The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[Deleted member]

I'd like to know why Snake is still allowed to use Up Tilt against my Jigglypuff please.

What does this have to do with D3 using an infinite on DK and other characters?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The infinite decreases DK's viability.

Snake's up tilt decreases Jigglypuff's viability.

There is no reason to objectively treat an infinite differently to any other strategy or tactic in this situation.

 

[Jimmyfosho]

Didn't know jiggs had viability in the first place

 

[Grim Tuesday]

She is definitely mid tier in terms of match-ups. It's just that no one uses her and the people who do, don't plank.

 

[Deleted member]

Unless Snakes Up-tilt is going lock Jigglypuff(lol) and take her to whatever percent he wants to, that's a bad argument.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

@ BPC

double edit:

Im not letting this drop LOL who is ghostbone and where is any response to my post LOL

Either ghostbone or Grim Tuesday (the guy below). I always mix those two up. You know, the guy who made the big-*** refutation to that post?

I'd like to know why Snake is still allowed to use Up Tilt against my Jigglypuff please.

K, on a theoretical level, you may be right–now make a functional rule, then demonstrate that you're right. Your rule makes a character who is hardly competitive anyways slightly less ****ty in a matchup that is still ridiculously bad, with a rule that cannot be effectively implemented without replay hacks and will probably lead to a bunch of unintentional DQs. On a practical level this fails completely.

 

[Orion*]

Err... no, not every counter-pick is littered with abusable, skill-less gimmicks.

Well tbqh every stage has some but others have more than some ._.

so I still don't see how youre relating it to a problem in the ruleset unless you want to play on like ultra conservative stages like FD only or something.

No matter what you do theres gonna be gay **** its just at what point do you draw the line and say chill- and thats honestly whats the difference between everyones opinion imo.

What do you mean?

Pro banners have a habit a lot of times of arguing **** that doesnt help the current metagame, and argue for rulesets that many times would be okay if MK was banned. However the problem is that he isnt, and unless he is its just either

A. wasting a lot of peoples time arguing that crap over salt

or

B. unrealistic to get people to budge because even if the ruleset proposed is a good idea, in actual play it wouldnt work out for the fun/good of the community tournament wise

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yeah, I thought the "ban MK" movement died with M2K at MLG DC and APEX 2011. GIVE UP. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

 

[Orion*]

She is definitely mid tier in terms of match-ups. It's just that no one uses her and the people who do, don't plank.

LGL..............................

please dont assume everyone uses the rules that are going on in that head of yours because they arent. and if youre proposing she is mid tier with one you are absolutely out of your mind LOL

Either ghostbone or Grim Tuesday (the guy below). I always mix those two up. You know, the guy who made the big-*** refutation to that post?

There was no large refutation

we argued about something on a completely different tangent lol

K, on a theoretical level, you may be right–now make a functional rule, then demonstrate that you're right. Your rule makes a character who is hardly competitive anyways slightly less ****ty in a matchup that is still ridiculously bad, with a rule that cannot be effectively implemented without replay hacks and will probably lead to a bunch of unintentional DQs. On a practical level this fails completely.

I agree with this though

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Unless Snakes Up-tilt is going lock Jigglypuff(lol) and take her to whatever percent he wants to, that's a bad argument.

I already said that there is no reason to treat the Up Tilt and infinites differently in this discussion, and you've yet to give a reason why I should.

Either ghostbone or Grim Tuesday (the guy below). I always mix those two up. You know, the guy who made the big-*** refutation to that post?

It was me.

K, on a theoretical level, you may be right–now make a functional rule, then demonstrate that you're right. Your rule makes a character who is hardly competitive anyways slightly less ****ty in a matchup that is still ridiculously bad, with a rule that cannot be effectively implemented without replay hacks and will probably lead to a bunch of unintentional DQs. On a practical level this fails completely.

Firstly, Jigglypuff is not hardly competitive. I can tell you right now that D3 vs. DK is still ridiculously bad without the infinite, and the rule can be implemented just fine.

