Tournament Ruleset Hypocrisy

[Yuna]

I agree, but the same "technique" which organizers are willing to prevent via hard ban is still happening to certain characters because no soft ban is in effect.

I'm personally against not banning stuff because it'd be a soft ban, let's get that out of the way first.

I can't think of any other word for that than "laziness", and it's not like it's a split-second action, either. When D3 is infinite grabbing someone, it's blatantly obvious. Anyone-the judge, the observers, the players-could easily count the number of grabs performed sequentially. Once that number reaches 5, let 'em go. That's all there is to it.

DeDeDe can only infinite Donkey Kong... unless there's a wall.

I understand this, but the technique is still in the game even when the stages have been banned. It IS a hypocritical act to remove a stage that allows characters to be infinite grabbed but put no rules in place that prevent characters from being infinite grabbed without the stage.

Because on walled stages, the infinites work on everyone. On unwalled ones, they only work against a select few. For DeDeDe, that's Donkey Kong. For Marth, that's Ness (or Lucas, I can't remember), and his isn't even an infinite.

Everyone else has chaingrabs (or grab releases) that will eventually end because you'll eventually run out of stage (including Marth vs. Ness or Lucas).

And this is where there can be NO gray area: either infinites are banned or they aren't. To remove stages that allow infinites against a larger portion of the roster is not sufficient when there's still a percentage of the roster that suffers regardless of stages, ESPECIALLY when there are 12 characters that are not vulnerable to wall infinites or chaingrabs at all and will make perfect acceptable counters to D3 players on Elding Bridge.

We ban stuff if it's broken, not just to make the game "more fun".

3 characters being infinitable by specific characters is not broken. If you play as a character that can be infinited, tough ****. You have the choice to not play as them.

If a character can infinite everyone, then we ban it, because then it's broken. The only way to win would be to then play as the same character and infinite your opponent back. The game would literally come down to who can infinite the other better, but it's bad enough if you have to play as the same character to stand even a remote chance of winning.

This is why walled stages and walk-off edges are banned, because some characters become unbeatable against pretty much everyone on those stages.

I'm REALLY not trying to come across as antagonistic here, but this is EXACTLY what mainers of the cursed 7 have to deal with anyway: all it takes is one minor slip-up, we're grabbed and we're down a stock. We don't even NEED to be near the edge of the stage: we can be anywhere, anytime and a single grab is the loss of a stock.

Switch mains. DeDeDe on a walled stage: Cursed Entire Roster. Brawl ruleset at the moment: Cursed seven. Don't play as the cursed seven.

Or only use them as a counterpick when you've lost and your opponent has already chosen a character that cannot infinite you.

We do not ban stuff if it gimps specific (few) characters. Where will it end? "Oh, this character is just so friggin' good against my character! We must ban his combos against me!".

Then don't go near the edge of the level. Any player worth their salt knows they're playing with fire when they take the battle that close to the edge of a walk-off stage.

You don't need to be anywhere near the edge of a level to die from a laser-lock, a jab lock or a chaingrab like Falco's or King DeDeDe's (depending on character, of course). You can literally be taken from one side of the stage to the other, guaranteed, if the stage is flat.

This is still nothing compared to the "single missed tech" resulting in inescapable grab death for the cursed 7.

Don't play as the Cursed 7. We ban stuff when it's so broken it breaks the game. This just breaks the Cursed 7. What's next, banning everyone except Captain Falcon because, really, he suck now?

There are 12 characters who are not vulnerable to D3's infinite. Why are walk-off stages banned when a player can simply choose to main one of those characters instead?

No, there is every single character in the game except Donkey Kong. Besides him, King DeDeDe can chaingrab 4 others well. The rest can barely be chaingrabbed or just chaingrabbed for a bit. It's not an infinite or a broken tactic if it's not a walled stage or a stage with a walk-off edge because then it's a guaranteed KO.

On normal stages, it's just a chaingrab. Wow, it's so broken. Wow, he's too good, wow, one slip up and you lose... ... ... then how come DeDeDe isn't doing better at tournaments?

King DeDeDe can infinite one character and quasi-infinite 4 or so others on any stage. Marth can get Ness or Lucas up to high % on any stage and so can Pokémon Trainer. That's 1 character each (and 4 others who are effectively chaingrabbed by DeDeDe).

That's but 1 matchup each in which the opponent is against almost insurmountable odds. Now, with walls, that's 35 characters against King DeDeDe IIRC. Against a wall, it's "super-effective" against everyone.

With a walk-off edge, that's almost every single character in the game vs. Falco (percentage dependant) and 23 characters against DeDeDe.

Let me repeat:
No walls or walkoffs: 1 broken matchup for DeDeDe
Walls and walkoffs: 35 or 23 broken matchups for DeDeDe

And this is where the hypocrisy enters the situation...

