Updating the Smiles

[SuSa]

Please remove my loveydovey emote. SWF no longer has my permission to use it.

The Counterpick System is NOT essential.

Spoiler

Everything you will need to be informed about this debate will be posted momentarily.


Updated, easier to read, double-checking order of replies.

Referenced thread about neutrals/stage selection this is "BPC's

thread"

Pierce's first reply to this thread (Reply #4)

Spoiler

I want a second opinion on whether I'd be entirely justified on locking and deleting a thread that quotes

me several times in private message without my knowledge or consent that the message was going to be used publicly. This is

typically considered extremely rude. In this particular instance, I don't REALLY care all that much. I merely encourage everyone to

take everything I say with a tad bit grain of salt, simply because thing things I say past midnight in PM doesn't imply that I put

as much thought into a well thought out address to the public.

For instance, if I had written this in a post, I would've used the phrase "Starter" instead of "Neutral" because that is the

official terminology of the BBR.

Also, keep in mind that everything said in this thread is in no way representative of the BBR. It is merely my own opinion and

speculation.

Joking title is so not going to fit the length of this post. I figured I'd try to get a laugh out of

you before continuing. Expect a lengthy read, but I'll try to keep it as short and to-the-point as possible.

1) Heard Marc you're trying to speak to the BBR and get things worked about accepting people whom are voted in by the community.

Kudos, if that can happen my CH idea can be thrown down the drain (for the most part) seeing as the next-best-thing happened.

However, I'd like to know the factors in which they are trying to consider for this. (To remove the possibility of bribes for

votes, as an example)


2) As far as the MK Ban discussion goes, Anti-Ban needs to come up with data they want to see to have Pro-Ban be able to

find, organize, and display such data to them. I posted this in the thread in the SS in a response to Marc so if you want further

details read there please. The TL;DR however is that Pro-Ban has to randomly find and present information, and Anti-Ban just says

"well we're not looking for that" but doesn't tell Pro-Ban what they ARE looking for. If they can give us criteria that must be

met, or data that must be shown - then we can finally make progress on this issue.

3) I honestly didn't know you had this job. Otherwise I would have gone through you. I usually avoid admins (JV)

because it can take weeks/months to get an answer on the simplist and shortest of questions due to how busy/non-existant they

really are.

4) Stage Discussion needs to be considered. BudgetPlayerCadet (or something like that) posted a WONERFUL stage analysis of how much

a double-standard our stage list currenty is. It creates character bias and can't be seen as "fair" even with "neutral" stages. I

believe the BBR should at least discuss this amongst themselves, or provide some input into this matter. I think the thread is

called "OH NO IT MOVES" or something like that... It's made by BPC and is front page, not hard to find.

I'll leave my 5th point to be explained at a later date, depending on how #1 ends up. because until that happens, it's rather moot.

1) I can't tell you too much, because that goes against the privacy of the BBR. You obviously already know that I

did bring it up.

2) I don't have much interest in discussing the MK ban, because I honestly couldn't care either way atm. I have too much bias at

this point. However, I think it's important to allow people to talk about it, and I'll see about getting that allowed again.

3) I'll refrain from replying to this.

4) Stage discussion in the BBR typically occurs each time we go into updating the ruleset. Also, I read every post in Tactical, and

I read BPC's thread already, even though I opted not to post this time.

Understood.

My stance on it is very confusing. It doesn't really effect me either way - but I do care about which direction it goes...I

don't see the community dwindling because he's NOT around.... =\

3) It didn't even need to be answered, I was just stating the fact. =P

4) Okay.

5th Point, now that I have some answers:

How important/essential is the counterpick system? First - stage wise; Second - character wise.

SSB is one of the few (only one I know about personally actually..) games that allow a counterpick between rounds. This has become

an established standard. If you lose, you may counterpick. The fact it has become standard deems it of some importance, however how

essential is it? Not factoring in MK (yet) whom ruins the entire system (arguably... with no bad matchups or stages); how essential

is it, if essential at all?

Why is it in place? Would it hurt to remove the system? The system itself actually seems uncompetitive. It allows you to try and

place yourself at a huge advantage over your opponent by hard countering them and picking their characters worse stage. How

is that competitive? In fact, that's detrimental to competitiveness, but we have it around anyways. Why? It's obviously "more fair"

but is that a good enough reason?

