The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[Conviction]

Maharba, that rule is horrible. You just said that MK can now plank ICs with no LGL because they have an infinite on him.

Hey a lot least you didn't get blown off Mystic.

Why are so many people's self made rules so bad?

 

[Life]

Out of curiosity, do IC desynced blocks do anything to a planking MK?

 

[Tesh]

Maharba may of gone in the wrong direction with it, but there is a double standard with LGLs and infinites. Infinites have been banned at times to increase attendance, make matchups look less boring, and avoid forcing ness/dk mains off of their character to have a shot at winning. Universal LGL is not doing the same thing. NO ONE has universally unbeatable planking except MK (arguably). Lets assume Olimar absolutely CANNOT land hits on DK while he is planking (which was proven to be wrong). Big deal, bad matchup. Its 1 simple thing that destroys an otherwise winnable matchup, just like PT vs Ness or DDD vs DK or even Sheik v Ganondorf. Both are pretty boring to watch (planking is less boring to watch though).

Are we saying its okay to tell DK/Ness mains to go play a better character?

Why can't we tell Olimar mains to do that vs DK?

Or Ganon mains against Pit?

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

i knew that would be the first thing everyone would point out. but like MK aside, honestly would that be so bad? and besides ICs already lose to MK so that's not really the issue. it was for the character who gets a negative MU due to the infinite/ already has the bad match up. MK already wins the MU so it doesn't really apply when you actually look at how i worded it.

but anyways the real point is what tesh pointed out, it is BS to have no lgl but have infinites. both planking and infinites should be legal or neither should be legal. that's really all im trying to say. the made up rule was just trying to find a rational solution to an irrational problem

 

[Life]

The thing is, infinites are defeatable, just don't get grabbed. Planking is roughly equivalent to circle camping (for MK) OR actually weaker than infinites (for everybody else).

 

[Tesh]

Saying that ICs already lose to MK doesn't help your case. Why ban infinites then? DDD already beast Samus, Bowser and DK solidly without it. Marth beats Ness and Lucas solidly. If anything Ness grab release only shifts matchups out of his favor against low tiers or mid tiers like Pokemon Trainer (charizard and squirtle **** him).

Also I think infinites should all be legal. As I pointed out, chaingrabs aren't the only simple tool that can shift a matchup greatly. Look at MKs tornado, or Sheik's chain or ftilt. Consider how MKs planking would be beatable if we just said "hey, don't use up air like that". Snake Uptilt or grenades? Falco's lasers?

 

[Orion*]

Maharba, that rule is horrible. You just said that MK can now plank ICs with no LGL because they have an infinite on him.

Ice Climbers deserve to get planked though

Real talk

 

[Tesh]

Olimar also deserves to get planked.

 

[Conviction]

*insert anyone's not like character* deserves to get planked.

I would say MK but MK can only plank MK.

 

[Tagxy]

Can someone explain to me why walk-off stages are banned that doesnt involve an overpowered character?

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Can someone explain to me why walk-off stages are banned that doesnt involve an overpowered character?

1) Gain % lead

2) Camp by stage boundary

3) Shield grab opponent

4) Free KO with Bthrow

5) Repeat x2

That's the general idea as far as I know it. Sure, that wouldn't work against every character, but it works against enough that it would be over centralizing.

 

[Life]

Walkoff camping is high-risk high-reward, but in Smash defense wins out (especially in Brawl) more often than not so it becomes overpowering.

CG kills are also cited but aren't nearly as much a problem.

 

[Tin Man]

To be honest, I think that the most productive thing at this point is not "replace FD with PS1" or something like that, I think it's "Add PS1 and CS/DP/whatever to the starter list". FD (or more precisely, the FD/SV/BF combination) simply isn't as big of an issue with 7 starters. And the more starters you get, the more valid "just strike it" becomes to any "standouts" like CS or PS2... Or, in fact, FD. The question of "what's the 7th starter" remains open, sure, but I think just saying "we're going to upgrade to 7" and then figuring out the details is best. Even if you won't place PS2 as a starter, CS is really very balanced (when was the last time you saw it counterpicked in a tournament set? I think DDD even usually goes for FD over CS!), and Delfino provides a nice counterpiece to stages like FD and SV in most matchups.