No, it's about moderation. We do not ban everything that's any good. What DeDeDe has against Donkey Kong is just one friggin' good infinite chaingrab thing. Well, sucks to be Donkey. However, on walled stages, he's got it on everyone, sucks to not be DeDeDe then, I guess.

DeDeDe's dthrow is not broken on Final Destination, it's broken on Shadow Moses Island, however. We... ban... broken... things. Not anything that's any good.

I'm guessing that no one who chose a main when Brawl was released did so in the mindset of playing a broken character despite the odds, but when these CGs and infinites were discovered, actions were taken to protect SOME of the characters in most tournaments, mainly the banning of stages where a number of the cast could be infinited or CGed to a walk-off due to a SINGLE landed grab equating death for them.

This is how it's always been. It's not done for protecting certain characters, it's done for protecting Competitive gaming. Shadow Moses Island - Everyone must play DeDeDe. Final Destination - Just don't play DK against DeDeDe.

But the cursed 7 were kicked to the curb when it came time for tournaments to remedy the issue. Rather than going the distance to remedy the imbalance, most rulesets only account for some of the roster's imbalance, not all of it. It's not the FAULT of mains of the cursed 7 that their characters are vulnerable to infinites, just as it's not the fault of Snake mains that D3 can CG Snake off a walk-off stage, and yet walk-off stages are banned for this reason, because one grab equates a kill. This is DESPITE the fact that there are 12 characters who are not vulnerable to CG and would make for perfect counters to D3s on walk-offs.

Tournament rules are shaped to make the game playable. We only ban as a last resort. To allow walled stages would pretty much guarantee that only chaingrabbers can win and force everyone to play as them. Now, you just can't play as a small select few characters (7) against a small select few other characters.

Also, Falco can chaingrab almost every single character in the game, especially at 0%.

The rules are not made to level the playing field and make all players stand an equal chance of winning or even to have all players playable Competitively. Hey, you know, Fox's Upsmash killed Pichu at, like, 70% in Melee. We should've banned it entirely because it gimped Pichu so much!

The rules are made to get rid of brokenness, not to maximize fun.

The real irony in this is that wall infinites can only be started against the wall and walk-offs can only happen on specific stages, and both of these were banned.

Wall infinites can start on any part of the stage if it's a jab lock, a laser lock or some chaingrabs. And they're possible on all stages with a wall that doesn't disappear after a set amount of time.

Yet, the cursed 7 can be infinited in the same manner by ANY grab, via the same shoddy ban-worthy game mechanics which allowed characters to be wall infinited.

The cursed 7 cannot be "infinited" in the same manner by "any" grab. Each character can only be infinited by specific other characters with a specific throw. You cannot be infinited as Ness against Peach. You have to be facing Marth.

And no, it's not the same shoddy mechanics at all. Because they work anywhere and on any stage. A wall-infinite requires a wall because without it, you would fly off to far to be regrabbed. Ness' grab-release requires just Ness because Ness doesn't slide far enough away after a grab release. That's Ness himself sucking, not a specific stage design aspect which can easily be remove by not playing on said stages sucking.

Why is tossing 7 characters to the curb and telling them to find a new main any more acceptable than tossing 22 characters to the same curb, especially when the problem could be easily rectified?

You must not be able to count. 23. And you're still wrong. It'd be around 35. "Play as Falco... or lose."

"Supposed to" doesn't even enter into this discussion: this is about whether or not characters are being protected from infinites in tournaments, and SOME of them are while others are not. This is in response to an action taken by many tournament organizers, not a commentary on gameplay mechanics and their faults.

This isn't about "protection" specific characters, this is about protection the Competitive viability of the game itself. Walk-off edges and walls would force people to play as a select few characters to stand a chance of winning. The Cursed 7 are just the Cursed 7.

Sheik has a chaingrab that's pretty broken against a large amount of the cast in Melee. Did we ban it? Fox has a ****ty combo against tons of characters as well (drillshining). Not banned. Marth could do some nasty combos against fastfallers. No ban there. Ganondorf was terribly gimped when recovering. I guess edgeguarding should've been banned against him since it was just so much more effective against him!

Bowser, DK, Samus, Ness, Lucas, Mario and Luigi mains are simply told to "Find ways around it or find a new main." when presented with the issue of D3/Marth/Charizard infiniting their characters.

Not all of those can even be infinited. Do your research first.

Stuff

And then you repeated yourself for 2nd, 3rd and 4th times. I just didn't want to make it look like I ignored that part of your post.

 

[Yuna]

Thank you for bringing up this blatant hypocrisy. And I agree with the sentiment here; the only way to fix this is banning all characters that can be CGed.