So for what reason is this system around?

Now if we add the MK factor, it would have us lead that counterpicking is not essential to Brawl and should therefore... be

removed. If it's not essential, why keep it around? If it has been proven essential - this is where the MK discussion occurs.

How important is the ability to counterpick a stage against your opponent? Meta Knight arguably has no disadvantageous stages. He

breaks the stage counterpick system.

How important is the ability to counterpick characters against your opponent? Meta Knight answers this question with - pick Meta

Knight. This automatically centralizes the entire counterpick system on him which causes the metagame (which has proven to

be very dependant on counterpicks) to be entirely focused on him. Doesn't this qualify as overcentralization of the

metagame?

Hope you can bring this up with the BBR, feel free to use this PM if you want to. However, I'd love to get 5-10 opinions from the

BBR answering all of my questions.. just to get an idea on how they think.

It's commonly agreed that MK breaks the Counter-Pick system for the most part. We discussed the counterpick system

once, and we concluded that while rubberbanding is typically discouraged as a competitive feature, allowing the opponent to do it

as well balances things out. While I may not entirely agree with this, I'm of the opinion that the CP system is fine, and hence I'm

not looking to change it, and have yet to be introduced to a superior alternative.

Marc has told me otherwise. Rubberbanding? I see about the balance, and I don't really agree with

it..... just because it's balanced does not mean it should be there. There is no essential reason for the counterpick

system to be in place. None at all. If there is an essential reason, than MK breaks that - centralizes the gameplay around him by

doing so - and that can be used as ban criteria.

See what I'm trying to get at? The counterpick system is not essential yet we include it. This means it's important, but not

essential. No reasons are stated for why it is in place. There are no reasons as to why it is in place. For everything else

the BBR does, they try to include a reason. They removed the Bowsercide/Ganoncide rule because they believe the winner screen

should be followed. So what is there reasoning behind the counterpick system being in place?

No one has yet to suggest an alternative that we find superior.

Superior: No counterpicking, best 2/3 3 stock rounds, random stage selected from the stage list.

Or, no counterpicking characters as that part is definately not essential - but you can counterpick stages.

What can be superior to a non-essential, but wanted system? Nothing. You are avoiding my question of what makes the

counterpick system essential to competitive gameplay?

The correct answer:
It isn't.

However that raises another question. Why is it incorperated if not essential? Which this is now a subjective point, and it

is only around because we believe it should be.

There are no superior alternatives? That's completely avoiding the questions.... there doesn't need to be an alternative

because it doesn't need to be around. (Bit sick of having to say this...)

What makes different stages essential to competitive gameplay? Nothing. It's implied
that very few rules or setting are essential. I didn't avoid your question, I just viewed it to be rhetorical.

I would say giving players the OPTIONS of the stage the play on is superior to having it randomly decided. I would guess that most

of the community agrees with me. I would also agree that people would feel more comfortable with the ability to switch out of

unwinnables on a double blind, even if it means you can get CPed.

I'm speaking of the counterpick system. For both stages and characters.

You were completely avoiding the question. Now you answered finally with "It is not essential"

And you also used words like "comfortable" and "ability to switch out from unwinnables" (which technically don't exist to be

honest)

Without a counterpick system, there is a clear line drawn between "tournament viable" and "not tournament viable". Characters whom

are infinited by DDD for example, are less tournament viable. In fact - the only reason they are tournament viable is

because of the counterpick system. If you were a DK, I'd go DDD. You'd ask for a double-blind pick. At this point, I'm safer going

DDD than you are DK. Especially if you are a DK main, I'd have the advantage of going my main vs your secondary. Without a

counterpick system, if we did choose our mains - and because DDD's infinite is not banned by the BBR it would give you an

"unwinnable" (don't get grabbed, hur hur) matchup.

Now, this is not essential to competitive gameplay. In fact, it only exists to make certain characters more viable in

competitive play. This goes against everything that the BBR argues for. This goes against banning the small-step CG,

this goes against banning [selective] infinites. This goes against banning Meta Knight.

Now do you see why I want you to bring this up to the BBR? Essentially it is an extreme double standard of making

the game more varied and "balanced". It's something many people overlook, but the blatant fact is there.