Actually yes, I have seen Castle Siege get counterpicked many times. Its very important for Olimar. Even Razer used it vs ADHD. It offers a good advantage for Olimar in most matchups. I know which charaters do well there and which don't

Olimar also deserves to get planked.

 

[Blacknight99923]

ice climbers like Castle siege vs falco.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Firstly, to the people who think that "neutral" stages should be synonymous with static stages... Why do you believe that the first match should be played on a static stage while dynamics are fine for any later matches?

I'll base my next post off of the answer to this question.

I'm not done reading the thread yet, and I like the ruleset, but I wanted to just say tat this is possibly the best post I've ever seen from BPC, and I LIKE FD as a neutral (and I play Marth/MK)

Definitely agree.

*All Infinites are Legal*

*SD Moves Goes by game*

Good so far.

*LGL 35 MK 50 Everyone Else*

NO ONE ELSE NEEDS A LEDGE-GRAB LIMIT.

If I had a dollar for every double standard a global LGL introduces I'd be a very rich man.

*Pictochat Legality*

*PS2 is legal?*

Yay.

*Rainbow Cruise or Brinstar, Can't have Both?*

Two stage bans is very obviously the best option.

*FD as a starter?*

If people won't accept this ruleset due to FD being a CP, then too bad, they don't get a sticky. We shouldn't try and cater for people's warped and wrong opinions, we should try and shape them so they are correct. Doing otherwise is just as scrubby as banning Ike's fsmash because noobs find it hard to avoid.

Because both tactics are gay? That isn't fair IMO.

The difference is that D3 infinite CGing DK is an effective way to end the match by putting him into kill range, land a kill, etc. DK planking D3 doesn't force D3 to take on damage and end the match.

It may force D3 to approach if he doesn't have the percent lead, but say he doesn't and DK planks for 185 ledge grabs. Do you find it fair that the DK won the match by time-out instead of taking stocks? IMO, it isn't.

Another interesting use of the LGL rule is to limit stalling maneuvers. D3 isn't forced to approach DK outside of percentage lead, which becomes second priority to LGL once DK hits the limit. DK isn't forced to approach D3 either, especially when the field is in D3's favor, but is when he hits his LGL.

Thank god we don't craft rulesets based on YOUR OPINION.

Hypothetical analysis time!

What if there was no LGL and this scenario occurred? D3 is on stage, DK is planking with the percentage lead. Neither player wants to approach the other. Who is the "staller?"

Herp a derp, that's not what stalling is. They are both camping, a legitimate tactic. Stalling is doing something which only has the purpose of wasting time and doesn't net any advantage other than that, for example:

Using Jigglypuff's ledge-cancelled Up B while the opponent is waking up puts them back to sleep. This can be done infinitely and serves no purpose other than wasting time.

Planking is just making it hard for the opponent to approach you. You aren't wasting time necessarily, you are just trying to keep your lead by playing defensively.

I completely agree. I tend to stop arguing with "brawl gen" people because simply because they just dont have the EXPERIENCE.In general, All they know is BRAWL or 08 melee(aka everyone moved on to brawl and doesnt care about melee). They sit there and form these HUGE essay with fancy words and "logical this" and "logical that" and it looks REALLY REALLY good(and thats how they get their supporters because people naturally follow "smart" people) but at the end of the day what they say works just ON PAPER and almost NEVER in game. They also sit there and try to tell you whats "fair/unfair" "logical/illogical" "neutral/counterpick" "broken/not broken" and to be honest, the definitions of those terms were set back in melee but since they dont like that or dont wanna admit they suck/are wrong/******** they just decide to rewrite these terms into what THEY want. You cant win with these people. ROFL.