Why stop there? I say ban all characters who can be comboed well or who can be easily gimped as well! Ganondorf's recovery is utter crap and his moveset ain't all that much to write home about either. Allowing him would force us to ban edgeguarding because it's just so frighteningly awesome against him! So let's ban him instead! Yoshi has no real 3rd jump. Ban him or we'll have to ban hitting people after they've used up their 2nd jump.

Falco's recovery sucks now. Ban. All easily gimped tethers, ban (or we'll have to ban edgehogging).

 

[S_B]

On normal stages, it's just a chaingrab. Wow, it's so broken. Wow, he's too good, wow, one slip up and you lose... ... ... then how come DeDeDe isn't doing better at tournaments?

First of all, the term "infinite" is a misnomer, but the point stands. Marth loses a small fraction of the stage every time he dashes forward to grab Ness, but by the time he gets from one end of the stage to the other, Ness will have more than enough damage to be killed by the unblockable smash. Same with D3's victims: it's a miniscule step forward, more than enough to rack up KOable damage via throw.

Second, according to this, M2K placed 1st with D3 in the C3 tourney, according to this post, so don't pass the penguin off as worthless.

That's but 1 matchup each in which the opponent is against almost insurmountable odds. Now, with walls, that's 35 characters against King DeDeDe IIRC. Against a wall, it's "super-effective" against everyone.

I think you're mistaken about this...

From: http://allisbrawl.com/forum/topic.aspx?id=2932

Cannot be chain thrown (fall after the down throw, cannot be infinited into a wall):
Zelda
Sheik
Zero Suit Samus
Kirby
Metaknight
Olimar
Fox
Falco
Pikachu
Squirtle
Jigglypuff
Mr. Game and Watch

Surely, a decent player would be able to select a 2nd from this roster of 12 for battling D3 players on Shadow Moses.

However, though, I admit I haven't done my homework on laser locking yet. I'll look into this and get back to you...

Why stop there? I say ban all characters who can be comboed well or who can be easily gimped as well! Ganondorf's recovery is utter crap and his moveset ain't all that much to write home about either. Allowing him would force us to ban edgeguarding because it's just so frighteningly awesome against him! So let's ban him instead! Yoshi has no real 3rd jump. Ban him or we'll have to ban hitting people after they've used up their 2nd jump.

Falco's recovery sucks now. Ban. All easily gimped tethers, ban (or we'll have to ban edgehogging).

Is this really necessary? I've made certain to go out of my way to maintain a civilized tone, even going to far as to apologize in advance if the nature of the post sounds antagonistic, and this is what I get in exchange for that?

If I came in here slinging insults and demanding that certain characters be banned from tournaments, yeah, I can see deserving this kind of response, but all I've done is argue my points and I've certainly kept it civil.

Like I said, I'll look into laser locking and I'll get back to you...

 

[Yuna]

First of all, the term "infinite" is a misnomer, but the point stands. Marth loses a small fraction of the stage every time he dashes forward to grab Ness, but by the time he gets from one end of the stage to the other, Ness will have more than enough damage to be killed by the unblockable smash. Same with D3's victims: it's a miniscule step forward, more than enough to rack up KOable damage via throw.

How about you stop using the wrong words, then?

It's a chaingrab, easy as that. With Marth on Ness, it's a grab-release chain. With each rethrow, there's less damage, less knockback and less stun. King DeDeDe can only infinite Donkey Kong. He can only effectively chaingrab 4 or 5 others IIRC. The rest, DI will prevent him from racking up too much damage.

It's just a strong chaingrab. We don't ban them because that would be stupid. We don't ban long and/or powerful combos, now do we? Not everyone has then, no, but that's because everyone is not the same character.

If you don't want to get chaingrabbed, don't play as someone who can get chaingrabbed. It's only broken if you have to play as DeDeDe or a specific counter in order not to lose.

Second, according to this, M2K placed 1st with D3 in the C3 tourney, according to this post, so don't pass the penguin off as worthless.

Reading comprehension is essential. No one said D3 is useless. But D3 isn't broken. Mew2King is one the most technical Smash players in the world. He knows how to chaingrab. He's also one of the best players in the world, overall. Yet, he's not destroying all competition as DeDeDe, now is he? He's barely winning. He's not even winning every single tourney he enters.

Hence, DeDeDe's chaingrab is obviously far from broken. Hence, we cannot ban it.

I think you're mistaken about this...

I stand corrected then.

However, though, I admit I haven't done my homework on laser locking yet. I'll look into this and get back to you...

Here's your homework: Works against every single character in the game. Inescapable infinite against a wall and Falco can slowly approach and finish with a Smash. Of course, you can wall-tech it but he would've gotten 300% or so damage on you.

Jab-locking works the exact same way since you no longer pop up after getting jabbed on the floor. This makes it the same as the Laser Lock, only more characters can jab lock. Also an infinite against the wall.

On walk-off stages, you will eventually run out of stage and die at the edge... from a jab (or a laser).