If you want criteria for a ban against Meta Knight, look at the non-essential counter-pick system in place. In order

to remove the double-standard, you either need to remove the counterpick system for characters, or remove Meta Knight.

As I stated it's actually very uncompetitive to have a counterpick system in place. If you don't want to be counterpicked,

the answer is clear. Pick Meta Knight. With the counterpick system, if you don't want to be counterpicked, the answer is

clear. Pick Meta Knight.

Removing the counterpick system - leaves Meta Knight as the center of metagame.

Keeping counterpick system, removing Meta Knight - Every other character has a counterpick, making no one character the best

choice. Now it comes down to preference, and.. le gasp! You have a varied metagame with no one overly dominate character!

Spoiler

So what do you think personally of my argument? I've only seen anything similar used once, it didn't get very detailed

like mine - and it was completely ignored.

Please... just present this to the BBR for discussion, I feel like I'm only getting your input - and I know you don't speak for the

BBR.. just as PR for them...

If you were under the impression that I'm going to nitpick words and debate with you through PM, you're sadly

mistaken. I take time out of my day every Wednesday to do this, and I'm surely not going to do it on a relaxing Saturday night.

You yourself said that the CP system increases the "viability" of several characters. You go on to state that MK breaks the system.

This has already been known forever.

You want me to bring up your argument to the BBR? And say what exactly?

"Susa has pointed out a flaw in our counter-pick system. Like several other features of our ruleset, it is not essential.

Furthermore, it's ruined by MK. Therefore, we are creating a double standard by having a counter-pick system and MK together in the

same ruleset."

It would get argued over for a bit, then probably laughed at, then ignored while a couple of die-hards debate it.

By the way, it's quite false that we do not have rules to be fair to the cast. Realistically, a shorter timer helps some characters

clock each other out, and a neutral stage list helps to keep the game as balanced as possible. Furthermore, counterpick is done to

give the players more options, not to balance the cast. Whether or not it's essential, it's a widely accepted and appreciated

clause in our ruleset, and it's unlikely that the BBR would recommend it for change, or that the public would even accept such a

recommendation if it were to happen.

Saying that removing MK leaves a more diverse metagame is an age old proban argument that I have used myself. It's not new.

Why have you not started a thread in Tactical titled "Removing the Counter-Pick system" where you proceed to explain how you don't

think the CP system is good. You really don't need to talk about MK at all to do this. Then you could suggest an alternative in

public.

If you do this, then I will bring it up in the BR.

The PM's between myself and yourself are now open for public criticism. I have stated my points, and you have

stated yours as well as do your best to answer said points. I will let the public discuss on whom they feel is correct.

Also giving a player more options, essentially balances the cast.

Now watch how fast the thread turns into an MK debate and it gets locked.

Also your argument brings up "neutral" stages being "the most fair" which I again refer to BPC's argument against that and the

polarization of many of these stages towards certain characters.

 

[global-wolf]

This sounds fun! I'll try to come up with some stuff.

Edit: is an emoticon too, I think you forgot to add it in the OP.

 

[Clownbot]

The Counterpick System is NOT essential.

Not to be rude or anything but... What does all that have to do with the topic of this thread?

 

[SuSa]

It's my in-post signature.

Kind of like how I also often end like so.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Sonic board poser.

 

[SuSa]

Get back on topic, I only posted here to say to remove my emoticon.

Also Kawaii, I'm one of two exceptions that the steak gang let use :093: without starting fuss. Why? Because I'm SuSa. Lurk the Sonic boards more please.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

I wish

could be a smiley.

...I'm still obsessed with that commercial.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Get back on topic, I only posted here to say to remove my emoticon.

Also Kawaii, I'm one of two exceptions that the steak gang let use :093: without starting fuss. Why? Because I'm SuSa. Lurk the Sonic boards more please.

Sonic boards died when Boxob and CITH stopped posting ;_;

 

[Indigo Jeans]

Smash 64 character icons-

:64falcon: |

:64dk: |

:64fox: |

:64jigglypuff: |

:64kirby: |

:64link: |

:64luigi: |

:64mario: |

:64ness: |

:64pikachu: |

:64samus: |

:64yoshi:

 

[KrazyGlue]

:D:

:<:

:wink:

:wink2:

:freakout:

:???:

:ohmy:

: peek:

Those are ones i made, not my friend

Really?

