawl is set up compared to Melee. I'd like to petition for the removal of Unira and Bumper though. They're stupidly strong and safe -_-

 

[AltF4]

Wow, Wobbles... you totally just made me want to do some kind of crazy in-depth spreadsheet analysis on item occurrence and probability...

Btw: You HAVE to go Rob! Alicia and I are gonna be in Vegas that weekend and we want to watch you win EVO bad rules or not.

 

[polarity]

Why must it be proven, again? And why must everything be proven in tournaments, especially specific ones and not at, say, tournaments that came before it? What if we discovered a way for Xiaoyu to win against every single character every single time? Juggles that work from every single launcher against everyone, everywhere. A guaranteed 100%. It'd make her so broken you wouldn't be able to win as anyone but her. Must we allow this to happen at EVO first or can't we just ban her for being too good?!

Uh, yeah, you must allow it to happen in tournaments first. Not just one tournament, but many tournaments. Do you have any familiarity at all with the history of fighting games? Not only is it not unusual, but it's REALLY ****ING COMMON for some tactic to emerge which appears to be totally broken only to later turn out to be totally fair. I remember back when Tekken 5 came out, someone found some Heihachi 'infinite' which people were terrified was going to ruin the game, only for it to turn out totally irrelevant within a matter of weeks. On the other end of the scale, it took up to a year for people to figure out how to counter Cable's guard breaks in MvC2 (which can allow him to kill a whole character coming onto the screen before they even have a chance to move), but now he's fell from 'best character in the game' to 'bottom of the top tier'.

Nothing outside of top-level competition is proof.

What evidence? I never saw vids suggested by SRK as evidence to ban certain items/stages. I never saw tourny results used by SRK to support their ideas behind what should be banned or not.

It's just another double-standard. What's obvious to them goes without needing testing, yet what's obvious to anyone else (such as it's obvious to SWF that items should be turned off period) has to be tested first. Not that either opinion is correct, but the fact that one opinion automatically holds more weight than the other is ridiculous.

Uh, that's because the burden of proof is on the people who want to REMOVE something from the game. The correct attitude to competitive games is to take the game in its natural state (i.e. everything on) and then remove things as appropriate when irrefutable tournament evidence demonstrates the game is degenerate unless those elements are removed.

How the hell do you make a case for something that's banned not being broken when every tournament has it banned? The only way SRK can prove that items are not broken is by running this tournament. What the hell else do you propose they do?

 

[ColinJF]

Uh, that's because the burden of proof is on the people who want to REMOVE something from the game.

No one in this thread is proposing removing anything from the game. Item spawn is a setting, not something that is banned or not banned. It happens to be a bad setting on anything other than None, but nevertheless by choosing None nothing is being banned; items are still allowed if you can get them any way within these settings (e.g. Peach's items).

 

[polarity]

No one in this thread is proposing removing anything from the game. Item spawn is a setting, not something that is banned or not banned. It happens to be a bad setting on anything other than None, but nevertheless by choosing None nothing is being banned; items are still allowed if you can get them any way within these settings (e.g. Peach's items).

Okay continue to live in your dream world where turning something off doesn't count as removing it from the game, the rational folks will be at Evo if you care to join them.

 

[ColinJF]

I'm curious what sort of tests Evo did to establish that Time Mode 2:00 was degenerate. Having established it was, why did Evo decide it had a free hand to venture into Stock Mode rather than Time Mode 3:00? Surely each possible Time Mode -- the default setting -- has to be tested before anything else can be, considering that Time Mode is the default and by choosing Stock Mode you are removing Time Mode from the game.

And of course, this testing has to have been done in a major tournament, so I'm surprised that Evo isn't going with Stock Mode 2:00 since the burden of proof is on them to prove that it's degenerate through a major tournament.

Also, the default state of the game has many characters not unlocked. This game is not degenerate, so why is Evo allowing unlockable characters (assuming they are ...)?

 

[Revolver Roosevelt]

Speaking of which, why on earth do the tourney-clueless people at SWF use stock in Melee.

Tourneys test skill

Bonus Mode is a skills test.

Clearly, the default setting for tournies, then, is Bonus mode. Bonus mode encourages players to do more than simply kill their opponents or control the stage...they need to master EVERY aspect of the game. There doesn't seem to be anything inherently broken about it, either. It's stuff like that that makes me question the validity of Melee's "metagame:" they didn't even TEST to see if bonus mode, the default for settings for skill-based-fights, was balanced. I bet they just didn't want to learn about all of the bonuses.

Pansies

 

[Zankoku]

Good job, Roosevelt. Way to remind me what made me scream at Brawl for a full minute when I realized what was missing the first time I played it through.

