The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[Zankoku]

There are other - equally effective - ways to save time than restricting the timer to 8 minutes or use an unadequate time-out clause.
No other time out clause comes as close as an equivalent to the primariy win condition of this game [removing 3 stocks] than a rematch.

Then those are what should be discussed rather than rules implemented to prevent camping or, heaven forbid, "force approach."

 

[Kuro~]

I consider it a necessity at this point - of course that doesn't mean it's actually gonna happen but a raise of the time limit is long overdue. Tbh I think a lot of the pro-ban people just try to argue in favor of the status-quo because the current rule cater for MK so much [8 minutes = clearly too little, % time-out = favors damage rackers like MK] and will produce a constant wealth of result that "prove" that he should be banned.

But let's be real, what is the argument that makes an 8 minute timer better than 9 or 10 minutes? I could name plenty why the latter are better for Brawl tourneys. Things like the timer or the time-out rules are just too fundamental flaws of the ruleset and should be taken care of *long* before we even think about banning a character - we have been debating the ban of MK for 3 years but the really *simple* [and evidently benefitial] act of increasing the timer by a minute or two is too much asked for this community? Not to say that an increased timer will solve the issues the american metagame has but it's a really obvious flaw that's been left ignored for a long time.

Wow wdf gheb. You have some interesting views. Some i agree with. Some i don't. But how the hell can u generalize like this?

Pro-ban isn't against the status quo at all. most of pro ban WANTS an increased timer cuz it's RIGHT for the COMMUNITY. Even you should know within a given group of people. ANY group then there is different types among that group. Pro-ban only shares one universal view. That is the belief that having metaknight banned would be healthy for the community. Many of proban are open-minded and want what's is best for the community. We're not some salty little *****es that are doing our best to thwart anything that could prevent mk's ban or make him a fair fight.

So watch wdf u say cuz it's disrespectful as hell to generalize like that.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Kuro, I don't care about you. If you take it as a generalization blame yourself. Just because it doesn't apply to you doesn't mean in doesn't apply to a lot of pro-banners. I know a lot of these people that immediately try to shut down my suggestions for improving the rules because "they arbitrarily nerf MK just to make him less broken" - even though I can logically explain ANY suggested change without even needing to mention *any* character. But you know, a lot of pro-ban people *do* want to argue that way because it's convenient and the current rules just give them so much momentum and "power" [because they're "legitimized" by the BBR-RC now] that arguing in favor of the status quo is all they need to do from the position where they are at. But why do so few people question why they've even reached that position?

Then those are what should be discussed rather than rules implemented to prevent camping or, heaven forbid, "force approach."

Yeah, I'm not saying that I agree with Jebus, at least not with the how and the why of what he's arguing. But I think he has the right idea when it comes to the idea that it's time for a change in regards to the RULES.

Personally, I think the ruleset would improve by a LOT with the things I mentioned - you can increase the timer and still find perfectly acceptable ways to save time [Pool sets can be played with 4 stocks & 12 minutes / best of 1; loser bracket and side events can be ran with 2 stocks & 6 minutes except finals] and use the rematch as determining factor in case of a timeout.

If you look at the logic of it I don't even see how anybody can objectively call %-based timeouts superior to a rematch:
- The win condition of the rematch is EXACTLY the same as the primary wincon
- Using % as factor is arbitrary and ignores the fact that knockback infliction and resistance are key aspects of a stock
- Furthermore a rematch [and a 9 or 10 minute timer] makes stalling tactics that are hard to define or abuse grey-areas of the ruleset [planking, scrooging] become nearly - if not completely - fruitless, which cuts out a lot of the "arbitrary nerfs" against MK [which are actually just counter movements to the arbitrary *buffs* he receives from the current rules] that are implemented in the rules

I think 3 minutes for each stock should be the standard - what's even the rationale behind 3 stocks & 8 minutes?

 

[Zankoku]

I think 3 minutes for each stock should be the standard - what's even the rationale behind 3 stocks & 8 minutes?

Do you really want to know? It's not pretty.

 

[Cassio]

^is there more to it than a carryover from melee? If so Im curious.

Kuro, I don't care about you. If you take it as a generalization blame yourself. Just because it doesn't apply to you doesn't mean in doesn't apply to a lot of pro-banners. I know a lot of these people that immediately try to shut down my suggestions for improving the rules because "they arbitrarily nerf MK just to make him less broken" - even though I can logically explain ANY suggested change without even needing to mention *any* character. But you know, a lot of pro-ban people *do* want to argue that way because it's convenient and the current rules just give them so much momentum and "power" [because they're "legitimized" by the BBR-RC now] that arguing in favor of the status quo is all they need to do from the position where they are at. But why do so few people question why they've even reached that position?

