The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[Alphicans]

Tbh, that's how I always thought it was.

It makes sense. You're "banning" a stage, meaning that stage cannot be played in the set.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

That's how I always saw it as well.

 

[MK26]

meh, i figure the mindgames factor would be enough to throw the opponent off and get the upper hand

not that that scenario will happen with any level of frequency, but it might as well be left legal

 

[ぱみゅ]

I always tought you called your ban for the next game, not for the entire set...

 

[C.J.]

I always tought you called your ban for the next game, not for the entire set...

Well, seeing as there's only one ban per player, per set, and that some sets (WF, LF, GF) go longer than 3 games, that would mean that games 4/5 had no bans on them, which is very much so not the case.

Also, @ discussion, since you choose the stage before the character, you could just ask your opponent if you can CP there, then when he says yes because it's good stage for him in that MU, and stays the same character, then you change your character.
Soblem Prolved.

 

[T-block]

You should be allowed to CP to your own ban imo... I'm pretty sure I've actually done it before.

I play PT/Diddy. Ban FD against Marth as PT, CP FD when I switch to Diddy.

 

[Yikarur]

a beat'em up player once said to me

"Smash Community is so stupid, in every other game a character like MK would already be banned a long time ago, there are restriction on MK Only and a lot of areas adapt there stage list so that MK is less of a threat but he still have an infinite amount of advantage and is clearly a broken char even with a lot of limitations"


and imo if you really want to keep RC and Brinstar in, you need to ban MK sooner or later because I think the MK success ratio will rise more and more with the time.

we're waiting for the day where 100% of all players use MK and MKs winning ratio is 50% but MK will be so broken that his winning record would be 51% in that case!

 

[DRDN]

Whats the % of people using MK in the tournament scene?

 

[Kuares]

You should be allowed to CP to your own ban imo... I'm pretty sure I've actually done it before.

I play PT/Diddy. Ban FD against Marth as PT, CP FD when I switch to Diddy.

Eh that's pretty dumb. You make the other person think of not wasting there stage ban on a stage you banned and then back out on that decision. Good thing the second part of rule #8 is in place


Any Stage named as a "Stage Ban" by the either Team may not be selected.

 

[DRDN]

but that gives them essentially 2 stage bans when its their first time banning something

 

[T-block]

Eh that's pretty dumb. You make the other person think of not wasting there stage ban on a stage you banned and then back out on that decision. Good thing the second part of rule #8 is in place


Any Stage named as a "Stage Ban" by the either Team may not be selected.

That's a good point. Hadn't thought of that.

Guess I'll just see if they want to agree to the stage from now on.

 

[Kuares]

Now what I don't get is why the set procedure is so that stages are selected before characters in Counter-pick situations.

Say if I were playing Yoshi vs a Metaknight first round and wanting a counterpick, it'd likely be FD for chaingrabs. The way it's set right now allows for pocket characters to come in and take away any advantage a certain stage would have in that match-up.

It was my CP, and now I'm going up against a Falco, is it really my counterpick?

 

[MK26]

newest mk strat: ban brinstar so your opponent doesnt, then cp it.

damn, i never even thought of that

that would be ingenious

 

[T-block]

Now what I don't get is why the set procedure is so that stages are selected before characters in Counter-pick situations.

Say if I were playing Yoshi vs a Metaknight first round and wanting a counterpick, it'd likely be FD for chaingrabs. The way it's set right now allows for pocket characters to come in and take away any advantage a certain stage would have in that match-up.

It was my CP, and now I'm going up against a Falco, is it really my counterpick?

Suggest an alternative? Most other schemes offer extreme advantages, such that this is the lesser of evils.

UNLESS you user Dastrn's system =o

newest mk strat: ban brinstar so your opponent doesnt, then cp it.

damn, i never even thought of that

that would be ingenious

Haha. Too good.

 

[Yikarur]

what is dastrn's system?

 

[NickRiddle]

Now what I don't get is why the set procedure is so that stages are selected before characters in Counter-pick situations.

Say if I were playing Yoshi vs a Metaknight first round and wanting a counterpick, it'd likely be FD for chaingrabs. The way it's set right now allows for pocket characters to come in and take away any advantage a certain stage would have in that match-up.

It was my CP, and now I'm going up against a Falco, is it really my counterpick?

You see them go Falco, and you CP your ICs.
That's the theory.

 

[Kuares]

Dastrn's System? Dunno what that is. I know what I do for my tournaments is have a Counterpick proposal system used instead.

Basically it's my CP, we can both choose whatever characters we want, but once it's on the Stage select screen there's no changes. At this point I say a stage and the opponent agrees or disagrees. If he agrees great, we start on that stage, if not, then I choose any other stage.