Why are replay hacks necessary for the Up Tilt rule and not for the infinite rule? It's pretty obvious when Snake hits with up tilt, especially if people are watching (which they almost always will be). If you accidentally hit Puff with Up Tilt, that is your fault for making a mistake (it won't happen often at the highest level of play, I can guarantee that).

If we are going to talk about the practicality of rules, I'd like to point out that an infinite ban does absolutely nothing, as DK can move forward 1 frame with each grab.

a rule that cannot be effectively implemented without replay hacks. On a practical level this fails completely.

Thanks for putting it so well.

LGL..............................

please dont assume everyone uses the rules that are going on in that head of yours because they arent. and if youre proposing she is mid tier with one you are absolutely out of your mind LOL

I'm not suggesting she is mid tier with a ledge-grab limit.

But considering that a global LGL is stupid and that many tournaments don't have one, I have no reason to care about her placing with one.

The reason I am pro-ban is that I believe he is broken without a ledge-grab limit and that a ledge-grab limit is anti-competitive.

When I make rule-sets and stage-lists, I always assume MK is legal unless stated otherwise. I have also never made a move to push my view on the subject. So your wrong in this case basically, Orion xD

 

[Deleted member]

I already said that there is no reason to treat the Up Tilt and infinites differently in this discussion, and you've yet to give a reason why I should.

Last I checked, compared to infinites on other characters, up-tilt isn't a guaranteed stock on Jigglypuff at low percents.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

So...?

The strength of the tactic is irrelevant, the only thing that matters (in this discussion) is whether it increases depth overall by banning it. Which is definitely the case.

 

[Browny]

it probably kills her at like 40% from halberd platform

 

[Jimmyfosho]

iirc ddd vs dk without the infinite isn't that bad. Or atleast not as bad as you believe

 

[Grim Tuesday]

My mistake then Jimmy.

 

[John12346]

Snake's Utilt doesn't kill Jigglybutt when he hits her with it at 0%. Dedede's grab DOES kill DK when he lands it at any percent. If that helps analogy-wise.

Also does difficulty barrier play any factor in this?

Yeah, I thought the "ban MK" movement died with M2K at MLG DC and APEX 2011. GIVE UP. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

>___>;

Viridian City 9.

'Nuff said.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I already explained why percentage/effectiveness is unimportant in this discussion, John.

 

[John12346]

Well, I say it is important?

Percentage/effectiveness and difficulty barrier should definitely play some kind of role in this scenario, imo.

Dedede can kill DK off the very first move he lands on him. The grab itself is insanely easy to use and land due to DK's lack of disjoint, and of course the infinite to 300% + Bthrow is simple enough to perform and will finish him off.

IC infinites may have a similar effect, but when you consider how hard it is to keep Nana nearby, how bad the IC's shield and grab range are, and how they are significantly harder to do than Dedede's infinites, it becomes apparent why these are still fine to keep around in the game.

Snake's Utilt doesn't murder anyone off the very first hit, plus I would think that, since the move does 17(?)% instead of 300%, plus it doesn't kill until 60-80(in Jigglybutt's case)%, AND the move can be shielded, it's not quite as big of a threat, since Snake at least has to work for it.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Except I'm not trying to say that the move affects Puff's viability as much as D3's infinites affect DK's, I am only making the comparison that they both affect their viability adversely.

Seeing as that is the only comparison I am making (at the moment), THAT is why I keep saying that the effectiveness of the tactics is irrelevant. I'm not saying they are both equally bad, I am saying they are both bad.

 

[John12346]

So what exactly is so bad about double standards?

Dedede's infinites on DK threaten DK's viability as a character FAR WORSE than Snake's Utilt threatens Jiggly's viability. Shouldn't that mean something?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I'm getting to that, but I'd like BPC to address my current point first, which is: "Why should we differentiate between these two depth-increasing rules?"