Then you have the people like inui(no offense)/dmbrandon(is that the same guy as diem?) and other people who literally wake up in the morning, eat a bowl of wheaties and make it a "GOAL OF THE DAY" to find something to complain about and look like total poop scoops just so they can feel like a hero or feel noticed or maybe even feel like they are worth something(i dont know or care, they are messed up either way). These people will always be a thorn in your side but since you cant drive to their house and ram a butcher knife in their eye you just gotta carry on and do whats right regardless of what they say. Thats pretty much what i have done for over 7 years.

tl;dr
"RAH RAH BACK IN MY DAY PEOPLE DIDN'T CARE ABOUT STAGES OR RULESETS AND NOW THEY DO AND I'M GETTING CALLED OUT BECAUSE I AM BAD AT MAKING THEM RAH RAH"

Two, Matchups are all theory craft. We should not base a ruleset around theory craft.

In which case we can just use tournament results, data and statistics... Which will tell you basically the same thing as match-ups and AREN'T theorycraft.

Im kinda in the middle about this, but overall I see no problems lol. It really does give mk an easy *** time though I have to be honest. Like everything that seemed more even I just get 6:4s (game one... lets not even go on after that lol)

LOL at delfino being balanced with metaknight in the game.

We shouldn't be trying to balance the game with our rule-sets, too many double standards.

My honest reply to this is... does it really matter though. >_>
Its not like you see those characters winning tournaments that often in American let alone EU metagame. Youre trying to balance something that isnt even broken

Just because it isn't broken doesn't mean that it can't be better.

Okay, let's drop the "nerf MK argument." I apologize for bringing it up.

I'm not defining any norm. I'm stressing the idea of "as balanced as possible." Aerial combat isn't shut down on FD. You see plenty of Aerial combat from the likes of MK/Marth and others on this stage.

Can you really argue the same for ground combat on RC and Brinstar? The entirety of RC is forcing you to move into the air. Brinstar has similar elements: extreme lack of permanent ground space (due to hazards). I'm not going to delve into straight floor and tilted floor because it would complicate the topic and I'm sure someone would bring YI's, a starter stage, into this. So let's not delve into that yet. I think my first reason is strong enough to separate FD from these two stages.

Just address my argument of how FD doesn't limit aerial combat, it just doesn't favor it, but RC and Brinstar limit ground combat and thus should stay as counterpicks compared to FD's starter status.

Err... whether a stage is aerial-based, ground-based, limiting, whatever should have NO affect on it's status as a starter. The only thing that matters is match-ups.

Walkoff camping is high-risk high-reward, but in Smash defense wins out (especially in Brawl) more often than not so it becomes overpowering.

CG kills are also cited but aren't nearly as much a problem.

No... Defense doesn't win out especially in Brawl, it wins out only in Brawl. Walk-offs are balanced in both Melee and Smash 64.

 

[Claff]

The unity ruleset is really dumb imo. Not even gonna bother posting any reasons.

 

[Lord Chair]

Discriminating people with 'only' 3 years of Smash experience out of the discussion is ********.

Even agreeing to that to a small degree is stupid.

It's like, totally ignoring whatever other experiences with game design, or hell whatever ability to think rationally someone has.

Then again, there's enough Smashers whose understanding of the game doesn't even remotely represent the years of experience they have. Not going to give names.

 

[Life]

No... Defense doesn't win out especially in Brawl, it wins out only in Brawl. Walk-offs are balanced in both Melee and Smash 64.

IDK about 64, but Melee's rulesets (AFAIK) do not reflect this. The balance is closer in those two games (remember that 64 is the game for which "don't get hit" was coined), but defense wins.

Actually, defense wins all fighting games. You know why we have a timer (besides keeping the tournament shorter)? To force somebody (the losing player) to approach. If offense were truly greater than defense, a timer would not be needed as players would gladly approach each other.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Players do gladly approach each other in Melee, barring a few match-ups on a few stages. The timer is specifically for those match-ups.

