Why is everyone so opposed to having Smash Balls in competitive play?

[cobaltblue]

Also, a few people are asking why anyone would want to choose add more randomness to the outcome of matches. My response to that is that the randomness is not what we are choosing to add. The randomness is a side-effect. The reason I'd prefer to play with items is to add variety in what can happen in a game; not to obscure who is the better player - that's just a side effect.

Yuna already addrssed this. No one cares what you play at home, its whats played at the $500 money matchs that people travel accross the country to participate in. And no one wants to deal with that situation when the obvious better player gets blown away because the smash ball/beamsword/bomb/etc landed near their losing opponet.

Reading all these posts make me see why Yuna has to come off as a douche is 80% of his posts...

 

[SarsVirus]

this thread is epic fail like tripping is not bad enough already u have to add smash balls god newbs and their bals

 

[fireb0rn]

1. "Smash Balls are random"
Well there are a lot of random elements in this game. I don't see how anyone can complain about randomness in Brawl when any character can trip at any time, for no reason at all. Not to mention some characters have inherently random attacks.

fact: randomness within brawl is despised by competitive players.

just because something bad already exists doesn't mean it is necessary to add to this.

for example, read my argument as to why I think murder and **** should be legalized:

1. "Murder and **** already occur in our societies." ("Randomness already occurs in Brawl")
Well, there is a lot of murder and **** in this world. I don't see how anyone can complain that I should want to kill people (and stuff) when any person can already do it at any time, for no reason at all. Not to mention that some murderers have inherently random signatures.

so in other words, you haven't really done much to prove that it is a good or valuable addition. in fact you've done more to prove that it shouldn't be added since you've just agreed that it is something which is random, and randomness is obviously something competitive players have decided to avoid.

 

[Yuna]

karadoc: I don't feel like replying to you anymore as you keep missing the point. Twin Dreams can take over (as he already has).

ok. no one is saying there is a "best" way to play in general. the argument against items is strictly for competitive play. in order to see who's better, we try to reduce as much randomness as possible to get more accurate results.

Actually, there are people who are claiming there is a "best" way to play. The funny part is that the vast majority of said people are people who want items to be on.

No one who plays with items off has ever told someone who plays with them on (at least not in this thread) that they're "playing it wrong" or that "playing with items off is better and/or requires more skill". All we've ever said that for Competitive gaming, items off is better.

However, many people have claimed that playing with items off is the better way to play Smash.

 

[sFoster]

The chance of all characters getting the smash ball is not even.

I main zelda, and I call tell you with din's fire getting that smash ball is REALLY REALLY EASY

 

[Yuna]

But he's not arguing that. At least not anymore.

Funny, sounded like it.

I didn't say you are discouraging him...

Then why did you?

He's looking to create other competitive formats. You're defending the format "Competitive standard".

He doesn't clearly say that. He comes across as wanting to change the current "competitive standard". And why would he still whine when we've openly encouraged him to create different competitive formats?

It's the use of "competitive" that is confusing the issue, because when he says "competitive" he is referring to any format used in tournaments. When you say "competitive" you are referring to the current standard format for competitive play.

It's his fault for refusing to use the correct term. "Competitive gaming" means one thing. If he misuses the term, too bad for him.

Also, he's clearly talking about the current tournament format, anyway.

Stuff

Jack needs to express himself better. It's not my fault if I can't make huge leaps in logic and linguistics to compensate for his inability to clearly state what he wants to state. I come across quite clear (sometimes crystal) even when I haven't slept for 20 hours and am mispelling things left and right.

 

[The Executive]

No one who plays with items off has ever told someone who plays with them on (at least not in this thread) that they're "playing it wrong" or that "playing with items off is better and/or requires more skill".

This is the single most relevant thing I've read all week and no one who needs to see it will pay enough attention.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Funny, sounded like it.

That's what disagreement over the meaning of terms does. He already said that I was correct about this being the cause.

Then why did you?

I don't think I did, though if I'm having a senior moment here it's because I initially misunderstood the point you were trying to make.



Regardless, I'm not, saying that you're discouraging him, I'm saying this is a misunderstanding.

He doesn't clearly say that. He comes across as wanting to change the current "competitive standard". And why would he still whine when we've openly encouraged him to create different competitive formats?

No, he stated that I was correct in his above post.