 

[kirbstir]

Uh, yeah, you must allow it to happen in tournaments first. Not just one tournament, but many tournaments. Do you have any familiarity at all with the history of fighting games? Not only is it not unusual, but it's REALLY ****ING COMMON for some tactic to emerge which appears to be totally broken only to later turn out to be totally fair. I remember back when Tekken 5 came out, someone found some Heihachi 'infinite' which people were terrified was going to ruin the game, only for it to turn out totally irrelevant within a matter of weeks. On the other end of the scale, it took up to a year for people to figure out how to counter Cable's guard breaks in MvC2 (which can allow him to kill a whole character coming onto the screen before they even have a chance to move), but now he's fell from 'best character in the game' to 'bottom of the top tier'.

Nothing outside of top-level competition is proof.

Regarding this:

Uh, that's because the burden of proof is on the people who want to REMOVE something from the game. The correct attitude to competitive games is to take the game in its natural state (i.e. everything on) and then remove things as appropriate when irrefutable tournament evidence demonstrates the game is degenerate unless those elements are removed.

How the hell do you make a case for something that's banned not being broken when every tournament has it banned? The only way SRK can prove that items are not broken is by running this tournament. What the hell else do you propose they do?

How do you rationalize this:

Excerpt from the Evo rules:
Banned Stages: New Pork City, Hyrule Temple, Warioware, Spear Pillar, Flat Zone 2, Original Mario Brothers, Mushroomy Kingdom.

Where was the testing to "prove" Spear Pillar, Flat Zone 2, or Mushroomy Kingdom were banned?

And how do you rationalize that, before the list was updated, Norfair was banned for some reason?

And where are the videos proving all the items not on that "Allowed items list" are "broken" as well?

And finally, the argument for or against items isn't all about brokenness, and we've been over this a billion times by now.

 

[Rebel581]

BTW, online tournaments with no money involved count for about as much as my item friendlies with people. If my friendlies don't count, neither does an online "tournament." If friendlies matches aren't enough proof (which we've all done friendlies matches with items on at some point to test them), then a tournament based on pride is NOT proof.

And items are in the off setting when I turn on the game. Shouldn't that be the default then? After unlocking all of the characters, I've never had to go to the Item Switch and turn them off. I've had to turn them on if I want to play with items, where afterwards I put them back to off. So when I switch on the game, I don't have to go turn items off.

BUT, when I switch on the game, I DO have to change it to stock rather than time. Time is obviously the default then. Why aren't we playing that? Where's the time tournament for Brawl? Brawl =/= Melee. Time might have not worked in Melee, but it may work in Brawl. It needs testing.

 

[Scamp]

Wobbles I've got a question for you.

When you do the item testing do you leave the items on the stage or do you throw them off?

Because I think it matters if you do this or not.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

Oddly enough, I did 5 rather extensive, long, trials (one was 10 minutes) where I had one item on medium/high, 2 Marios, FD, and everything else I first did. But I found NO bias whatsoever. None. It was the strangest thing, since I KNOW I saw quite a heavy bias the first time I tested it. I altered a few variables, like if it was P2 or P4 winning (just happened to be what my wiimotes synched to), and things of that sort. Nothing changed. I also tried it with a variety of items, some of which were definitely biased the first time I tested, to no avail.

My conclusion? F'ing weird. I plan on trying it again sometime later but having more than just a single item on. Maybe that will change something...

Btw,

And finally, the argument for or against items isn't all about brokenness, and we've been over this a billion times by now.

Its as if nobody at SRK bothered reading my post regarding that issue that was quoted like 5-6 times throughout the old thread...

Oh wait, I know they didn't.

 

[FishkeeperTimmay!]

Okay, I ran some test of my own:

First set:
2 Mario's standing on opposite ends of FD
3 Stocks, 3 minutes long
No score advantage whatsoever
I did 20 trials.

Second Set:
Ditto, but one Mario is in the middle, while one was on the edge

Third Set:
Ditto, but both Marios are standing beside each other in the middle.

Findings? The items very rarely spawn where there isn't a player. I found this interesting. They almost always spawned on a certain characters "area", or RIGHT between the two characters. The odd ball item might spawn on the far side, but these were RARE.

My conclusion? Stage Control is bogus. Items are programmed to land where a player can easily grab them, or both players have an equal chance. Occasionally, an item is dropped in a random spot sway from both players.