If his answer is the same as yours, John, I'll move on from there. Otherwise I'll refute both the point you brought up (about how much the rule affects the match-up) and whatever BPC comes up with.

Savvy?

 

[John12346]

Uh sure.

I'm kinda neutralish on this subject; just calling them as I see them, is all.

 

[Tesh]

MK threatens viability of characters. Ban MK? Tornado is easy to use so......

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Screw waiting for BPC's response, he isn't even lurking.

Basically, John, you have admitted that we have to create a subjective line between rules that add a large amount of depth to the game and those that add a low amount. Firstly, this means that I cannot be called "wrong" for believing that infinites should stay legal and that the LGL should not exist, as you are not arguing for something objective.

Secondly, to this I would like to pose a few questions:
1. Why should we introduce this subjectivity if we can avoid this with little to no negative effects to the game competitively?

and

2. What stops me from suggesting several different rules and claiming that the overall depth they bring to the table is equivalent to or surpasses that of the infinite? You could bring up that this would unnecessarily clutter the ruleset, but I could say the exact same thing about the introduction of both the LGL and the infinite ban in the first place.

 

[Yikarur]

I'm getting to that, but I'd like BPC to address my current point first, which is: "Why should we differentiate between these two depth-increasing rules?"

Savvy?

you can't be serious, the difference is so clear, if you argue against it your just stubborn and addicted to argue. Your comparison is bad and you should feel bad for saying that (BPCs former favorite sentence <3)

Taking 1/3 of your stocks by one touch is not comparable with doing damage with an ordinary attack.

I'm Con-Ban for infinites though but your argument was just bad.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Yikarur, I'd prefer if you read this post before calling me stubborn, addicted to arguing, and calling out my comparison/argument as bad.

Try again.

It's amazing how many people think that me making a comparison means that I am saying two different things are exactly the same.

 

[Deleted member]

Yikarur, I'd prefer if you read this post before calling me stubborn, addicted to arguing, and calling out my comparison/argument as bad.

Try again.

It's amazing how many people think that me making a comparison means that I am saying two different things are exactly the same.

It's just the fact that the comparison that you're making is indeed just bad. It's not affecting Jigglypuff's viability near the amount that infinites affect other characters.

Yikarur isn't wrong in his post at all.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

It's just the fact that the comparison that you're making is indeed just bad. It's not affecting Jiglypuff's viability near the amount that infinites affect other characters.

Yikarur isn't wrong in his post at all.

And at no point did I claim that it does. You people did read that post, right?

The one where I explained that I was only comparing that they affect depth adversely, not that they affect depth by similar amounts?

 

[Deleted member]

We're not SAYING that you said that.

We're SAYING to find a better comparison. lol

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Why do I need to find a better comparison when the one that I made works just fine?

Unless you are trying to tell me that you believe that banning Snake's up tilt against Jigglypuff won't make her slightly more viable?

 

[Deleted member]

Honestly, the argument is just irrelevant. If Snake couldn't use his up-tilt, then his MU's with the entire cast would suffer. HE would move down. I couldn't see Jigglypuff getting that much of a boost because Snake isn't her only problem.

Edit: And now you're going to post below me that she still would be more viable. This argument is pointless.

 

[Yikarur]

since when is banning a move an increament of depth?
Dededes Infinite does make a whole character useless.
Snake's uptilt doesn't but if you think it does re-learn the game, the game is not that simple.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Honestly, the argument is just irrelevant. If Snake couldn't use his up-tilt, then his MU's with the entire cast would suffer. HE would move down. I couldn't see Jigglypuff getting that much of a boost because Snake isn't her only problem.

Edit: And now you're going to post below me that she still would be more viable. This argument is pointless.

I wasn't the one who started this pointless argument.

I made a perfectly legitimate statement (Banning Up Tilt against Puff would increase her viability) to help further my argument (I used the Puff comparison to show that the only distinction that can be made is how much they effect the game depth-wise. Which is subjective, so I cannot be called objectively wrong for not agreeing with a LGL or an infinite ban).