I found the couch one in a forum from 2008: http://detroit.momslikeme.com/membe...m=3047190&replyid=12022339&source=stream_rail

I also found it on smiley vault: http://www.smileyvault.com/displayimage.php?album=35&pos=860

As well as various other sites.

You've got to make your own sprites, dude. Which ones are actually yours? Please tell the truth this time.

 

[Indigo Jeans]

I found the couch one in a forum from 2008: http://detroit.momslikeme.com/membe...m=3047190&replyid=12022339&source=stream_rail

Wtf... mad is there!

 

[KrazyGlue]

Wtf... mad is there!

Yeah. On that site you can share smilies, so it may have circulated around. Probably some of the older smilies were originally from other sites as well. But the new ones are supposed to be original, and a smiley that is an exact replica of one in a forum post from 2008 clearly isn't original.

I don't think there's anything wrong with finding a concept online and making a smiley based off of it, but you can't just copy smilies from other sites.

 

[SuSa]

Considering we want original content to try to avoid legal copyright issues, and those are open-source smilies.. I don't see the issue, besides the fact he claimed it was his... which is REALLY BAD....

@Smash Researcher
That's not quite and that's because I'm pretty sure most of our smilies are default vB ones.... meaning they are everywhere.

@Krazyglue
Most smilies are free-to-use actually.... there are few that are copyrighted and such, but compared to the free-to-use ones those are a small amount indeed.

 

[KrazyGlue]

It may not be original material, but someone should make a smiley for

I would love everyone forever.

Good sir, I have attempted your request:

he claimed it was his... which is REALLY BAD....

That's exactly the problem. He claimed he made it.

In addition to the fact that we were specifically requested to not take smilies from other sites, whether free or not.

We only want original smiles though. We don't just want people swiping smiles from other sites. If you have an idea for a new smile, be creative and make it yourself. After all, that's what we do in the AE, right?

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Is... is that a... banana with the peel acting like tentacles?

Yes. It's Nannerpus.
Denny's superbowl commercial from '09 i think

 

[SuSa]

Good sir, I have attempted your request:

That's exactly the problem. He claimed he made it.

In addition to the fact that we were specifically requested to not take smilies from other sites, whether free or not.

Again, I think that request was more specifically made to avoid any possible copyright issues. As swiping from a site might pose some, it dod not specificy free or not.

It just specified don't, which like I said... most likely to avoid legal issues.

/forum admin+mod+support staff at quite a few places...

 

[MacNCheese.]

Ok, i will edit my posts and tell the truth I sware !_!

Why aren't we allowed to use free smilies???
All of the current ones are from other sites :/

GREAT SMILEY MAKING SITE!!!!!
http://http://www.gifmix.net/create-graphics/make-smileys/

thats how i made the :ohmy: thing XD

ok

XD

XD2

O.O

:ohmy:

*unfinished*

:D

:<

 

[Neon Ness]

I am so incredibly confused.

DarkStar, it looks like you took some smilies from other sites (definitely seen some of the ones you posted in other places), even though the admins explicitly stated they wanted original smiles. I can't tell which ones you actually made and which ones you just found. We've already dealt with this once this weekend, is this gonna be a problem with you? :\ Really, just post things you made yourself... please.

You guys really know how to get offtopic lol. Let's try to only post serious suggestions and shovel the funny stuff over to the social thread though. Nannerpus is funny but I doubt it would really function as useful emoticon... Whatever, I'll add it to the OP anyway.

Again, only smiles made by yourselves, people. No taking from other sites, free or not.

 

[MacNCheese.]

Well I made most of those on a smiley making website :\ the one above your post, Ness.
After all that why would i do it AGAIN? That's not logical... Check out the website, yo :\
If anybody here did they would understabd how fun and easy it is to make millions of smilies! :D

 

[KrazyGlue]

I believe DarkStar now... He typed in the site name wrong (two http tags), but once I got to the actual site, I see what he means.

Basically, it's one of those sites where you have a blank smiley and then you have a panel of and mouths that you click to put on the smiley.

Here's the correct url: http://www.gifmix.net/create-graphics/make-smileys/

Here's one I made in about 10 seconds:

They don't fit with the rest of the site's smilies though. The color gradient is different and their size is larger (19x19 as opposed to the normal 15x15). Of course, this could be fixed easily.

