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!
That's true, but there are plenty of melee characters have the capability to time out without that.I'd like that
@F A N G: Melee doesn't have characters that have 6 jumps + a glide
At what event? All of them, or Dallas?Less than one percent of the games at MLG went to time.
Metaknight's capacity for timing out players in the set Brawl timer now is very high, and not even stage-dependent. If you are satisfied with Metaknight's time-out wins ending with both players having two stocks (my argument for time refers mostly to Metaknight), then you can have a problem with this idea, but otherwise, I feel his air abilities are quite abusive.That's true, but there are plenty of melee characters have the capability to time out without that.
I'm not even sure what's being argued here this is what I've seen in this thread:
Time-outs are undesirable > There's nothing wrong with time-outs > Melee and Brawl should have different timers because they're different paced games.
What's the argument for more time?
No, I agree with an extra minute or two to the current timer, but I don't agree with the "melee is a faster game, so brawl needs to have a different timer"At what event? All of them, or Dallas?
Metaknight's capacity for timing out players in the set Brawl timer now is very high, and not even stage-dependent. If you are satisfied with Metaknight's time-out wins ending with both players having two stocks (my argument for time refers mostly to Metaknight), then you can have a problem with this idea, but otherwise, I feel his air abilities are quite abusive.
Oh, because of the relationship between moves and time within the games. For example, in melee, you could do more actions within a set of seconds than in brawl. Since brawl is slower, to get the same affect, we'd have tweak the timer a little bit longer. I don't see any melee recorded videos of timeouts at all, but there are multiple for brawl due to this bad transition. I can't believe until now the timer subject is being rediscussed by only one person.No, I agree with an extra minute or two to the current timer, but I don't agree with the "melrr is a faster game, so brawl needs to have a different timer"
There are different reasons
Ey Orion , smash soon?
Alternatively, you can make the matches shorter instead of making the timer longer.Oh, because of the relationship between moves and time within the games. For example, in melee, you could do more actions within a set of seconds than in brawl. Since brawl is slower, to get the same affect, we'd have tweak the timer a little bit longer.
Wednesday and Thursday I'm free :DEy Orion , smash soon?
Fernandez and me are not playing at all ;o
Well M2K has been saying forever to make the timer 10 minutes instead of 8. Just throwing that out there.add in the 10 minute timer and change nothing else and chances are no timeouts will happen, its too much work. Even if its 2 people camping the **** out of each other its hard enough to go to 8 minutes without some form of planking/air camping...let alone 10
shorter time makes less sense than adding more time...think about it. Like lets say we just take off a minute or two, all that does is make timeouts easier and more viable...its not hard to figure out
I feel like a large portion of the brawl community is lazy and would rather theorycraft all day than try something new, hence why none of the better ideas on here never get tried out or given a fair chance
quote me and be like hurrr nappy if you say its hard enough to hit 8 why does it matter? Because adding in the harmless 2 minutes just ensures time outs wont happen...except i'm sure m2k will find a way -_-
I have yet to see a logical answer to the following.
Why should the timer be increased to 10 minutes, when overall, less than 1% of all matches resulted in a time out.
If timeouts are obviously not a problem, why are we attempting to remove them again?
In fact, I have some ideas.
1. In the event a match goes to time, the person with the least "cheap" character will automatically win the set.
This ensures matches go by quickly, and we do not have to endure dreaded time outs since someone is playing cheap.
2. In the event a match goes to time, both players will proceed to take turns slapping each other. The first to quit loses the set.
3. Ban Metaknight.
Now before everyone goes "WOMG MK BANNER"
My defense is, If the community is willing to place a ledgegrab limit upon the MK player, despite the fact there is no clear and easy method of keeping track of the number of ledge grabs, then it is being unreasonable to the MK player as well as his opponent who cannot be expected to keep track.
My second defense to this is similar to the first If the community is willing to go to such drastic measures, then one might as well ban the character
My third and best defense is Stop being stupid, time outs aren't an issue int he first place, so why try to nerf something that isn't even an issue in the first place? Oh wait unless you are Meatknight.
tl;dr: I say we go with option 2. It's funny, people will cheer, and its just as intelligent as an lgl.
To enforce rule number 1 I suggest we make a tier list of "cheapness." The BBR has work to do!!!I have yet to see a logical answer to the following.
Why should the timer be increased to 10 minutes, when overall, less than 1% of all matches resulted in a time out.
If timeouts are obviously not a problem, why are we attempting to remove them again?
In fact, I have some ideas.
1. In the event a match goes to time, the person with the least "cheap" character will automatically win the set.
This ensures matches go by quickly, and we do not have to endure dreaded time outs since someone is playing cheap.
2. In the event a match goes to time, both players will proceed to take turns slapping each other. The first to quit loses the set.
3. Ban Metaknight.
Now before everyone goes "WOMG MK BANNER"
My defense is, If the community is willing to place a ledgegrab limit upon the MK player, despite the fact there is no clear and easy method of keeping track of the number of ledge grabs, then it is being unreasonable to the MK player as well as his opponent who cannot be expected to keep track.
My second defense to this is similar to the first If the community is willing to go to such drastic measures, then one might as well ban the character
My third and best defense is Stop being stupid, time outs aren't an issue int he first place, so why try to nerf something that isn't even an issue in the first place? Oh wait unless you are Meatknight.
tl;dr: I say we go with option 2. It's funny, people will cheer, and its just as intelligent as an lgl.
I participated in two of them (in the same set, too), and it wasn't because I was aiming for it. :/Less than one percent of the games at MLG went to time.
Probably, but, like san said, the fact that matches often end in the last ten seconds because one player has to put himself in a bad position in order to even have a chance to win due to losing toward the end probably means that the number of matches that were timed out is probably much higher than the data would suggest.Did they count quitting right before the time went out a time out?
No, we didn't. We didn't technically mark anything for "time-out," actually. I just manually added that data by checking to see if a game had both players with stock/percent remaining at the end of the game, and marking "yes" or "no" accordingly.Did they count quitting right before the time went out a time out?
I was about to say this. Every time the threat of time out is present it almost always results in a hasty and reckless approach. This can be the difference maker in a match.Numbers prove sooooooooooo much. M2K didn't time out Coney, but that match includes all of the problems being discussed here. Its not hard to find a match that WOULD go to time, if the person about to lose wasn't forced to rush down recklessly to try to do something.
Why does it surprise you that a character with a massive double jump, versatile projectile and insane aerial mobility can time characters out?I've timed out ALSM's Toon Link on FD... In friendlies. I'd be completely fine with atleast an extra minute, since even a character like Yoshi can time out some characters. Just half the time most of us would rather get the match over with rather than camp the entire match.
3. Ban Metaknight.
Now before everyone goes "WOMG MK BANNER"
My defense is, If the community is willing to place a ledgegrab limit upon the MK player, despite the fact there is no clear and easy method of keeping track of the number of ledge grabs, then it is being unreasonable to the MK player as well as his opponent who cannot be expected to keep track.
Smashboards:
this seriously happened to me when i clicked this thread
i think it means something
Like I said earlier:I seriously don't understand WHY people are bashing this idea. The above reasons are more towards WHY it needs to be happening. So many matches are getting TOO close to time. It shouldn't be like that. A player should feel like he is comfortable enough to approach the situation correctly and intelligently. Which isn't the case many times cuz of an 8 min melee standard timer...
Would be more interesting to know how many matches out of those reach 7 minutes.I was about to say this. Every time the threat of time out is present it almost always results in a hasty and reckless approach. This can be the difference maker in a match.