He was only continuing the argument because he thought that you were discouraging him, and it was because when you used "competitive" you were referring to the current competitive format, whereas when he used "competitive", he meant "formats used in competitions".

It's his fault for refusing to use the correct term. "Competitive gaming" means one thing. If he misuses the term, too bad for him.

Look, I'm not trying to assign blame, I'm trying to resolve the issue by pointing out that you two don't disagree on the substance of the issue.

Also, he's clearly talking about the current tournament format, anyway.

Lets check up on what he says.

...before I go to sleep, just wanted to say that adumbrodeus and Twin Dreams are totally right; goes back to the whole 'weakness with internet discussions' thing. I have a feeling that the majority of the issues going on are just misunderstandings, but that's kind of to be expected, so I try not to take things too seriously at the end of the day (which is now, ****it; stupid sleep).

*Bolding added.

So, it's obvious that he's realized that it's just a misunderstanding, and that he was using "competitive" differently then you.

Jack needs to express himself better. It's not my fault if I can't make huge leaps in logic and linguistics to compensate for his inability to clearly state what he wants to state. I come across quite clear (sometimes crystal) even when I haven't slept for 20 hours and am mispelling things left and right.

It's not about blame. If you want to find fault with him for not expressing himself properly and not reading your posts properly, go right ahead, I have no desire to get involved in a "who is at fault" argument, but it's completely irrelevant to the topic.



I just noticed that you two in reality agreed but due to linguistic issues were debating, and I wanted to point it out so you could resolve it. That's all.

Actually, there are people who are claiming there is a "best" way to play. The funny part is that the vast majority of said people are people who want items to be on.

No one who plays with items off has ever told someone who plays with them on (at least not in this thread) that they're "playing it wrong" or that "playing with items off is better and/or requires more skill". All we've ever said that for Competitive gaming, items off is better.

However, many people have claimed that playing with items off is the better way to play Smash.

Agreed 100%.

Items players tend to evangelize far more in my expirience. Items-free players tend to only talk about how they prefer it that way, and state why it's their preferred format for their games and tournaments.

When challenged they explain why it makes the game more of a contest of skill.

 

[Pikachu'sBlueWizardHat]

This may or may not be my final post in this thread. I wasn't going to reply but then I saw this:

* And last but not least: If I tell you to please go away, will you actually stay away this time?

You want to kick me out of my own thread? I think I'll stick around just to spite you now.

But I have some other things to say. First of all, Yuna, I'm getting a little tired of you constantly calling me stupid. Apparently when someone disagrees with you or makes even the tiniest error in their argument, they are stupid and no one should listen to them. Not to mention that all of this bickering is hinged on a simple misunderstanding. You thought I was re-using old arguments that you had already refuted, and I made several attempts to tell you that I wasn't trying to do that. But you refused to listen and just called me stupid. So as long as you call me stupid, I'm gonna call you an arrogant elitist jerk who either loves arguing way too much or just takes internet arguments way too seriously.

Next order of business: I admitted in my previous post that at least I see where your side is coming from. Here, from page 7:

I can say that you and everyone else have given me a good understanding of why Smash Balls are currently not allowed in competitive play. I still don't fully agree, but I can accept it at least.

The fact that I don't have rebuttals for your arguments (and thus, can't fight them) doesn't mean I agree with you that we shouldn't even try Smash Balls out on the competitive scene. You still haven't convinced me that there is no need to even try it, and I have not convinced you that there is a need to do so. At this point all we can do is agree to disagree, since neither of us is going to change our minds anytime soon.

And about WHY I wanted to have Smash Balls in competitive play? Because "competitive Brawl" doesn't interest me the way it is now, and I might actually be interested if the game was different. Basically, from what I have heard from many people around here, Brawl is already shaping up to be a pretty poor competitive game, it not a totally non-competitive one (that's an argument for another thread, though). If Brawl obviously doesn't play like Melee, why are we still trying to play it like Melee? Why can't we try something new that might make the game more interesting? Smash Balls might make for a nice change of pace. That's the main idea I wanted to get across with this thread. You've made your arguments, I've heard them, but I still don't believe it's not worth a try.