So, logically, you can't "control" the stage when both players are on it. Holding the middle has no more of an advantage then holding a side, besides being able to get the oddballs that land on the far side. But that would risk you losing pressuring power on your opponent by surrendering the middle and retreating. So, in short, you have can create no item based stage control while both players are ON the stage.
The only time when you can "control" the stage is when your opponent is off of the stage, and your on it. Which, logically, already means your in a superior position! Someone OFF the stage is already in a bad spot, and the guy on the stage now has access to all the items that spawn. Sweet deal, items totally destroy the concept of having good edgeguarding because any character can pick up an item to throw at me.

In short, STAGE CONTROL IS BOGUS!

 

[WeretigerX]

Items suck all together IMO. Really takes out the rest of the skill in Brawl. They already took out the fast paced action from Melee requiring more skill. Items just makes a noob's day.

 

[thesage]

So even if there is no bias against players, according to fishkeeper timmay, items still spawn close to players usually. All you have to do is throw an opponent off the stage or keep away from the opponent and you're guaranteed an item. Is there 100 percent proof of this, because it basically rules out any serious item tournaments.

I know for a fact this didn't happen in melee. Has anybody tried to play an item match in hyrule temple? The things spawn like all the way across the stage. Actually, could this be tested on hyrule temple in brawl? If there's like a huge cluster of item spawns right nest to the players then it 100 percent confirms it.

 

[FishkeeperTimmay!]

So even if there is no bias against players, according to fishkeeper timmay, items still spawn close to players usually. All you have to do is throw an opponent off the stage or keep away from the opponent and you're guaranteed an item. Is there 100 percent proof of this, because it basically rules out any serious item tournaments.

I know for a fact this didn't happen in melee. Has anybody tried to play an item match in hyrule temple? The things spawn like all the way across the stage. Actually, could this be tested on hyrule temple in brawl? If there's like a huge cluster of item spawns right nest to the players then it 100 percent confirms it.

I'll do that right now! Be back in a bit.

 

[BigRick]

I agree with FishKeeperTimmay's theory. I did a few tests with 2,3,4 players and I failed to see bias. That's all I've got to say since ppl said alot already.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I would assume the random chance of items spawning in places is different for every stage. The programmers obviously don't want to make their algorithm obvious, and they want some stages to have a unique feel to them, so I would assume a stage like Hyrule would prove to have significantly different results simply because of the stage itself.

 

[FishkeeperTimmay!]

Alright here it is:

First set:
2 Marios stand at the opposite end of Hyrule Temple, on the top floor
1 minute trail
Repeated 5 times

Second Set:
2 Marios stand at the opposite ends of Hyrule temple, one on the top, one on the bottom
1 minute trials
Repeated 5 times

Disclaimer:
Hyrule makes weird results because the game does not seem to interpret "altitude" very well. It's obvious more biased left and right, but can't land them on the top floor or bottom floor accurately. Thus, my next test will be on a Custom Stage of max size and only a flat platform.

Results: Only a mere 10% of all spawned items landed in the middle. The rest landed within a short dash reach of the character, minus the climbing that might be involved due to height. I am testing on more controlled level to confirm if altitude makes a difference.

 

[D1]

Vegas woulda been awesome...ohhh well.

 

[darkatma]

just wondering has anyone quoted Forward's match at them?
because that's pretty solid video proof of some item screwiness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VBTJe-nXyY

 

[BigRick]

Vegas woulda been awesome...ohhh well.

wtf...

seriously you dont need video games to have fun at vegas lol

 

[SamuraiPanda]

So basically, if what Timmay is saying is correct, then AlphaZ was right about stage control all along. The entire idea of "stage control" coveted by item-enthusiasts means one simple thing: Keep winning. There is no more depth to that concept. The person who is winning at the time will have the easiest access to items on the stage. There is no "controlling" your opponent, just knocking them off the stage (the very concept of Smash) to give yourself enough time to grab an item. So its a system that rewards winners for winning. They may have tried balance that out with a potential bias for spawning near the loser (although we still have to prove it), which is totally against the very spirit of competition, and even gives the loser an advantage in regards to items sometimes.

All-in-all, this item system seems like it was designed with the very idea of trying to keep the players as even as possible unless there is an enormous gap between their skill (meaning the winner is always knocking around the loser so he couldn't even grab an item if he wanted).

 

[thesage]

just wondering has anyone quoted Forward's match at them?
because that's pretty solid video proof of some item screwiness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VBTJe-nXyY

Holy ****ing ****. WTF. Here I was thinking that hot head was lame and it gets to farken ko's. LOL. His 2nd KO could've been avoided but the first one was just ********.

Timmy, how much of a lead are you giving the other player? I already knew the game had problems "seeing" stuff vertically (vs. comps in brinstar depths lol). But the items still spawn right next to the player? Lol. That means there is no stage control and it's basically who gets the best item first. In fact these results encourage playing defensively as you only want to get the spawns that are close to you.