This is 100% why the community will be broken if MK is ever 'banned'. Half the community will remove MK, lgls, add tons of levels etc. The other half will keep MK, increase the timer, remove certain stages etc.

 

[DMG]

Gheb you could have saved yourself a lot of time and just said Stock Rematch. That is the only acceptable alternative to the current rule. Everything else is either impractical or completely obviously worse.


As for the Pro Ban part, the way you said it was a generalization. Asking people not to interpret it as a generalization would require you to word it in a way that would not make it look like a blatant generalization. "Just because it doesn't apply to you, doesn't mean it refrains from applying to everyone else" AKA, generalization. Pro Ban (not people who have that belief, not a portion of Pro Ban, but simple "Pro Ban". Dunno how much broader you can get besides "everyone" when making a statement).


There are also Anti Ban players who shoot down your suggestions when they involved garbage stuff like ground time or air time limit. A lot of players on either side have been looking at stock and % combinations besides the status quo, for awhile now. Over a year and a half, maybe totaling 2 years even (not in a majority fashion, but when that idea first started gathering steam). Same thing with stages, LGL's/Scrooging rules/rules specifically for MK to keep him in the game, etc.


Personally I would move the game down to 2 stock 6 min. I think that's adequate in giving people time to adapt/come back from an SD/keep the game hype, while shortening set times and giving tournaments more breathing room (as well as attracting newer players easier). I'd also experiment with the stock rematch rule (although have the % win timeout rule apply after the rematch if time goes out yet again). I think that format would be better for the game regardless of your stances on LGL's/other MK rules, and how you feel about stages.


Jebus, your rules are ineffective and even worse than the current % timeout rule. Just cut it out. Air time rules punish people for doing more than actual stalling, and thus it's a worse rule than rules AIMED specifically at stalling. Being on the edge is bad, limit edge interaction. Being on the edge is bad, limit the amount of time you can be airborne. NOT the same thing at all and let's not pretend that's acceptable.

 

[Tesh]

Gheb, stop being so dense. People shoot down stupid ideas because they are stupid. I'm all for limiting MK to keep him in the game. Like DMG said, maybe you should just accept that the 08 TOs thought of all these stupid ideas before you and realized it was ****ing ********. Your ideas are just as dumb as Jebus. You are at least willing to admit your rules are aimed at MK and yet you want to blanket them over the entire cast. Lets just be reasonable and say "MK isnt allowed to do this, but everyone else is".

And its not like people are selfishly being against air time rules. As a sonic main, I basically automatically have lower ledge grabs and lower air time in most matchups and with stupid ideas like yours, I would win SIMPLY because of that.

 

[Vinylic.]

Why can't they just limit repeated moves?

 

[ぱみゅ]

Why can't they just limit repeated moves?

Because it can't be effectively enforced.

Also, would change a lot of things on the metagame (chaingrabs, walling, certain kind of projectyles or spacings... just too much to list).

 

[DMG]

I think he meant just specifics like limiting MK uair once you grab the edge or actions related to cutting down on stalling, not "you cannot regrab in a row with any character" or broad things like that.

 

[Vinylic.]

Yup. Even limit diddy's banana chain watchamacallit.

 

[DMG]

???

I see all the luigi icons

I understand now

 

[ぱみゅ]

If it were like you said, DMG, my first point would still be valid.
It's just impossible to enforce (and would be dumb, imo).

 

[Vinylic.]

I'm ashamed to be beaten by a nine year for constant B mashing.

At lest have limit of three for like, 4 minutes on this certain blasphemy.

 

[Zankoku]

Oddly enough the guys making Brawl might've seen an issue with repeatedly grabbing the ledge, but they only did enough to limit tethers and Ike's Aether.

 

[DMG]

They also purposefully made you have down time when you grab the edge, compared to Melee and 64 being instant or near instant that you can let go of the edge. AND they put a restraint on how quickly you could regrab the edge.

 

[Ghostbone]

But then they made the distance you could grab the ledge from massive >.>

 

[Zankoku]

AND they put a restraint on how quickly you could regrab the edge.

Can you elaborate on this part?

 

[DMG]

Sure. They purposefully made it so that you couldn't instantly regrab an edge after dropping off. Regardless of how long you stay on the edge.

Say you go to GG's. You grab the inner edge, drop down, and try to grab the lower edge. The game will not allow you to until a few frames after your invincibility run out (assuming you move off the edge instantly. If not, it's something like 30 frames after you have moved off the edge). It's why you can drop off the edge, drop down a bit, use Upb with a character like DK, and not grab the edge if you used it too soon/grab the edge only once you reach that frame threshold.