Is this really necessary? I've made certain to go out of my way to maintain a civilized tone, even going to far as to apologize in advance if the nature of the post sounds antagonistic, and this is what I get in exchange for that?

I am civil. I'm just not cordial. Two different things.

I'm just using your own logic against you. The fact that I'm not cordial and using biting sarcasm doesn't make my tone uncivil.

If I came in here slinging insults and demanding that certain characters be banned from tournaments, yeah, I can see deserving this kind of response, but all I've done is argue my points and I've certainly kept it civil.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/civil
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cordial

Like I said, I'll look into laser locking and I'll get back to you...

Or you could, you know, look into how D3s chaingrab works. I don't claim to be an expert, so I'm allowed to be wrong.

You're the one demanding it be banned, thus, the burden of evidence lies on you.

 

[Brahma]

IIRC, Dedede can infinite Mario, Luigi, Samus, as well, he just has to grab jab in between.

Dedede's DK infinite is ridiculously easy. Limiting number of grabs is nearly impossible to enforce effectively. Perhaps a solutions would be to ban the standing infinite, and allow a grab, Dthrow dash grab chain throw in it's place?

 

[Yuna]

IIRC, Dedede can infinite Mario, Luigi, Samus, as well, he just has to grab jab in between.

No, those eventually stop.

 

[Nigerian Star Storm]

But they still do qualify as quasi-infinites right?

Anyways the thing is, actually applying with Smash_Brother's saying would cause the Metagame to either crumble and come down to *Use Falco/DDD or lose* or basicially everyone except for those who can't be CGed would be banned <_<.

 

[AltF4]

I don't want to pick upon you in particular, but every time I've made an argument along these lines (similar to the one you've made), someone has called me a "scrub" and thrown the Sirlin articles in my face, insisting that a better player will learn to counter it without complaining.

I can't speak for the rest of the community, but there's a fine line between a John and a valid complaint. There are those people who like to throw around "no Johns" at every turn in an attempt to inflate their own ego, but don't let it get to you.

See, you're PERFECTLY describing what a main of the cursed 7 faces. The risk of going in for a grab is MINISCULE compared to the reward of being able to infinite them to death, and like you said, one very small mistake (in this case, getting grabbed once per stock) and you can lose to some VERY bad players.

I can beat a D3 player up to 200% damage, having him never hit me once, but as I return to the stage, he lands one grab and it's all over. Is THAT competitive?

It sounds so much like we agree on this part that I'm having trouble figuring out we disagree.

The difference is that the Chain Grab is only against those characters, and walk-off edges affect every matchup.

There will be tiers. Period. Some characters are just plain better than others. Go looking through the tournament results section and find me a tournament that doesn't have a Snake or Metaknight in the top spots.

It is inevitable that certain characters will just be plain bad. This is no different than in Melee. Sheik was single handedly responsible for the bottom tiers being bottom tier. She could chain grab over half of the entire cast, making them nigh unusable. The chain grabs against those characters are just part of what makes them lower tier.

It is not the responsibility of tournament organizers to make sure every character is perfectly balanced. They will not be.


Walk off edges, however, affect every character matchup in the way I previously described. They are anti-competitive.

 

[Nigerian Star Storm]

I can't speak for the rest of the community, but there's a fine line between a John and a valid complaint. There are those people who like to throw around "no Johns" at every turn in an attempt to inflate their own ego, but don't let it get to you.



The difference is that the Chain Grab is only against those characters, and walk-off edges affect every matchup.

There will be tiers. Period. Some characters are just plain better than others. Go looking through the tournament results section and find me a tournament that doesn't have a Snake or Metaknight in the top spots.

It is inevitable that certain characters will just be plain bad. This is no different than in Melee. Sheik was single handedly responsible for the bottom tiers being bottom tier. She could chain grab over half of the entire cast, making them nigh unusable. The chain grabs against those characters are just part of what makes them lower tier.
It is not the responsibility of tournament organizers to make sure every character is perfectly balanced. They will not be.


Walk off edges, however, affect every character matchup in the way I previously described. They are anti-competitive.

But Liekz, dun shiek should b baned so more pplz hav a chanc to compete.



I really think there's a good chance someone might come in here and say that......

 

[vigiliante]

You can simply not play as characters who can get infinited when facing the few characters who can truly infinite you. You cannot just switch characters to prevent this on stages with walk-off stages where chaingrabs will result in death or walled stages where a single jab or laser can lead to an infinite.

Solution as Lucas and Ness when fighting Marth: Switch character
Solution when fighting DeDeDe or Falco on a stage with a walk-off edge: None, you get grabbed, you die most of the time

We only ban something when it's universally broken. A chaingrab/infinite that only works against certain characters just makes those characters unplayable against the character(s) in question. As such, it does not need to be banned. One that works on everyone is broken if it makes the character way too good ("Play as them or lose!") and thus, the technique is banned. If it's only possible on certain stages, then those stages will be banned.