And saying that the game is defensive because that's what the Melee rule-set reflects is the equivalent of me saying that Brawl must be very static and bland by looking at a conservative stage list.

 

[Life]

*links the vid of Chibo's (or am I thinking of somebody else?) Jiggs nearly timing out a Falco by hanging on FD's ledge for roughly 7'45"*

Also, people in Brawl (us) are pushing for more stages. Nobody in Melee (again, AFAIK) is arguing in favor of walkoffs. (And even this ruleset isn't THAT bland--Delfino and CS and ESPECIALLY Picto come to mind)

....how'd we get into this discussion in this thread again?

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

by making fun of my idea

 

[Supreme Dirt]

Melee is actually more balanced on Static stages. Add in RC and PS for the characters who really badly need them, and it's fine. In Melee, low tiers fare much better on static stages.

In Brawl, the imbalance is to such a degree that for the sake of character diversity we need more stages. I'd really rather the game not end up being just MK vs. MK. Melee would very likely quickly degenerate to that with an expanded stagelist (except with Fox, and the odd Peach on Mute City). However, Brawl is an ENTIRELY different game. It is very projectile oriented, for starters. The only top tiers without projectiles, Wario and Metaknight, both happen to have extremely strong air games.

I don't have the time to finish this post, I got distracted, came back, and couldn't remember where I was going with this.

 

[Life]

SD: don't forget Marth.

 

[Overswarm]

*links the vid of Chibo's (or am I thinking of somebody else?) Jiggs nearly timing out a Falco by hanging on FD's ledge for roughly 7'45"*

Rolleyes.jpg

 

[Life]

Rolleyes.jpg

He'd have done it but he screwed up at the very end and got hit by a laser. Before that it was 0-0 both ways IIRC.

Though I suspect I'm missing the point.

 

[AlphaZealot]

The fact that Xyro is considered a pillar of the community is honestly kind of depressing. I mean, it could be worse, we could be listening to M2K, but still... kinda sucks.

HOBO 1 (41 Entrants)
HOBO 2 (63 Entrants)
HOBO 3 (43 Entrants)
HOBO 4 (81 Entrants)
HOBO 5 (83 Entrants)
HOBO 6 (27 Entrants)
HOBO 7 (36 Entrants)
HOBO 8 (88 Entrants)
HOBO 9 (45 Entrants)
HOBO 10 (110 Entrants)
HOBO 11 (113 Entrants)
HOBO 12 (59 Entrants)
HOBO 13 (36 Entrants)
HOBO 14 (54 Entrants)
HOBO 15 (51 Entrants)
HOBO 16 (73 Entrants)
HOBO 17 (100 Entrants)
HOBO 18 (80 Entrants)
HOBO 19 (71 Entrants)
HOBO 20 (40 Entrants)
HOBO 21 (47 Entrants)
HOBO 22 (41 Entrants)
HOBO 23 (38 Entrants)
HOBO 24 (40 Entrants)
HOBO 25 (62 Entrants)
HOBO 26 (43 Entrants)
HOBO 27 (49 Entrants)
HOBO 28 (64 Entrants)
HOBO 29 (35 Entrants)
HOBO 30 (32 Entrants)

QuakeCon 2010 (123 Entrants)

World HOBO 1 (140 Entrants)
World HOBO 2 (107 Entrants)
World HOBO 3 (139 Entrants)

.
..
...

Is it really such a shame to have a consistent tournament host who has held among the most events for the community and who constantly adapts his tournaments and works with his scene? Xyro is not very politically correct with how he posts, but I'm going to let actions speak way louder than words here (he has held a massive six [maybe seven if you count Quakecom] tournaments with 100+ attendance, I believe a record for Brawl tournaments for a single TO). Also there was truth in his statement (if you can read between the lines a bit), there are a lot of people who will write entire essays that revolve little around reality.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

EDIT: this is just going to make more of an *** of myself

 

[Alphicans]

Ok yeah Xyro has held a ton of tournaments that all appear to be really successful. I am not going to say he isn't a successful tournament host, but at the same time I am not gonna say he's successful because he's a fantastic TO. The region he lives in has really good players and also has a lot of players. This could explain by OoS people want to come (large and skillful player base). A ruleset doesn't attract people, and honestly it never really drives people away. If the tournament is guaranteed good players and a lot of them, it will succeed.