Works out well since you can always get your 2nd best CP, or you can mindgame your opponent into letting your best stage. And since characters are stuck, there's no pockets to worry about.


Nick Riddle: Then you'd always have certain Match-ups on certain stages. Falco Pikachu/IC's on FD and MK vs MK/Wario/Pikachu on Rainbow. Things like that which would be kind of boring to watch constantly.

 

[C.J.]

Now what I don't get is why the set procedure is so that stages are selected before characters in Counter-pick situations.

Say if I were playing Yoshi vs a Metaknight first round and wanting a counterpick, it'd likely be FD for chaingrabs. The way it's set right now allows for pocket characters to come in and take away any advantage a certain stage would have in that match-up.

It was my CP, and now I'm going up against a Falco, is it really my counterpick?

You see them go Falco, and you CP your ICs.
That's the theory.

This

The idea is that you gain an advantage on your CP, but not TOO big of a one (lolsubjectivedetermination). Plus, this way it rewards players for being skilled w/ more than one character (the inference being that that means that they're "better" players which is what we're testing). If you're worried about competent pockets, it gives you incentive to have your own pockets ready to use, as Nick said.

EDIT:

Nick Riddle: Then you'd always have certain Match-ups on certain stages. Falco Pikachu/IC's on FD and MK vs MK/Wario/Pikachu on Rainbow. Things like that which would be kind of boring to watch constantly.

People aren't playing in a tournament for the best visual experience. Tournaments are to find the "best" player among the entrants. Doesn't matter what the character/stage selection choices are throughout the tourny

 

[NickRiddle]

Nick Riddle: Then you'd always have certain Match-ups on certain stages. Falco Pikachu/IC's on FD and MK vs MK/Wario/Pikachu on Rainbow. Things like that which would be kind of boring to watch constantly.

I think that's more fair than having two, basically, auto-wins as your CPs.

Example:
You play Diddy and Wario.
I play Luigi and MK.

Game 1, you win.
Game 2, you stay as Diddy, and I go MetaKnight on Rainbow Cruise. People consider that an auto-lose.
Or...
I go Cruise and you CP Wario, a much better character on the level, vs. my MK.


Or, even worse, you'd have the ability to double CP somebody game 3.
Hell yeah, lose match 1, guaranteed set loss.

I stop that, everybody would just go MK on their opponent's CPs as it's a much safer option.
Seems even more boring, no?

 

[Kuares]

Way to jump at the part of saying boring to watch ._.

What I should have said for that, some player mains are scared to choose a certain stage because of those situation in which people can just counter pick characters to better suit the stage. Yes, you should choose a character that has the best chance to win but the ability to Counter pick characters pretty much forces a certain condition that some players are unwilling to follow.

It's a argument that doesn't really change anything so anyways.

Or, even worse, you'd have the ability to double CP somebody game 3.

Hell yeah, lose match 1, guaranteed set loss.

I stop that, everybody would just go MK on their opponent's CPs as it's a much safer option.
Seems even more boring, no?

Did you forget to quote something? If you were talking about what I use for sets then that'd make sense. Yeah it'd be smart to go MK on your opponents CP, but it wouldn't force the Counterpicker to choose a different character.

I also put the Stage strike at the end of Best of 3, more focus on the third game.

 

[Raziek]

I've argued in the past that those who learn a secondary character deserve said advantage in the CP system.

My statement stands. If you play GW/ICs or MK/Diddy, or any sort of god-tier combination like that, you earned the ability to cover your *** on counterpicks.

 

[MK26]

I've argued in the past that those who learn a secondary character deserve said advantage in the CP system.

My statement stands. If you play GW/ICs or MK/Diddy, or any sort of god-tier combination like that, you earned the ability to cover your *** on counterpicks.

This. So much this.

 

[Flayl]

I disagree and so do a lot of other people. Once this thread dies down a bit I'm bumping my counterpick topic in hopes that more TOs will read it.

 

[Ghostbone]

I've argued in the past that those who learn a secondary character deserve said advantage in the CP system.

My statement stands. If you play GW/ICs or MK/Diddy, or any sort of god-tier combination like that, you earned the ability to cover your *** on counterpicks.

Pretty much this.

The point of a secondary is to be safe from your opponents counter-pick and to have more counter-pick options yourself.

If your opponent is at a disadvantage because he only mains one character that's his fault.

 

[DRDN]

Pretty much this.

The point of a secondary is to be safe from your opponents counter-pick and to have more counter-pick options yourself.

If your opponent is at a disadvantage because he only mains one character that's his fault.

