Rewarding stalling tactics with the way time-out are currently handled are not MK specific and aren't limited to planking.
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
The Official BBR Tier List v4 -> Sonic's HA Stall is NOT beaten by spot dodge!!!!!!!!
- Thread starter Shaya
- Start date
- Status
Supermodel From Paris
Smash Hero
This. Plus, I haven't actually limited anything, just changed the way time-outs are handled (which has multiple ramifications).Rewarding stalling tactics with the way time-out are currently handled are not MK specific and aren't limited to planking.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,860
I see what you mean.
Supermodel From Paris
Smash Hero
If you'd been reading the thread or my posts in the past at all you'd know that:
1. I think the best solution is banning Meta Knight.
2. Barring a Meta Knight ban, the best solution is to simply limit his ledge grabs and his ledge grabs alone.
3. I believe a global LGL is a pretty scrubby rule because it affects multiple characters that aren't imbalanced when interacting with the ledge.
4. I don't have a problem with the way we handle time-outs and believe it to be the best solution we could reasonably ask for, but recognize that it isn't a perfect solution and believe a better one might exist. The problem with this "better" solution is that it would probably involve a time-breaking coin match, and no one wants to play those; thus it is not ideal.
So yes, all of my posts on the subject have been made with the understanding that the rule we have is not likely to change, not is there any reason to believe it should as long as there is a MK-specific LGL in place.
1. I think the best solution is banning Meta Knight.
2. Barring a Meta Knight ban, the best solution is to simply limit his ledge grabs and his ledge grabs alone.
3. I believe a global LGL is a pretty scrubby rule because it affects multiple characters that aren't imbalanced when interacting with the ledge.
4. I don't have a problem with the way we handle time-outs and believe it to be the best solution we could reasonably ask for, but recognize that it isn't a perfect solution and believe a better one might exist. The problem with this "better" solution is that it would probably involve a time-breaking coin match, and no one wants to play those; thus it is not ideal.
So yes, all of my posts on the subject have been made with the understanding that the rule we have is not likely to change, not is there any reason to believe it should as long as there is a MK-specific LGL in place.
Because it arbitrarily buffs character that have the ability to make themselves unattackable for some time via planking [MK, GW, Pit, Marth, ...], scrooging [Pit, MK] or other tactics that are obviously "stalling" but not easily definable as such.
If MK has 99% and Snake has 100% the scenario is clearly in Snake's favour. The option to simply plank until the time runs out gives Meta Knight an unnatural advantage that he doesn't have per se - it comes with the solution to decide the winner of a match by percent.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,860
If you don't agree with an inferior rule you're playing the devil's advocate for, then don't expect me to not argue against it. :/
And I agree with the principle of all these points.
Let me elaborate on my question.Because it arbitrarily buffs character that have the ability to make themselves unattackable for some time via planking [MK, GW, Pit, Marth, ...], scrooging [Pit, MK] or other tactics that are obviously "stalling" but not easily definable as such.
If MK has 99% and Snake has 100% the scenario is clearly in Snake's favour. The option to simply plank until the time runs out gives Meta Knight an unnatural advantage that he doesn't have per se - it comes with the solution to decide the winner of a match by percent.
All of the rules we've set into place outside of the way Sakurai initially intended the game to be played both indirectly and somewhat arbitrarily nerf and buff just about every character- every single rule. So what makes an alteration of the way we've dealt with timeouts for a very long time more important than changing all of the other rules we traditionally use?- for example, number of stocks, time limit, banning of items, etc.
In my opinion, it's not important that we change the rules about what to do in case of a timeout. Nothing has warranted a change of the original rules the competitive brawl community set for this instance in case it happened.
And yes, the original ruling about timeouts was somewhat arbitrary when it was first set in place, but so was every other rule that could have been used instead. It was impossible to make completely objective rules about it. And we were forced to start somewhere, though, as I really doubt anyone thought this game could have been very competitive had absolutely nothing been changed.
-----
That said, I suppose one could argue that we should assume we're dealing with the game when it first came out, (and perhaps a lot of people are assuming this already.) to settle arguments similar to the one below.
"This proposed rule is an arbitrary nerf to X."
"Well, those rules we set in the first place were arbitrary. Why can't this one be arbitrary as well?"
My answer to this:
By arbitrarily changing the rules about a particular tactic or character after the original ruleset came out, we're changing a lot more than just the rules. We're also arbitrarily changing it's players. By doing this we're potentially telling people that have already spent time with those characters or strategies, "you just wasted all your time" with arbitrary reasons for forcing this on them.
I can tell you right now that doing this (arbitrarily nerfing characters and tactics) after this game has been out for as long as it has is not going to make this game's tournament scene flourish. It's going to do just the opposite.
Poltergust
Smash Master
What, is no one else going to comment on my referee idea? =/
Orion*
Smash Researcher
this will never happen because a lot of players that are pro ban would rather just have no LGL, or not restrict it to metaknight so they have more excuses to ban him.
"if we have to make a rule just for him, surgical nerf scrubetplayerfreedet blah blah blah wall of text "
in all honesty im kinda split on the ban, metaknight is clearly stupid as hell. but im not sure by how much yet ._.
but its very unlikely that he will ever get banned anyway and making him better at this point is just dumb.
it kind of makes me sad that most of pro ban has temporarily abandoned efforts to get MK banned and instead has done everything possible to make him more overpowered than before
like, I could see banning him as things were, but really, distant planet guys? you really needed to go there? SMFH
thankfully NO ONE is using those rules anyway lol, fission mailed pro-ban portion of the BBR
like, I could see banning him as things were, but really, distant planet guys? you really needed to go there? SMFH
thankfully NO ONE is using those rules anyway lol, fission mailed pro-ban portion of the BBR
Supermodel From Paris
Smash Hero
According to Crow's (amazing) statistics post (which is a little old now, but still pretty close, I'd guess) Meta Knight is as much as 3 times as good as Snake and 15 times as good as Marth.