EDIT: by fantastic I meant his rule set. He's probably very catering to players, and makes the tournament experience great (another reason why he might get large attendance).

 

[Nidtendofreak]

^His MK banned tournament got a few people from northern states to come down just to play in a MK free tournament, so the "ruleset doesn't attract people" is kinda wrong.

 

[Hylian]

Xyro hosts some of the most enjoyable tournaments I've ever been to, and I've been going to smash tournaments since 2003. He really knows what he is doing and makes the tournaments great for everyone and is by far one of the best TO's. I hardly agree with anything he says online but that doesn't matter much when it comes to the tournaments he hosts.

 

[Alphicans]

^His MK banned tournament got a few people from northern states to come down just to play in a MK free tournament, so the "ruleset doesn't attract people" is kinda wrong.

You kind of have a point, but if I hosted tournaments in Alberta Canada that had MK banned, do you think people would come? We're probably closer to the northern states than texas so why not?

And keep in mind I am not bashing Xyro, and it's quite obvious he's a good TO. But should being able to host enjoyable tournaments (things that aren't related to rulesets) give him the chance to influence a rule set that will affect the entire nation?

Lol erik. Ok change Alberta Canada to a ****ty US state.

 

[ErikG]

You kind of have a point, but if I hosted tournaments in Alberta Canada that had MK banned, do you think people would come? We're probably closer to the northern states than texas so why not?

Passports

 

[Blacknight99923]

Passports

pretty much this.

Despite teh distance being closer the international boundary is a mental block that makes people think "farther"

 

[Alphicans]

Read my edit.

Also I am not trying to single out Xyro, my statements can be applied to all of the members of the BBR-RC.

 

[Orion*]

EDIT: ****ing live topic not working. Will respond to orion's post shortly.

Since youre taking this long it either means

A. you dont have an answer that you can just simply and logically give. which means I will have to read some bull**** wall of text

or B.

you dont have an answer and youre going to just forget lmao

Firstly, to the people who think that "neutral" stages should be synonymous with static stages... Why do you believe that the first match should be played on a static stage while dynamics are fine for any later matches?

A. Static stages generally have more even matchups (bar, ps2 but that stage hasnt even been around enough for me to believe that lol)
B. Gotta be honest, static stages require you to actually outskill your opponent LOL

NO ONE ELSE NEEDS A LEDGE-GRAB LIMIT.

Even if that was correct, and you managed to prove that it was true with data, which I havent seen. It still isn't healthy for the game, and if you actually cared about the community you would understand that.

We shouldn't try and cater for people's warped and wrong opinions, we should try and shape them so they are correct. Doing otherwise is just as scrubby as banning Ike's fsmash because noobs find it hard to avoid.

People that think like that are always a problem

Thank god we don't craft rulesets based on YOUR OPINION.

Or yours... or anyones singular. Its a group opinion generally.

Planking is just making it hard for the opponent to approach you. You aren't wasting time necessarily, you are just trying to keep your lead by playing defensively.

Yeah... coming from someone who planks. It's to run the timer LOOLOLOLOOLOLOL

In which case we can just use tournament results, data and statistics... Which will tell you basically the same thing as match-ups and AREN'T theorycraft.

well... I dont really know how much tournament experience you have but. Generally there are a LOT of factors that go into a tournament match.

Even worse that doesnt show the relative SKILL level of the players involved. Believe it or not that matters!

We shouldn't be trying to balance the game with our rule-sets, too many double standards.