Really, I enjoy making smilies from scratch though. I don't know if using someone's smilies, mouths, and eyes and then just mix-and-matching them counts as being creative and original. I also feel like there's no work put into it. I don't know if this is a bad thing, but I thought this would be a fun project where all of the AE people group together and help each other out to make a whole new set of creative and awesome smilies. I almost feel like it would be a letdown if I just went to that site for an hour and whipped up 30 smilies. We'd be done super-fast, but I think we'd be missing out on all the fun and teamwork.

Of course, these are just my personal preferences. I do appreciate that DarkStar has now actually put together some of his own smilies as opposed to taking them from other sites. But I'd like to hear from other people and see what they think about this. It'll make more sense if you check out the link and go make a smiley. Trust me, it won't take long.

 

[MacNCheese.]

Thank you I would make my own, but I can't get invisible backgrounds

 

[Jim Morrison]

If you have such a small smiley I am 100% sure someone else will make those other few pixels transparent for you.

 

[E123Omega]

No more awesomeface smiley attempts?? son i am disappoint

 

[Indigo Jeans]

I am so incredibly confused.

DarkStar, it looks like you took some smilies from other sites (definitely seen some of the ones you posted in other places), even though the admins explicitly stated they wanted original smiles. I can't tell which ones you actually made and which ones you just found. We've already dealt with this once this weekend, is this gonna be a problem with you? :\ Really, just post things you made yourself... please.

You guys really know how to get offtopic lol. Let's try to only post serious suggestions and shovel the funny stuff over to the social thread though. Nannerpus is funny but I doubt it would really function as useful emoticon... Whatever, I'll add it to the OP anyway.

Again, only smiles made by yourselves, people. No taking from other sites, free or not.

Mine were serious and were made by me... except the :C one, afaik Azua made that one. But the last two fit both of the above criteria.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Man, just made it, looks horrible lol.
Female.png

EDIT: No idea how to make it transparent, but it's like 2 clicks for someone with the appropriate knowledge/tools.

 

[SuSa]

Don't make it over a background (so you get that grid in photoshop, for example) and save it as a .png

Basically, if it doesn't have a background and you save it as a .png or .gif, it's transparent

 

[Jim Morrison]

In Paint?
Paint doesn't looke like it works like that.

 

[SuSa]

I haven't used Paint in aaaggggesss... Don't think it does either. =P Sorry, forgot you were using paint..

XD

 

[ndayday]

Oh Guus~
I'll fix your smilies.

female.png, bro

 

[Jim Morrison]

Looks like a legit smiley imo.

 

[SuSa]

It only looks funny because you gave it eyes, but no pupils. :x

Try to add a 2 pixel pupil inside the (blue?) of her eyes. Smallllll detail but it should make a difference.

 

[Jim Morrison]

That's literally what I did, except they are crooked.

EDIT: They would look ever worse if I put them in the other white slots. No, this is the only way.

 

[ndayday]

I for one think she's beautiful.

 

[SuSa]

I saved the emoticon to see what you did, you made her crosseyed... XD switch the white and the blue pixels. (looks worse when zoomed in, but better when zoomed out to me)

I just removed the blue pixel to be honest, gave her 1 pixel eyes (EG: What most emoticons have)

Still full credit to you, but her eyes don't look as weird to me. :s

[Just my opinion... XD]

 

[KrazyGlue]

Whoa, they're already changing the smiley system up a lot... any chance that ours are going to be included?

Also, I'll try to make some smilies later but I'm busy for now. I do think the

should be added to the OP, as well as :female: and some of the ones Smash Researcher made. (Except for , which was already added to the smilies.)

 

[Neon Ness]

Yes, I am going to update the OP real soon... been working on a massive art project since like Friday night.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Ok, cool. Yeah, I'm liking the mario smilies like and .

Also, loving the new pokemon!
:352:

And postbits! :master::ibwc::redmushroom::dice2::dice::brush:
:droom::ten::magnify::notabullet::scale::quill:
okeball:

And... er... Shaq?

 

[SuSa]

Wow... he actually added the Shaq meme?

Just... wow...

 

[Geist]

Oh yes
yes
yes I love it

Shaq


Yes.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

..wait...we finally got shaq?!


...OH GOD PICHU. DONT. TELL. ICG.