Edit: guys don't post this on SRK until we actually have an argument on this. All they're going to say right now is that it gives players an even chance to get items. I mean there's an obvious rebuttal to that (but what happens if one player get a better item over another) but they won't accept it.

 

[FishkeeperTimmay!]

Okay, new data set in:

The Stage:
Largest Map Size
Basic Blocks accross the entire bottom, nothing else

First Trial:
Items on medium (all trials done this way)
Franklin Badge only (ditto)
Sticker Ignored (also done on all my trials)
2 Marios on opposite side, 2 blocks in
1 minute trials
Repeated 5 times

Second Trial:
Ditto, but made player 1 stand in the middle

Third Trial:
Ditto, but added a second floor about halfway up to test altitude

Fourth Trial:
Exactly like Trial 1, with a second floor.


Results:
Altitude is not factored in when spawning. The game has always been baised left and right, but not up and down while I'm testing. Its almost as if altitude is randomly decided based on the number of "layers" in the level. This will cause interesting things to happen with items on stages like Luigi's Mansion and Delfino Plaza at Evo.

At any rate, the game is heavily biased on trying to make items land near players. Thus, the Stage Control theory is BUNK. You only have a superior advantage with getting items when your opponent is off the stage, which is an unnecessary and unfair advantage.

Though, I didn't test ANYTHING regarding having an advantage/disadvantage. Both Marios had 3 stocks, and 0% in all my trials. This is assuming both players are currently equal. That could vastly change things in other trials.

 

[itsameSMB]

I seriously don't see why everyone is getting so worked up over this. So EVO does their tournaments one way. Good (or bad, as the case may be) for them, but last I checked, EVO isn't the law. In fact, I hadn't ever heard of EVO before this rule ordeal (casual player, what do you expect?), but I've see many tournaments (seen not been to) and heard about many more. I mean, sure their a big name in competative fighting game, err, competition, but does that mean everyone has to follow their ruleset? No, it doesn't. Yuna, you're a tourament director, aren't you (rhetorical question)? That means you host your own tourneys and make your own rules. Sure, you can base it off the rules of others, but at the end of the day, you are still the one running the tournament. That's why I find all this complaining about the ruleset (as laughable as it may be) to be, well, futile.

 

[Furbs]

I seriously don't see why everyone is getting so worked up over this. So EVO does their tournaments one way. Good (or bad, as the case may be) for them, but last I checked, EVO isn't the law. In fact, I hadn't ever heard of EVO before this rule ordeal (casual player, what do you expect?), but I've see many tournaments (seen not been to) and heard about many more. I mean, sure their a big name in competative fighting game, err, competition, but does that mean everyone has to follow their ruleset? No, it doesn't. Yuna, you're a tourament director, aren't you (rhetorical question)? That means you host your own tourneys and make your own rules. Sure, you can base it off the rules of others, but at the end of the day, you are still the one running the tournament. That's why I find all this complaining about the ruleset (as laughable as it may be) to be, well, futile.

people aren't mad because they think evo's rules will be law, they're mad that wizard is basically ****ing on the smash community. he obviously doesn't care about the turnout, and he obviously doesn't want smash to be in evo as seen in the AIM chat that was posted between him and DMbrandon.

people are mad that evo is really the first BIG name brawl tournament and that its directors are trying as hard as they can to mess it up =/

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I find it funny that this was posted on SRK. And it was locked after wobbles posted. Before they could see any more research. Good going SRK =/

 

[thesage]

he obviously doesn't care about the turnout, and he obviously doesn't want smash to be in evo as seen in the AIM chat that was posted between him and DMbrandon.

AIM chat posted whar?

people are mad that evo is really the first BIG name brawl tournament and that its directors are trying as hard as they can to mess it up =/

Aren't there other big tournaments at the beginning of June?

 

[EnigmaticCam]

Yes, I'd like to see this AIM chat too

 

[Rebel581]

Yes, I'd like to see this AIM chat too

May I third this?

 

[Scamp]

I still find this research interesting.

Again, did you guys leave the items on the stage after they spawned, or did you throw them off? I think this makes a difference.

 

[Nintendude]

Yes, I'd like to see this AIM chat too

AIM chat:
http://allisbrawl.com/forum/topic.aspx?id=10999

 

[Inui]

Mr. Wizard is pretty homo. I met him on two occassions and he clearly doesn't give a crap about Smash. He didn't even touch Smash at EVO East and someone else did it all. Even that guy got lazy and just let ChuDat do the seeding and other people do stuff.