Then you misinterpreted the point of my Puff argument and we have gone off on this pointless tangent because of it.

since when is banning a move an increament of depth?
Dededes Infinite does make a whole character useless.
Snake's uptilt doesn't but if you think it does re-learn the game, the game is not that simple.

It doesn't make Jigglypuff useless, you're right.

Again I stress the increasingly obvious (by now) point that the amount of viability gained had NOTHING to do with that comparison and the point I was trying to make.

 

[Alex Strife]

I will be using the typical EC rules with D3 and Marth Standing chain-grabs banned.

I try to look at things in a more GREATER GOOD whole as opposed to what is truly "fair".

We can all argue and theorize what is legal and fair but we are not a community that have the game created for tournaments as SF or MVC is. We made the rules and with that we have to live with the fact that we have to balance what is great for the community and the casuals.

Many TOs are about the numbers and not about improving the event itself. Very few realize how many tools we have as a community to get things better. That is something we need to focus on more and not the rules. We can have people who run events everyday in the back room but that does not mean they do not improve the community and help to change things.

We need to step up and work on that as this is so insignificant to the bigger picture.

 

[Deleted member]

I will be using the typical EC rules with D3 and Marth Standing chain-grabs banned.

I try to look at things in a more GREATER GOOD whole as opposed to what is truly "fair".

We can all argue and theorize what is legal and fair but we are not a community that have the game created for tournaments as SF or MVC is. We made the rules and with that we have to live with the fact that we have to balance what is great for the community and the casuals.

Many TOs are about the numbers and not about improving the event itself. Very few realize how many tools we have as a community to get things better. That is something we need to focus on more and not the rules. We can have people who run events everyday in the back room but that does not mean they do not improve the community and help to change things.

We need to step up and work on that as this is so insignificant to the bigger picture.

I agree with this completely. Nice post.

 

[clowsui]

let me get this straight

it's acceptable to ban infinites and reduce potential character diversity because banning infinites won't increase character diversity at all, it will just create more MK mains because he's the best CP vs DDD/other bad MUs?

is that the big picture we're referring to? i'm just making sure we're very clear on this. my statement sounds biased but that's because i don't know a different way to word it >__>

edit: like when you don't ban infinites theoretically it SHOULD increase character diversity because people will pick up characters that do better vs D3...but this is obviously a problem if there's a best option that covers many characters, not just d3 lol

 

[Alex Strife]

I never knew using MK was a bad thing...its just a fact of games. You learn the match-up or you dont. People need to just accept it.

I ran tournaments using that ruleset and , far as I know, I never had issues.

edit: its not like a d3 cannot do well without it.

 

[clowsui]

i didn't say using MK is a bad thing lol, i'm just not sure of the big picture you're talking about. YES we want more people in this community, YES we want to keep the scene alive, but i don't see how banning infinites is part of this plan for expansion (sorry if it's obvious).

also you KNOW that saying a d3 main can do well without infinites is not a fair statement to make, lol...in that case we may as well just remove falco's ability to CG because he can do well w/out it

 

[Deleted member]

i didn't say using MK is a bad thing lol, i'm just not sure of the big picture you're talking about. YES we want more people in this community, YES we want to keep the scene alive, but i don't see how banning infinites is part of this plan for expansion (sorry if it's obvious).

also you KNOW that saying a d3 main can do well without infinites is not a fair statement to make, lol...in that case we may as well just remove falco's ability to CG because he can do well w/out it

Not everybody wants to play MK. Look at his point about balancing what is great for both the community and the casuals. How do you pull a casual into the tournament scene when they enter a tournament for the first time, only the see their character losing a game just because there's nothing they can do against an infinite.

They may not come back.

Also, at your second point, how does it feel to be playing a character that does well in the MU, only to be completely shut down because of an infinite? It works both ways, but it's more of a severe repercussion in my opinion.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Doesn't DK have zero-death on Ness/Lucas?