Most "infinites" in the game aren't even infinites. At certain points, they will end. It's just that on walk-off stages, that point is almost always death.


Idiotic reasoning. Almost nothing is "supposed" to be there. That or everything that's not an obvious glitch is supposed to be there (this includes Marth's grab-release on Ness and Lucas since Ness and Lucas' grab-release is gimped against everyone, it's just that Marth is so much better than everyone at making use of this).

Sakurai didn't sit down and have beta-testers come up with the best ways to play every character and then design the game around it. He just designed the game and leaves everything up to us. The chaingrabs are much "supposed" to be there as the infinites.

What is your (or their) reasoning for the infinites "not supposed" to be there while the chaingrabs are?

You obviosly forgot about the demo's which they had people try in Japan and US(Not to sure on Europe though) and they actually saw the chain grab that DDD had and obviosly did nothing about it. When they did those demo's they wanted to attract the tourney players who know about most of the glitches that we abused in melee and guess what Gimpyfish told everyone that there was l-canceling in brawl but nintendo saw that and completely fixed it. Think about what your going to say before insulting someone thx

 

[S_B]

How about you stop using the wrong words, then?

Because everyone calls it that because the end result is enough damage to kill the other player with a throw.

Nothing is "infinite". Even in DK's case, the D3 player would need to eat sometime or they'd die.

It's a chaingrab, easy as that. With Marth on Ness, it's a grab-release chain. With each rethrow, there's less damage, less knockback and less stun. King DeDeDe can only infinite Donkey Kong. He can only effectively chaingrab 4 or 5 others IIRC. The rest, DI will prevent him from racking up too much damage.

It's just a strong chaingrab. We don't ban them because that would be stupid. We don't ban long and/or powerful combos, now do we? Not everyone has then, no, but that's because everyone is not the same character.

See above. It's guaranteed death unless the player screws up, same as a wall "infinite".

Reading comprehension is essential. No one said D3 is useless. But D3 isn't broken. Mew2King is one the most technical Smash players in the world. He knows how to chaingrab. He's also one of the best players in the world, overall. Yet, he's not destroying all competition as DeDeDe, now is he? He's barely winning. He's not even winning every single tourney he enters.

Hence, DeDeDe's chaingrab is obviously far from broken. Hence, we cannot ban it.

I never said in this thread that chaingrabs should be banned, only that infinites should be limited via a certain number of grabs to ensure they're not inescapable death. 5 grabs is still a sizable advantage without trivializing matchups.

Here's your homework: Works against every single character in the game. Inescapable infinite against a wall and Falco can slowly approach and finish with a Smash. Of course, you can wall-tech it but he would've gotten 300% or so damage on you.

Jab-locking works the exact same way since you no longer pop up after getting jabbed on the floor. This makes it the same as the Laser Lock, only more characters can jab lock. Also an infinite against the wall.

On walk-off stages, you will eventually run out of stage and die at the edge... from a jab (or a laser).

Then these are good reasons for these stages to be banned, reasons I was previously unaware of (though laser locking requires you to land without pratfalling, something I think can be avoided by skilled players).

I am civil. I'm just not cordial. Two different things.

I'm just using your own logic against you. The fact that I'm not cordial and using biting sarcasm doesn't make my tone uncivil.

Let's not mince words. I'm sure you know exactly what I meant (especially since you referenced your biting sarcasm).

Or you could, you know, look into how D3s chaingrab works. I don't claim to be an expert, so I'm allowed to be wrong.

I never said you weren't allowed to be wrong. In fact, your ability to admit wrong speaks volumes about you as a person and garners my respect. Also, it makes me more willing to admit wrong, as I've done in the next paragraph...

You're the one demanding it be banned, thus, the burden of evidence lies on you.

I stated that it's hypocritical to ban certain stages to protect some characters from infinites and not others, and I stand by that, but given that the motivations you've given me DO branch the game into more complex territories (laser locking and jab locking) I admit that these stages could be banned for those reasons alone and preventing wall infinites is just an added bonus for everyone but the cursed 7.

I suspect that a 5 grab limit will one day go into effect, once tournament players begin seriously mastering the ICs' infinites, and the cursed 7 might get their reprieve then (if the rule becomes applicable across the board instead of just to the ICs').

Until then, you're right. These stages are banned for reasons beyond those I believed them to be.

 

[S_B]

But they still do qualify as quasi-infinites right?

Anyways the thing is, actually applying with Smash_Brother's saying would cause the Metagame to either crumble and come down to *Use Falco/DDD or lose* or basicially everyone except for those who can't be CGed would be banned <_<.

How are people coming to this conclusion? When did I say that chaingrabs should be banned?