To everyone else in this thread:
Again, thank you for the replies. I am happy that the majority of the posts have been constructive criticism and not just flaming.

fact: randomness within brawl is despised by competitive players.

just because something bad already exists doesn't mean it is necessary to add to this.

for example, read my argument as to why I think murder and **** should be legalized:

1. "Murder and **** already occur in our societies." ("Randomness already occurs in Brawl")
Well, there is a lot of murder and **** in this world. I don't see how anyone can complain that I should want to kill people (and stuff) when any person can already do it at any time, for no reason at all. Not to mention that some murderers have inherently random signatures.

so in other words, you haven't really done much to prove that it is a good or valuable addition. in fact you've done more to prove that it shouldn't be added since you've just agreed that it is something which is random, and randomness is obviously something competitive players have decided to avoid.

I'm not denying that Smash Balls are random. The only thing I was trying to say there was to not go "Brawl is perfect and Smash Balls would ruin everything." If we accepted that Brawl was random, maybe we could accept that Smash Balls have a place in it somewhere. But as you've said, like numerous others in this thread, competitive players don't like randomness. This begs the question "Why are you even playing Brawl in the first place?" but that's neither here nor there.

 

[Yuna]

It's not that you're wrong, it's that you're wrong and refuse to realize that you're wrong and keep reusing the same old tired arguments others and even you yourself have already used and failed with already.

Ignorance is perfectly fine since not everyone can be expected to know everything. But once you're informed of something, you're expected to be able to learn from that, not to ignore it if it works against your cause. You still say that you think we should at least try Final Smashes out in tournaments despite the heap of evidence and arguments I've showered upon you on why we will never do so.

 

[Yuna]

Double post. *10 Shota Links*

 

[adumbrodeus]

The fact that I don't have rebuttals for your arguments (and thus, can't fight them) doesn't mean I agree with you that we shouldn't even try Smash Balls out on the competitive scene. You still haven't convinced me that there is no need to even try it, and I have not convinced you that there is a need to do so. At this point all we can do is agree to disagree, since neither of us is going to change our minds anytime soon.

Well, if you want smashballs in the competitive scene, then create a format and try to attract interest.

But the current competitive standard format is going to stay in place, because people who are that interested in upper level play to be competitive dislike the randomness in general.

But you could create a rather common alternative competitive format, heck, follow Jack's lead with his items standard play (ISP) format which he's developing.

Nobody is stopping you from doing so, in fact many people will encourage you if you take that route, including Yuna in all probability.


That said, if you are suggesting the creation of an alternative competitive format instead of attacking the current standard format then my comments are inapplicable.

I'm not denying that Smash Balls are random. The only thing I was trying to say there was to not go "Brawl is perfect and Smash Balls would ruin everything." If we accepted that Brawl was random, maybe we could accept that Smash Balls have a place in it somewhere. But as you've said, like numerous others in this thread, competitive players don't like randomness. This begs the question "Why are you even playing Brawl in the first place?" but that's neither here nor there.

The problem is randomness detracts from the overall expirience for the majority of competitive players.

Adding to that randomness does not make things better.

As for "why play brawl"? Well, there is a significant number of people who chose not to play brawl because it is too random. However, for myself and those who play brawl but have the competitive mindset, it's a case of the pros outweighing the cons. I HATE tripping, but there's enough good in the game for me to stick around. I expect that this is what the majority of players will say.

 

[Yuna]

I'm not denying that Smash Balls are random. The only thing I was trying to say there was to not go "Brawl is perfect and Smash Balls would ruin everything." If we accepted that Brawl was random, maybe we could accept that Smash Balls have a place in it somewhere. But as you've said, like numerous others in this thread, competitive players don't like randomness. This begs the question "Why are you even playing Brawl in the first place?" but that's neither here nor there.

"It's already slightly random, so let's add tons of more randomness to it!" - Sorry, doesn't cut it.

Also, that still doesn't change the fact that Smash balls are imbalanced, camp-friendly and extremely broken. Not a single one of those aspects can be changed short of hacking the game and giving everyone Lucario's FS (everyone sucks) or a Landmaster (everyone rocks).

 

[metaXzero]

Yuna's last post made lol! We really need more LANDMASTAAA!

But this thread should be done. If you want item tournies, make your own. end.

But Smashboards current state dictates we shall have several more pages of flaming.