 

[polarity]

people are mad that evo is really the first BIG name brawl tournament and that its directors are trying as hard as they can to mess it up =/

Evo is the first major for Brawl with items, a totally different game from no items Brawl, which you've chosen to display no interest in.

You might as well be complaining that they're running 3rd Strike instead of no items Brawl - the fact that items-on Brawl is at Evo is about as relevant as 3rd Strike being there to you guys. Evo clearly isn't interested in running your game this year. You aren't being snubbed any more than the Guilty Gear players are, yet they for the most part dealt with it maturely, while you guys ***** incessantly and take it out on other games which have nothing to do with you (items on Brawl).

 

[EnigmaticCam]

Evo clearly isn't interested in running your game this year

Indeed, you are correct. They are more interested in having something more along the lines of a Mario Party tournament. Are you willing to shell out traveling costs to go to a Mario Party tournament?

I know I'm not, and I know I'm not the only one.

 

[Rebel581]

Have you read the conversations? They have clearly told us to **** off. The Guilty Gear players got snubbed because they didn't run their tournament correctly last year. We made a good impression, and got invited back. We got invited back to be kicked in the nuts. I WISH they had kept Guilty Gear. It deserves that spot more than items Brawl. Hell, it deserves it more than no-items Brawl.

The situations are different. They aren't trying to destroy Guilty Gear's image of a competitive game. They are attempting to get any big name Brawl players to not care about this tournament, and show a lackluster performance at this year's Evo.

 

[Yuna]

If items spawn closer to the losing player, isn't that a good thing to all you guys whining about how 'campy' Brawl is? The player who's winning sure as hell can't camp any more...

Resolving a great (if annoying) tactic but having a stupid and broken gameplay mechanic interfere = Not cool

Wobbles the Phoenix: The point is that you cannot control what will spawn where or when, you can only guess around when an item will spawn. A Smash Ball might spawn ideally for me during the 15% of the game where I have stage control and only useless items for you during the 50% during which you do.

The fact that the loser might get more items if both players' current stage control is equal is also bad. Why not do a test where the loser has current stage control and see if the momentum switches drastically (as in the losers getting a lot more items than the winner when he had Stage Control)? This proves that even with superior Stage Control, the loser side still has an advantage when it comes to item spawns.

I find it funny that this was posted on SRK. And it was locked after wobbles posted. Before they could see any more research. Good going SRK =/

What? More evidence that MrWizard and other mods at SRK are clearly super-biased and don't care what people who disagree with items being on, especially SWF:ers, say, even when it's valid and irrefutable evidence? How unexpected!

He's read my 2nd PM now, by the way. COUM is still not banned.

 

[thesage]

Evo is the first major for Brawl with items, a totally different game from no items Brawl, which you've chosen to display no interest in.

Evo is going to be the first serious tournament with this game (items on brawl). How many IRL tournaments have there been? 2? What was their attendance? I find it weird that Mr. Wizard questioned dmbrandon's credentials after he beat M2K at a 18 person tournament, when he's hosting a brawl items tournament based off of a handful of similar sized tournaments.

I don't understand why the evo staff choose a game hardly anybody plays. If they view it as a different game, why should the rest of the smash community come if it's not even a game they play or are interested in. The only people from the smash community that are coming are those going for the easy money. Is that how a "major" tournament should be viewed as, a source of easy money?

You might as well be complaining that they're running 3rd Strike instead of no items Brawl - the fact that items-on Brawl is at Evo is about as relevant as 3rd Strike being there to you guys.

Would you be pissed off if you favorite fighter was snubbed for a mario party-like game to be put in? I would not care if 3rd Strike got in over smash as 3rd Strike has an actual competitive community. What does kind of community does brawl w/ items on have?

Evo clearly isn't interested in running your game this year. You aren't being snubbed any more than the Guilty Gear players are, yet they for the most part dealt with it maturely, while you guys ***** incessantly and take it out on other games which have nothing to do with you (items on Brawl).

So you want us to host a tournament for no items brawl at evo just to show we're mature? Plus we get to enter the items on tourney?!?!?

The majority of this community would prefer a major tourney with brawl, melee, and 64 tournaments instead of playing with items. And unlike most other fighter communities, we can actually host a tournament that size ourselves.


Sidenote: I don't hate SRK. I don't care about SRK or other fighters as I don't play them or am good at them.

 

[iankobe]

EVO is stupid enough to let Mr. Wizard to set the rules anyway.

Why would we even go to a tournament that is hosted by an organization that has no respect whatsoever for Brawl anyway?!

SCREW EVO. They can suck my big popsicle.