I thought the main reason of having a secondary was to have someone to use during your bad MU's not to just have for CP's

 

[Flayl]

Yeah the point of having a secondary is to cover your bad matchups/stages. It's not possible to be safe from your opponent's counterpick, they pick last...

 

[Raziek]

Yeah the point of having a secondary is to cover your bad matchups/stages. It's not possible to be safe from your opponent's counterpick, they pick last...

It's not possible to be completely safe, but it does cover you in many important situations.

Consider the following. A hypothetical match occurs between a Marth player and an MK player.

The first match resulted in a loss for Marth. Ignoring stage bans for the moment, say Marth counterpicks FD against the MK.

Characters have two defenses to counterpicking. Stage bans, and secondaries. In this case, our MK just happens to have pocket ICs, an advantage he gained by learning how to play a second character.

Marth's intelligent counterpick on MK just went to an even matchup on the WORST possible stage for it to happen, putting him at an extreme disadvantage.

But say our Marth ALSO carried a secondary? What if he pulled out Snake, or MK?

Said advantage is mitigated.

Because both players have the ability to carry secondary characters, we cannot say it is "unfair" to the player who chooses NOT to learn a secondary. After all, the other player is just maximizing his options.

That too, adds an element of strategy to the counterpick system. The most obvious example of this happens all the time, and it is:

"Do I counterpick <insert character> to Brinstar? It could work out extremely well for me, but he COULD have a pocket MK."

Pocket MK is the most obvious example of this advantage being utilized. While I agree that it can feel cheesy at times, I've yet to see a better system suggested that doesn't strip a ton of depth out of the game.

As much as I love Full-list stage striking, and see huge benefits to playing an entire set on the three stages that are left after striking, doing so strips out over 70% of legal stages. Polar stages will rarely ever get played. You'd see most matches take place on what would probably amount to a handful of about 7 stages tops, depending on the matchup. I don't think sacrificing that depth is worth it, but that's my personal opinion.

 

[Jack Kieser]

The also obvious fact is that the CP system that Raziek describes above places one kind of player at a distinct advantage above all other players: the player that mains every character in the game.

Imagine Raziek's same scenario, but the Marth player also has a pocket Wario, in addition to the pocket MK. The original MK player mains MK, but has a pocket IC's and knows Diddy. Se how this continues? The player who can play the most characters at a high level has the most stage picking advantages. How is that nonsensical or unfair? It's perfectly fair: the player who learns the most wins the most.

Taken it it's logical conclusion, the player that mains all characters has the maximum number of strategic stage pick advantages, and thus the most options and the highest level of overall skill. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

It wouldn't be necessary to main every character, just the character with the best ratio for every match-up.

For example, maining Ganondorf is pointless.

 

[Flayl]

You guys are drawing the incorrect conclusion that learning a character for only 1 stage is hard.

 

[Ghostbone]

You guys are drawing the incorrect conclusion that learning a character for only 1 stage is hard.

What should difficulty matter?

 

[Flayl]

What should difficulty matter?

You can have this one of two ways: The difficulty of learning a character is offset by the reward of playing it

OR

No advantages should be gained by learning multiple characters because nobody cares how hard that is

 

[Conviction]

Why not just learn MK?

 

[DRDN]

because we have enough MK dittos in all the finals we dont really want to see them all tourney

 

[Conviction]

So?

MK completely defeats the purpose of maining multiple characters to have multiple stage advantages, when he is all that in one character.

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

or you just pick 2 characters to cover all scenarios within reason.

for example, imo the best main/secondary combo is MK/DDD. MK handles all the bad DDD mus, and DDD does everything else (at least where MK doesn't do better).

other examples of *** covering (though not to as strong of a extent) would be like:

snake/ICs

pika/falco

wario/DDD


these are the examples i could think of that have some of the most potential MU wise, i personally use pit/fox since fox does well on all of pit's bad stages (which the only time i go fox is based off of stage pick, otherwise i have no need to switch usually MU wise).

i'd post some other mid/high-tier combos but the point is that there is usually one character who can cover most of your disadvantages very well (obviously i mean besides MK for those of you who don't want him as a secondary)

 

[Conviction]

But all that's cool and all but, any combo with MK or just MK is the right combo.

 

[DRDN]

So?

MK completely defeats the purpose of maining multiple characters to have multiple stage advantages, when he is all that in one character.

And this is a reason for banning him he's better then everyone and by your logic everyone should main him for the ability to be even throughout the set

 

[Yikarur]

that's really sad =( Brawl would be so balanced without MK.

 

[Conviction]

And this is a reason for banning him he's better then everyone and by your logic everyone should main him for the ability to be even throughout the set

Yep, that is my point exactly. So why are you even arguing against it when you agree.