 

[Justpeachey1029]

justpeachey Im sorry but you dont know what you are talking about.
also did you just ignore every other post in this thread?

we banned items and stages in melee so the randomness would be minimal, 7 years later people are still playing.

we are talking about tournaments here not about how people should play the game in the comfort of their own home.

I'm just saying that variety is the spice of life. Once you've done the same thing over and over, it's going to get boring. Sure, I understand that if you always set it to one simple map, and no items, it will never be the same, but at the same time, I think its more fun to have things changing all the time. that is why we play brawl right? to have fun? Anyways, for tournaments, I agree that having a set map, and no items will definitely show who is the greater player, but I think it makes a game more enjoyable if you're having to run like hell to avoid the landmaster. Plus, a smash ball is not a guaranteed KO. Many are really easy to dodge. It just all depends on what you want to do. If you want to determine skill lvl, great, smash balls aren't for you. But if you want to make a game more fun... in my opinion, then go ahead, throw them in there.

 

[Justpeachey1029]

It's not that you're wrong, it's that you're wrong and refuse to realize that you're wrong and keep reusing the same old tired arguments others and even you yourself have already used and failed with already.

Ignorance is perfectly fine since not everyone can be expected to know everything. But once you're informed of something, you're expected to be able to learn from that, not to ignore it if it works against your cause. You still say that you think we should at least try Final Smashes out in tournaments despite the heap of evidence and arguments I've showered upon you on why we will never do so.

dude, you can't just say someone's wrong because they disagree with you. No matter how hard you try, if someone believes something fully, you cannot change their opinion. Believe me, I've tried. Anyway, if he believes that Smash Balls should at least be tried, and you don't... don't play a match with him. Let other people have their own opinion without calling them morons.

 

[dj_pwn1423]

I'm just saying that variety is the spice of life. Once you've done the same thing over and over, it's going to get boring. Sure, I understand that if you always set it to one simple map, and no items, it will never be the same, but at the same time, I think its more fun to have things changing all the time. that is why we play brawl right? to have fun? Anyways, for tournaments, I agree that having a set map, and no items will definitely show who is the greater player, but I think it makes a game more enjoyable if you're having to run like hell to avoid the landmaster. Plus, a smash ball is not a guaranteed KO. Many are really easy to dodge. It just all depends on what you want to do. If you want to determine skill lvl, great, smash balls aren't for you. But if you want to make a game more fun... in my opinion, then go ahead, throw them in there.

no I'm sorry I have way more fun in tournaments then I ever had playing with my friends with all the items on. Your definition of fun does not apply to all of us.

I said you didn't know what you where talking about because you probably have never been to a tourney. You don't know how much fun those people would be having compared to you.

 

[orintemple]

I'm just saying that variety is the spice of life. Once you've done the same thing over and over, it's going to get boring. Sure, I understand that if you always set it to one simple map, and no items, it will never be the same, but at the same time, I think its more fun to have things changing all the time. that is why we play brawl right? to have fun? Anyways, for tournaments, I agree that having a set map, and no items will definitely show who is the greater player, but I think it makes a game more enjoyable if you're having to run like hell to avoid the landmaster. Plus, a smash ball is not a guaranteed KO. Many are really easy to dodge. It just all depends on what you want to do. If you want to determine skill lvl, great, smash balls aren't for you. But if you want to make a game more fun... in my opinion, then go ahead, throw them in there.

Who are you to tell people what they think is fun? For me it is more fun to play with pure skill then it is to have to worry about my enemy getting a ball that could send down a flying tank that takes 2 stocks off me if used right. I don't want to lose a game because he happened to snipe the ball from across the screen with a laser. That is not fun for me. It frustrates me when people play with items on because there is no telling what could happen. I consider myself a competitive player, I "Play to Win." For me, winning is fun, and I don't like losing because of some crap that had nothing to do with my opponent being good at the game. A first timer could pick up a ray gun and shoot me off the stage forever if they wanted to.

 

[Sosuke]

LANDMASTERRRRRRRR!!!! nuff said.

Thank you.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I like how there are two people who are arguing over what I've been saying... and neither one of them is me. I just think that's the bee's knees (for no other reason than it's an excuse to use the phrase 'bee's knees').