So that's how much. Is that too good?
Ripple
ᗣᗣᗣᗣ ᗧ·····•·····
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,632
off topic anyway
you do not (or rather, not supposed to) ban stages because 1 character is "broken" on that stage. MK is very flexible and has a lot of good stages but you do not ban them because he is the best character in the game and possibly the best on that stage. I applaud the BBr for their stage list since they only added like 3-4 stages anyway
on topic.
DK can kill anyone in 6-9 hits. thoughts?
Luxor
Smash Champion
Actually, if one character or group of characters is so powerful as to be outright broken/extremely overcentralizing and near impossible to defeat without choosing the character(s) who do well there, the stage is bannable by BBR criteria. I'm good with having lots of "janky" stages legal, but RC and Brinstar are iffy just because they're so powerful for MK. I can't remember a time when any top MK lost on either of those, except for M2K against ADHD that one time.
on topic.
Ganon can win a match in 5 hits. Although not in ruleset 3.1...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1T5HM1-_Zw
X beat M2K on Rainbow Cruise with Sonic too.
Those stages aren't autowin, its just the best legal stages for the best character in the game. So, ofcourse you can expect a tough time.
X beat M2K on Rainbow Cruise with Sonic too.
Those stages aren't autowin, its just the best legal stages for the best character in the game. So, ofcourse you can expect a tough time.
Orion*
Smash Researcher
its a wall of text that that *****s over analyze sooo much -.-
Supermodel From Paris
Smash Hero
What kind of data do you want? That's as close as we're ever going to get to being able to get. Are you waiting for something to happen that makes you feel MK is "too good" in your gut or something? Because that's pretty worthless, sorry.
"OK MK just won 7 nationals in a row he's too good now" isn't a very accurate sample nor is "OK, I've done some thinking and MK's X and Y combined are just too good so that's what I think now" isn't very convincing either, and then we'd still have people claiming it wasn't good enough. So what do you want?
D
Deleted member
Guest
.
Graphs do not accurate character analysis make.
Graphs do not accurate character analysis make.
Luxor
Smash Champion
If we can't trust numbers, we can't trust anything.
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
Lol @ RBrown gettin' mad at Raleigh.
D
Deleted member
Guest
Tournament results are numbers.
You cant analyze a character only through frame data, and thats a fact
Orion*
Smash Researcher
its very obvious you can beat people better than you by using mk sometimes, because tbh thats how all tiers work. x character has more tools than y char, he wins z matchup, ect
other than perfect planking, which tbh i Still havent seen a tournament won by even with no ledge grab limit (and thats coming from me LOL) i dont really see proof that hes broken. i just see Ridiculous overuse because hes easy to use, and hes obviously the best
there are two reasons that keep me from being pro ban is
1) despite me Feeling that hes broken so far i havent seen proof of it, and ive gone and tried to brake him as much as i can in tournament.
2) most of the people i see arguing pro ban are honestly people that havent put in enough hours into the game or the character for me to give a **** about their opinion. they just look at tournament results or w.e and its like yeah you havent experienced any of this :/
demonictoonlink
Smash Master
Luxor
Smash Champion
Ganonciding was still typically accpeted as a win condition. Even now most people accept it.
Of course the game's just for lols, why do you think Ally didn't even bother trying to recover?
Oh, and @burntsocks, tournament data/Crow's data were the numbers I'm referring to. I'm sure you could somehow combine all a character's frame data/advantage data/hitbubbles/kb/trajectories/attributes and come up with a reasonable quantitative analysis of a character, but that's not what I meant in context. I was more or less just agreeing with SFP.
Of course the game's just for lols, why do you think Ally didn't even bother trying to recover?
Oh, and @burntsocks, tournament data/Crow's data were the numbers I'm referring to. I'm sure you could somehow combine all a character's frame data/advantage data/hitbubbles/kb/trajectories/attributes and come up with a reasonable quantitative analysis of a character, but that's not what I meant in context. I was more or less just agreeing with SFP.
Luxor
Smash Champion
Dee Em Genius right here.
Blacknight99923
Smash Champion
watch he is going to sig that.
And MK is stats wise broken. His OoS options alone compared to other characters are just so much better
Nefarious B
Smash Champion
Marth is just slightly worse than MK at everything OOS, except maybe better grab range? But yeah, both have a dragon punch, though MK's is safer (it's still not really safe), both have good fast nairs to cover their entire area, quick drop shield ground options (DB and dtilt or ftilt for MK), and Marth has fair as well.
I duno how you wouldn't consider Diddy's OOS options **** as well though, his punish radius is just enormous from shield, and his grab and fair/bair are good too.
So assuming Raleigh is going to be considered for the tier list, well...Nick/5th/DEHF/evenwithaDQ. Or are we still not convinced?
I'm pretty sure Florida trains on 2 frame laggy tvs.
Supermodel From Paris
Smash Hero
Nefarious, placing well at a single national isn't good enough! Or two nationals! Or three nationals! Or four nationals! Or placing top 3 in Florida for several months! Or proving a match-up thought as unwinnable is actually... winnable! Having a match-up spread arguably no worse than 4/6 isn't good enough either.
None of that matters because I my gut tells me that ZSS isn't a good character. Nick Riddle is just amazing. Stats be ****ed, my instincts and vague colloquial notions of character quality are what's important here.
- Status