Same thing with Norfair and fast fallers. You can grab the top edge, let go and drift down to the next edge, and not grab it/not grab it immediately because of this restraint.

 

[Juushichi]

It's probably also the reason that Sheik can't vanish stall in this game, Ankoku. To give an example that applies directly to the character we main.

 

[Zankoku]

Sure. They purposefully made it so that you couldn't instantly regrab an edge after dropping off. Regardless of how long you stay on the edge.

Say you go to GG's. You grab the inner edge, drop down, and try to grab the lower edge. The game will not allow you to until a few frames after your invincibility run out (assuming you move off the edge instantly. If not, it's something like 30 frames after you have moved off the edge). It's why you can drop off the edge, drop down a bit, use Upb with a character like DK, and not grab the edge if you used it too soon/grab the edge only once you reach that frame threshold.

Same thing with Norfair and fast fallers. You can grab the top edge, let go and drift down to the next edge, and not grab it/not grab it immediately because of this restraint.

Wasn't aware of this, I'll take a look.

It's probably also the reason that Sheik can't vanish stall in this game, Ankoku. To give an example that applies directly to the character we main.

Incorrect, the reason Sheik can't Vanish stall is because her Vanish doesn't snap to a ledge when Sheik is invisible. Same with Zelda's Wind.

 

[Judo777]

Wasn't aware of this, I'll take a look.



Incorrect, the reason Sheik can't Vanish stall is because her Vanish doesn't snap to a ledge when Sheik is invisible. Same with Zelda's Wind.

Yea this is correct. But yea Ankoku I have noticed this before on certain things. IIRC if you do an ordinary ledge getup with sheik (below 100%) then immediately drop off and try to regrab the ledge you can't grab it because the game wont let you. I might be wrong on this specfic one but I know there is something like that where the game will NOT let you grab the ledge I have tried like a million times.

 

[BSP]

So, in regards to timeouts, didn't OS pull some MLG data and figure out timeouts were less than 1% of all matches, or something like that?

Even if they were, we can still change it. I haven't seen any amazing counters to adding a minute or two to our current timer.

 

[Ghostbone]

That data doesn't give the whole story.
Doesn't account for matches that end in the last minute or so because someone had to be majorly aggressive and got punished, causing the match to end.

Also iirc timeouts occur more often in high level play than lower level play, so that 1% is skewed by the large amount of matches which hardly matter. (for creating rules anyway)

 

[Tesh]

uh BSP, do you know what happens 9 out of 10 times when someone is going to be timed out? They rush you the **** down and do any reckless thing possible to try to land hits and they usually die. The most infamous stalling matches in recent time didn't actually go to time. Alot of people were mad about Bizkit vs M2K on RC but it didn't actually go to time. Coney vs M2K didn't actually go to time. That data is nice and all, but don't put so much weight on it.

 

[BSP]

Fair enough.

So what's against an additional minute or two?

 

[Tesh]

idc, but i dont think it fixes the problems in the metagame. it just makes it more torturous and the only real effect it has is psychological. some people will get bored stalling for the extra time, but you didnt actually fix the ruleset. if thats a legit way to make rules, then raise timer to 15 minutes and remove mks lgl, maybe they will get bored?

 

[Ghostbone]

Well with the amount of matches I've been in/seen that the game either timed out, or finished in the last few seconds or so, I think an extra minute or two would be the correct choice.

I just think 8 minutes is too little.

That's not to say timeouts won't occur with 9 or 10 minutes, just that they'll occur less, and pretty much only in matches where one player is aiming to time out, which is the point.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Air time rule does NOT punish people for jumping. That's a false knee-jerk conclusion that has been shown wrong time and time again - try it out with a 10 minute timer, there has yet to be an issue with it in what's actually have been played. If theorycrafting should be damned then it's in case of something you have *no* experience with it whatsoever and the air time rule is one of these things.

Ankoku, you have no idea how much time Snake actually spends in the air merely through recovering or getting juggled. Try to time out your opponent [9 or 10 minute timer] while spending less time in the air than him.