That doesnt give anyone an excuse to make it worse lol

Just because it isn't broken doesn't mean that it can't be better.

So its better to give the characters that already win tournaments MORE of an advantage? Sounds like youre definitely making a better metagame lol

Err... whether a stage is aerial-based, ground-based, limiting, whatever should have NO affect on it's status as a starter. The only thing that matters is match-ups.

again... MUs are subjective.

However, if that was the case then I would actually ask all the "theory craft kids" to just leave the convo since none of you should be talking about playing the actual game anyway.

Rolleyes.jpg

this

He'd have done it but he screwed up at the very end and got hit by a laser. Before that it was 0-0 both ways IIRC.

Though I suspect I'm missing the point.

You did lol

Ok yeah Xyro has held a ton of tournaments that all appear to be really successful. I am not going to say he isn't a successful tournament host, but at the same time I am not gonna say he's successful because he's a fantastic TO. The region he lives in has really good players and also has a lot of players. This could explain by OoS people want to come (large and skillful player base). A ruleset doesn't attract people, and honestly it never really drives people away. If the tournament is guaranteed good players and a lot of them, it will succeed.

EDIT: by fantastic I meant his rule set. He's probably very catering to players, and makes the tournament experience great (another reason why he might get large attendance).

Na chill nobody goes to tournaments JUST for the players if the host is booty. Im sure Xyro is a **** host and I have never been to TX

 

[Alphicans]

^ That's kind of my point. Xyro is probably a fantastic tournament host, but the BBR-RC is about making good rule sets, and I personally don't think that just because you're good at being a good person means you should decide what the whole country will use as a rule set basically.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

So...I'ma basically just state basic reasonings on a couple of things that are being debated (It's funny because non BBRRC people are arguing with non BBRRC people, somewhat humorous to me)

STARTER STAGES!

We have made the starter list 5 stages as opposed to 7 or 9 because honestly, it doesn't make that much of a difference. In the typical ICs/Falco/Diddy scenario, you have FD, SV, and BF as starters. In a 7 stage list, you are going to (probably) add PS1 and Castle Siege (Maybe halberd instead of Castle). So...you went from having their best 3 to...their best 5? Sweet, that totally makes a huge diff-Oh wait it doesn't. That basically converted me to 5 starter.

Brinstar/RC both being legal.

Honestly, I have no idea what even brought on this topic. This was the general trend ALL OF BRAWL until, what, the Apex stagelist was released and he did that SOLELY FOR OOC COMPETITORS WHO AREN'T USED TO THE STAGES!!!! He didn't do it because they were both unfair/made MK too powerful, he just wanted the stage list to seem more appealing on people coming from overseas that simply weren't used to the stages, basically the same as the japanese getting 2 bans or whatever he did (I honestly don't remember the rule).

Anyway, to discuss the actual reasoning...RC/Brinstar are very aerial based stages, obviously. This just so happens to be the best type of stage for the best character: Metaknight. However, there are stages that do this for the opposite type of character: Grounded characters. FD/SV/Pictochat are characters like Diddys/Falcos/ICs strong stages, and they are synonomous to RC/Brinstar for MK. If you ban either RC/Brinstar, you must also limit the grounded stages, even though there are infinitely more of them (SV, FD, BF, Castle, Pictochat, PS1/2).

Um...I haven't read the whole thread so if you have any other questions just ask.

 

[WindMajor]

Brinstar/RC both being legal.

Honestly, I have no idea what even brought on this topic. This was the general trend ALL OF BRAWL until, what, the Apex stagelist was released and he did that SOLELY FOR OOC COMPETITORS WHO AREN'T USED TO THE STAGES!!!! He didn't do it because they were both unfair/made MK too powerful, he just wanted the stage list to seem more appealing on people coming from overseas that simply weren't used to the stages, basically the same as the japanese getting 2 bans or whatever he did (I honestly don't remember the rule).