I was suggesting they should be limited to 5 grabs, something I think will happen anyway once players start really mastering the ICs' chaingrabs.

I was under the impression that mains of Snake, Diddy, etc. were being given a reprieve in that stages where D3 could infinite them to death were being banned for their sake while D3 is still allowed to infinite the cursed 7 because banning it would take a judge watching the situation.

But that was before Yuna brought laser locking to my attention, which I agree is a solid reason to ban walls and walk-offs.

 

[pockyD]

far too much multiquoting going on... anyways

After the 5th, you fthrow. Simple as that, or the TO can decide what they do themselves.

You realize that there's not going to be a TO watching every match. Let's say you did actually just get grabbed 5x, so you pause and call the TO over to claim your victory. Your opponent claims it was only 4x. What should the TO do? it's obvious you've never actually tried to run a tournament

If they get regrabbed after being "free", it's their own fault and they have another 5 grabs coming.

You are telling me that your eyes are fine-tuned enough to tell when a character is "free"? if dedede grabs 2 frames too late, are you really saying that you are capable of discerning between that and a timely grab?

even if you were (you aren't), just refer to my previous argument... are you going to claim your 2-frame differential to a T.O. that wasn't even watching the match?

if you want to get rid of the CG, you have to either ban dedede, or ban the characters he can CG; "don't be stupid" doesn't hold up when there's money on the line

 

[Arkimbald]

About that Samus thing: I was a Roy player. That's all I should have to say.

Reading this thread, it seems as though there's no honor between Smash Bros. players. What am I talking about; there's no honor between anyone these days.

 

[pockyD]

why play for honor when you can play for $500?

most people are easily capable of discerning between 'for-fun' play and 'serious tournament' play... but there is no need to impose rules on friendlies, only on tournament matches

i'm sorry, but if playing dishonorably (but legally) can make me some significant amount of money (it can't - i'm awful at the game), i'd do it

 

[Professional Idiot]

I completely agree with Smash Brother: If people are going to tell Ness/Lucas players to simply "not get grabbed", then they also have to just "not get grabbed". It's blatantly hypocrisy to only rule out unfair disadvantages for some characters and not the others. While it is true that infinite chain grabs only apply to a handful of characters, it's still a pretty significant flaw that I feel should be dealt with properly. way I see it, to correctly balance the game in terms of chain-grabbing advantages, we must either allow walk-off/walled stages, or use a judge to prevent/penalize chain grabbing. The way it is now is unacceptable.

Everything concerning this matter boils down to whether or not, we as a community, agree that tournaments are about winning fairly, or taking advantage of game imbalance.

 

[pockyD]

lol @ "unfair disadvantages"

what's a 'fair' disadvantage?

 

[Professional Idiot]

lol @ "unfair disadvantages"

what's a 'fair' disadvantage?

Well, that is not to imply there are fair disadvantages. Either way, I'm pretty sure you know what I mean.

 

[pockyD]

Well, that is not to imply there are fair disadvantages. Either way, I'm pretty sure you know what I mean.

no, I don't understand at all

if you allow for the concept of a "fair disadvantage" (whatever you 'mean'), then you have to recognize that it is a completely subjective concept and therefore there is no real way to decide whether something should be banned on that basis

 

[Professional Idiot]

no, I don't understand at all

if you allow for the concept of a "fair disadvantage" (whatever you 'mean'), then you have to recognize that it is a completely subjective concept and therefore there is no real way to decide whether something should be banned on that basis

Okay, well you're right. I will now supply a possible fair disadvantage. The fair disadvantage I'm talking about is being of lesser skill than your opponent and subsequently having a higher chance of losing. An unfair disadvantage is when your opponent can infinitely chain grab you, regardless of skill.

 

[Zankoku]

So an unfair disadvantage is something that makes a matchup in favor of one player regardless of skill? We should ban every character except Captain Falcon.

 

[Professional Idiot]

So an unfair disadvantage is something that makes a matchup in favor of one player regardless of skill? We should ban every character except Captain Falcon.

You have discovered the flaw in my logic. I bow before your superior ability to think. (Seriously.)
Anyways, yeah, that was a pretty bad way of wording it. Sorry for the confusion, guys.

Putting that aside, this all really depends on whether or not we want tournaments to be won by people who take advantage of all game imbalances or win using the so-called scrub mentality.

 

[Jack Kieser]

How about this? It will never be completely fair. There, I said it. Look, infinites suck. The f**k up gameplay and balance more than almost anything else. But there is only so much a TO can do. Stage bans work for a reason: because you don't have to have a judge working every single match to watch for someone playing on a banned stage. But putting a limit on Chain Grabs? Impossible without a dedicated judge watching EVERY SINGLE MATCH. If you have those kind of resources, more power to you. Use them, put soft bans on Chain Grabs, and have a happy 'ole time. But here in the real world? We'll run our tournaments the way its feasible to, and that means that some characters are gonna get shafted. Those 'cursed 7'? There is NO ONE MAKING ANYONE MAIN THEM. I mained Link in Melee; he always got shafted. He had a sh*tty WD, a slow dash dance, got pwned by Shiek left and right (just like most of the cast)... but you know what?