All right. The rule aims to stop timing out by making it so that if it goes to time, the player who spent more time in the air loses.
Problems:

1. Weakens a tactic that does not need or deserve to be weakened. You have about 1% of tournament matches that even go to time, and you want to weaken the only tactic that really conduces that? Yes, and while we're at it, ban ganon for absolutely no good reason. Timing out is a legitimate strategy that we have legitimized by turning on the timer. The only way to make it an illegitimate strategy is to turn off the timer. But we can't due to tournament time constraints, and we shouldn't because imagine what would happen if neither player was forced to approach, ever-it'd be a battle of wills, because approaching is an inherently disadvantaged position. You claim "brawl is about fighting, not running away!", but this is a completely subjective statement. We play to win here, and if you think your best chance of victory is jumping and spamming dair all day, then go ahead and do it. It clearly isn't game-breaking; ask anyone who's beaten a good MK.
2. Forces characters to run into ****. What do TL, Jiggs, Falco, and Samus, all have in common? They will spend most of the game in the air, can rack damage, but have trouble killing (well, falco is debatable, but scoring a safe kill with falco can be a tricky affair). Without this rule, these chars have the advantage that they can sit back and spam their projectile attacks/etc. from the air while running away. This is a part of their character design, and strengthens them. With this rule, sooner or later they have to jump in and kill you 3 times. And for some of them, this is really, really hard. Samus starts killing lightweights around 140%; jiggs closer to 200% if she doesn't want to use a move like Fsmash or Rest (both of which have ridiculous amounts of commitment and are ridiculously hard to hit a competent opponent with).
3. Is a surgical entrance to the game. You're telling the game, "Screw what you have to say, the winner is now *insert arbitrary criteria here*". That arbitrary criteria could be anything! Remember, you're not stopping a broken strategy. You're stopping something you don't like. At this point, you set the precedent to allow for anything. Hate ganon? Oh, all right, you can ban him. Hate FD? Fine, ban it. Wanna make the game "who can land the most falcon punches"? Fine, go ahead, let's make that the competitive standard. This is incredibly scrubby!
4. CAUSES NEW TIME-OUT "PROBLEMS"! Remember those chars I mentioned earlier? Well, what do all of these chars have in common: Snake, ICs, Diddy Kong. Can you guess it? They have obscenely good ground games, force approaches from the air, and are ridiculously hard to approach. Now if TL gets the lead on Snake, he can hang back and force snake to approach-a position that snake is fairly bad in. With this rule, if TL/ZSS/etc. gets the lead, who cares? Snake was on the ground longer, he'll live forever, and he stuffs approaches (which these chars need to kill him) extremely well. Furthermore, I might add that MK is amazing at juggling and edgeguarding and only decent at killing; plus he has a ********, approach-stuffing ground game.

In short, the rule is scrubby, sets the precedent to ban anything with 1% or more tournament dominance (or, alternatively, whatever the hell we want, which is even worse), creates a host of new problems, and destroys several matchups. It is a terrible rule that makes me ashamed to be a part of a community where some members support it.

That post is from about a year ago. Can we please stop discussing these ridiculous rules?

But let's be real, what is the argument that makes an 8 minute timer better than 9 or 10 minutes? I could name plenty why the latter are better for Brawl tourneys. Things like the timer or the time-out rules are just too fundamental flaws of the ruleset and should be taken care of *long* before we even think about banning a character - we have been debating the ban of MK for 3 years but the really *simple* [and evidently benefitial] act of increasing the timer by a minute or two is too much asked for this community? Not to say that an increased timer will solve the issues the american metagame has but it's a really obvious flaw that's been left ignored for a long time.

Hey gheb. 1 Stock, 3 minutes, Food on high, higher % wins. Suddenly stalling doesn't work because if you stall in any "broken" way, your opponent can collect food and suddenly you're no longer winning. Wouldn't even have to ban IDC!

I'm ashamed to be beaten by a nine year for constant B mashing.

Yes, I would be too. Man, you must be garbage.

 

[Tesh]

oh look BPC is back

 

[ADHD]

I just came in here to say 1% is alot.

 

[Tesh]

Kind of shameless to backup your beliefs with data you know is bull****, hoping that other people won't notice its bull****.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Food set on high is stupid. I am F-tilting and food spawns right in front of me. Now instead if F-tilting, I eat the food and get down smashed. It's too random and we want to remove as much randomness as possible

 

[Ghostbone]

Pretty sure you f-tilt and pick up the food at the same time

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Pretty sure you f-tilt and pick up the food at the same time

Nope. Tested it a long time ago when he first brought it up

 

[Tesh]

sorry bro, dont dash dont tilt

 

[SaveMeJebus]

sorry bro, dont dash dont tilt

How about instead you don't use a stupid rule

 

[Ghostbone]

Nope. Tested it a long time ago when he first brought it up

K, well that's annoying then.
how much lag does eating food have?

 

[SaveMeJebus]

K, well that's annoying then.
how much lag does eating food have?

Not alot but enough to cost players a match

 

[Tesh]

How about instead you don't use a stupid rule

thats funny coming from you