Anyway, to discuss the actual reasoning...RC/Brinstar are very aerial based stages, obviously. This just so happens to be the best type of stage for the best character: Metaknight. However, there are stages that do this for the opposite type of character: Grounded characters. FD/SV/Pictochat are characters like Diddys/Falcos/ICs strong stages, and they are synonomous to RC/Brinstar for MK. If you ban either RC/Brinstar, you must also limit the grounded stages, even though there are infinitely more of them (SV, FD, BF, Castle, Pictochat, PS1/2).

I just want to say that I very much agree with this.

STARTER STAGES!

We have made the starter list 5 stages as opposed to 7 or 9 because honestly, it doesn't make that much of a difference. In the typical ICs/Falco/Diddy scenario, you have FD, SV, and BF as starters. In a 7 stage list, you are going to (probably) add PS1 and Castle Siege (Maybe halberd instead of Castle). So...you went from having their best 3 to...their best 5? Sweet, that totally makes a huge diff-Oh wait it doesn't. That basically converted me to 5 starter.

But I don't agree with this.

ESAM probably already knows the reasons why though, so I won't waste his time.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

A. Static stages generally have more even matchups (bar, ps2 but that stage hasnt even been around enough for me to believe that lol)

So you're saying that you don't want static stages as neutrals, you want neutral stages as neutrals and you believe that static stages are generally more neutral than dynamic ones?

Final Destination quite obviously doesn't fit the bill.

B. Gotta be honest, static stages require you to actually outskill your opponent LOL

Maybe this is the case if you are only considering hardcore counter-picks, but if I bring up PS2 or Delfino, both stages that require a wide range of diverse skills that no static stage provides, why would you disagree?

Even if that was correct, and you managed to prove that it was true with data, which I havent seen. It still isn't healthy for the game, and if you actually cared about the community you would understand that.

That's not how the burden of proof works. It's your job to prove that what I said is incorrect (as I am arguing for the game's default).

Besides that, the data is pretty obvious. Why is it that Donkey Kong, Samus and Jigglypuff don't win tournaments if there planking is so broken?

It isn't a matter of being healthy for the game, if you are going to introduce this rule to surgically limit a legit strategy that you don't like, I'd suggest also introducing a "No Blizzard against Ganondorf rule". Oh, also no Up Tilt against Jigglypuff, no Tornado against Donkey Kong, etc...

Give me a good reason why a planking nerf is fine to improve diversity of play and balance, yet none of those are?

People that think like that are always a problem

What? Thinking in a way which will help the community in the long run? You realize how a metagame works right? Someone discovers a powerful tactic, someone else discovers a tactic to counter it, etc... If we just go around banning things with no justification the metagame won't develop properly and we'll be left with a less skill-based game.

Or yours... or anyones singular. Its a group opinion generally.

...Okay?

Yeah... coming from someone who planks. It's to run the timer LOOLOLOLOOLOLOL

Good job missing the point. I said that it isn't necessarily used to run the timer. You can't prove that people are planking just for a time-out, so you can't discretely ban it. However if it was something like Jigglypuff's sing lock, that serves no purpose other than to run the timer.

The way of telling if something is stalling or not is asking yourself "Would people still do it if time wasn't a factor?".

well... I dont really know how much tournament experience you have but. Generally there are a LOT of factors that go into a tournament match.

Even worse that doesnt show the relative SKILL level of the players involved. Believe it or not that matters!

Alright, let's say your right and it is impossible to objectively determine match-ups. It is now completely pointless to create a starter list, as the main point of it (even ground for game 1) is impossible to determine.

So... we would just end up striking from every legal stage, basically.

That doesnt give anyone an excuse to make it worse lol

Err, we aren't making it worse, we are keeping it how it is. If you think that is already bad, play a different game.

So its better to give the characters that already win tournaments MORE of an advantage? Sounds like youre definitely making a better metagame lol

I've already explained why surgically balancing the game is dumb.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Twinkie, please outline the reasons so that I dont' have to sift through the pages. People have different reasons.