I DEALT WITH IT.

I played Link on the side and switched to Doc. Problem f**kin' solved. So man up, realize that life isn't always fair (and competitive Smash certainly isn't), and just DEAL WITH IT. We physically cannot feasibly put a soft ban on Chain Grab amounts, so STOP TALKING LIKE WE HAVEN'T ALREADY HAD EXPERIENCE HERE.

 

[pockyD]

how did playing doc solve your sheik problem?

 

[Jack Kieser]

I get that a lot, actually. It was all psychological. Playing a character so different from Link let me approach some of my problems in really different ways; being a lot more aggressive and being able to approach with those awesome Megavitamins really worked for me in comparison to how I had been playing Link. Sure, most of the time I still lost because Shiek just owns, but it was never by as large a margin as it had been with Link. And I did better in most of my other matches, too.

 

[S_B]

You realize that there's not going to be a TO watching every match. Let's say you did actually just get grabbed 5x, so you pause and call the TO over to claim your victory. Your opponent claims it was only 4x. What should the TO do? it's obvious you've never actually tried to run a tournament

A. Most matches can be easily videotaped off screen and many are anyways. The tape could be checked.

B. If the TO was going to enforce the rule, they should know they'd need judges watching each match anyway.

You are telling me that your eyes are fine-tuned enough to tell when a character is "free"? if dedede grabs 2 frames too late, are you really saying that you are capable of discerning between that and a timely grab?

The final grab needs to be an Fthrow or an up throw.

In any case, I expect this whole thing will get a new coat of logic paint once we have players start mastering the ICs' infinite and tearing up tournies with it. I've actually heard anecdotes from a few players on this site about how they were destroyed at a tourney by the IC infinite so that day may come sooner than we think.

Until then, those stages will be banned and the cursed 7 will likely remain cursed except by TOs willing to go the distance and have judges.

Ah well. Nothing else for me to say on the subject.

 

[pockyD]

A. Most matches can be easily videotaped off screen and many are anyways. The tape could be checked.

B. If the TO was going to enforce the rule, they should know they'd need judges watching each match anyway.

Ok, so if you have 16 TVs going (a low estimate for a big tourney btw), you need 16 judges watching the TVs at ALL TIMES throughout the day

The final grab needs to be an Fthrow or an up throw.

wow this had nothing to do with what I asked. and is bthrow unacceptable?

what about marth's throwless regrab? if ness suddenly decides to wiggle out on the 6th iteration, does the marth get DQ'd because he didn't have a chance to do a legitimate throw?

In any case, I expect this whole thing will get a new coat of logic paint once we have players start mastering the ICs' infinite and tearing up tournies with it. I've actually heard anecdotes from a few players on this site about how they were destroyed at a tourney by the IC infinite so that day may come sooner than we think.

haven't seen IC dominate a major tournament

the new ic infinite is certainly harder than wobbling, and wobbling was widely (and correctly imo) left unbanned

no IC player actually won a tournament because he was wobbling

Until then, those stages will be banned and the cursed 7 will likely remain cursed except by TOs willing to go the distance and have judges.

let's just ban those 7 characters so people will stop complaining

 

[S_B]

Ok, so if you have 16 TVs going (a low estimate for a big tourney btw), you need 16 judges watching the TVs at ALL TIMES throughout the day

Like I said, it takes enforcement and if the TO is willing to do it, so be it. If not, so be it.

what about marth's throwless regrab? if ness suddenly decides to wiggle out on the 6th iteration, does the marth get DQ'd because he didn't have a chance to do a legitimate throw?

Marth would probably opt to smash after the 5th release.

haven't seen IC dominate a major tournament

That's great, but it doesn't make the stories of players losing to IC infinites any less valid, especially since we've established that it takes some time to master and most seem to agree that the tactic hasn't really been explored to its fullest potential yet.

let's just ban those 7 characters so people will stop complaining

No need: by being vulnerable to infinites, they're basically banned already because no one will play them competitively. It doesn't even make sense to have them as a second main because putting in months of practice with a character who can be destroyed by a single grab from another character is a logical fallacy.

And FYI, if someone figured out a standing infinite grab on Snake tomorrow, I'm quite certain action would be taken to limit it.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

And FYI, if someone figured out a standing infinite grab on Snake tomorrow, I'm quite certain action would be taken to limit it.

Yeah. Action like laughing at Snake mains.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Yeah. Action like laughing at Snake mains.

Action like doing it.

 

[Seanson]

If SOME of the roster is going to be allowed a reprieve from inescapable grab death, then ALL of the roster needs the same treatment.

I was reading and I just couldn't get past this line.

The SOME of the roster that is being protected is actually ALL of the roster. You are referring to DDD chaingrab and wall infinites right? Snake, for example, is protected from DDD by banning walk-off and wall stages, but don't forget that the 'cursed 7' are also protected by these rules.

The fact just may be that these characters have a bad matchup. Infinites are in the game whether we like them or not. Ness mains should double blind pick every singles, just to be sure, and you should only use the 'cursed 7' warily, and watch out for being counterpicked.

Personally, I main Lucas, and I've done very well in large tournaments (top 10%). There are few characters who can flat out infinite the 'cursed 7'. There is a chance you won't play someone that can infinite you. However, I have played many marths in tournaments. It isn't important whether or not they tried to infinite me, or if they pulled it off. The important thing is that I have more options open than just a single character. In most cases, I beat the marths I've played. I main lucas mainly because I like him, and he's good. I am not hesitant for a second to switch for another character.

It isn't as if characters are so in-depth that you can't learn more than 1. Maybe characters with infinites deserve to be top tier. If you demand a rule change to benefit only your main/favorite character, maybe you shouldn't be playing. It is a game. Do not mix playing for fun and playing to win. Playing most of the cast is probably not as smart if you're playing seriously to win. Cursed 7 included.

 

[Sosuke]

So you limit the number of grabs done consecutively?
What if I just happen to be able to grab the guy 17 times in a row at random moments in the match? O_o

 

[S_B]

So you limit the number of grabs done consecutively?
What if I just happen to be able to grab the guy 17 times in a row at random moments in the match? O_o

I mean chaingrabs, not regular grabs.

If the opponent is free, then it's up to them to avoid being grabbed again.

The SOME of the roster that is being protected is actually ALL of the roster. You are referring to DDD chaingrab and wall infinites right? Snake, for example, is protected from DDD by banning walk-off and wall stages, but don't forget that the 'cursed 7' are also protected by these rules.

I think you're a bit late to this discussion, but we've already established that there are 12 characters who aren't vulnerable to D3's wall infinites or CGs, meaning that, no other broken game mechanics included, those stages should still be fair game because players could just as easily pick one of the 12 to counter D3 players.

However, Yuna pointed out that laser locking by Falco players screws over 100% of the cast on those levels, meaning that something still needs to be done about those stages, lest everyone starts playing Falco.

 

[S_B]

sorry, forgot to edit.

 

[pockyD]

so (for the 4th time), how do you determine when the opponent is "free"?

 

[S_B]

so (for the 4th time), how do you determine when the opponent is "free"?

If they're U, F or Bthrown, they're free because they can't be regrabbed in the air, last I checked.

That's the easiest way I can think of to ensure the chain has been broken. Of course, an individual TO may choose another way completely to determine this.

 

[pockyD]

If they're U, F or Bthrown, they're free because they can't be regrabbed in the air, last I checked.

That's the easiest way I can think of to ensure the chain has been broken. Of course, an individual TO may choose another way completely to determine this.

you don't seem to understand

what if on his last throw, ddd dthrows, then stands there for 5 seconds, then regrabs?

 

[S_B]

you don't seem to understand

what if on his last throw, ddd dthrows, then stands there for 5 seconds, then regrabs?

Then it's entirely the other player's fault for being regrabbed.

I'm not talking about limiting the number of grabs for any reason beyond ensuring that the victim has a chance to act again. Once that has happened, they're fair game if grabbed again and pay the price through 5 more chaingrabs.

Obviously, this isn't something they can afford to do repeatedly, but the only intention behind the 5 chain limit would be to ensure it's not a ONE time screw-up which equates death.

If there was a character that had a move which was a one-hit kill at 0% and the move was relatively easy to land and could be done out of shield even, that character would be dubbed "anti-competitive" and would be banned across the board, and that's what it is for the cursed 7.

But tier lists are formed one way or another, and often a game will unintentionally gimp its own characters like SSBB has.

It's the decision of TOs regarding what they want to do, and this is only my stance on the matter and I can only offer it as a suggestion. I'll likely never attend a tournament in my life so the decisions of TOs will never affect me personally.

I'd be interested to see what Sakurai himself would say on the matter, but I highly doubt he'd ever be bothered to comment.

 

[pockyD]

Then it's entirely the other player's fault for being regrabbed.

ok, what if he waits 4 seconds?

i hope you see where i'm going with this, and i don't have to keep asking all the way down to 'what if he waits 5 frames?'

 

[everlasting yayuhzz]

You can't enforce something like this. It's not possible without completely banning characters, which won't happen. Just realize some characters have bad matchups and work around it or play different characters. Simple as that.