I'm going to explain this as well as I can, and hopefully someone will understand it. Yuna, I know you can't believe that I could possibly be advocating change simply to be advocating change (and adumbrodeus is totally right in that I'm not advocating replacing the current tournament standard; it's the standard for a reason and that's not likely to change, nor should it), but that's exactly what I'm doing. I'm advocating exploration of options not because we require it to survive, but because it is a vital part of the growth of the community.

Many people are satisfied with what we have now, as is their right. But, no one comes up to you and says 'here's something new for you to experience' (unless he's a salesman); you have to go and actively look for new and exciting experiences. No one can do that for you. If you don't go out and look for a diverse set of experiences, then you are running the risk of missing out on something wonderful, something that you can't possibly know exists if you don't look for it yourself. I can give you plenty of examples of this, both inside gaming and out.

I am not an outdoors person. I hate getting dirty, and I have an insect phobia. Knowing this full well, I have gone camping before. Why would I purposefully put myself in a situation that I 'knew' I wouldn't like? Simple; because I would never know for sure if I was missing out on something that I could only get by camping without trying the activity out for myself, and lo and behold I did find something I like to do because I put myself out on a limb and tried something new simply for the sake of trying something new (that something being marksmanship).

As an example in gaming, I am an avid Pokemon Trainer. My favorite Pokemon has alway been Alakazam. As a Spc. Sweeper, he has crazy S. Atk and Spd., which is perfect for my playstyle; he may not be the best, but he's never let me down, and so I enjoy having him on my team. I felt that I was becoming stagnant, though, and as such I decided to reset my Pearl version so that I could play with an entirely different team than I was used to simply for the sake of playing with Pokemon that I wasn't used to playing with. As a result, I've grown very attached to Arcanine and Gengar, and I never would have even considered using them had I not done this.

This applies to our community in a very important way. We have something that works for us (the current tournament standard)... but who's to say that there aren't ways to play out there that aren't just as good (or better)? We'll never know if we refuse to experiment, if we foolishly stick to our standard and let others mess around on the side as if it isn't important. Our community is growing at an alarming rate, new players coming into the fold in massive quantities, and not everyone is looking for the same thing. We, as a community, owe it to ourselves to experiment simply to say that we've explored every avenue we could to find different ways to play competitively that work for many different people (all as compliments to the accepted tournament standard that will bind them all together).

We all, as members of a community, should want the community to grow, to reach horizons that we might not have though possible (or prudent) before. We should all be trying to find ways to change Smash for the better (and I hear now that EVO is considering using items in their Brawl tourney...). We should all be experimenting with no items, items, heavy Brawl, fast Brawl, Smash Balls, 1v1, 2v2, FFA... anything we can to find what is balanced and what works so that we can have as many accepted standards as possible. There is literally no reason not to as we stand nothing to lose, but everything to gain.

Nothing to lose at all. As long as we continue to approach everything with the same skill, level-headedness, and determination that built our current community, only good things can come from it. And it's a simple as that.

 

[zenoth]

It randomly appearing at random locations is fair because in my experience even if it appears right next to someone the other player can still sneak in and get the last hit on it most of the time.

Secondly all of them are avoidable to an extent. Even the land masters can be survived or dodged completely and you can even die while using it (one time I won because both of those happened to fox, at the same time). Most don’t even do one hit KOs you if you have low %.

And yes it can make some one who winning win even more but it can also help someone who mad a stupid mistake recover.

But really we’re not saying all tournaments should have items and smash balls. Were just saying the wouldn’t be unfair with them

Oh and one more thing lucario’s final smash doesn’t suck if you think so you have seen me use it.
The only one that does is peach’s, you can usually wake before she done dancing and steal some of her peach’s too.

 

[everlasting yayuhzz]

It randomly appearing at random locations is fair because in my experience even if it appears right next to someone the other player can still sneak in and get the last hit on it most of the time.

Secondly all of them are avoidable to an extent. Even the land masters can be survived or dodged completely and you can even die while using it (one time I won because both of those happened to fox, at the same time). Most don’t even do one hit KOs you if you have low %.

And yes it can make some one who winning win even more but it can also help someone who mad a stupid mistake recover.

But really we’re not saying all tournaments should have items and smash balls. Were just saying the wouldn’t be unfair with them

Oh and one more thing lucario’s final smash doesn’t suck if you think so you have seen me use it.
The only one that does is peach’s, you can usually wake before she done dancing and steal some of her peach’s too.

And exactly WHY do they deserve a skill-free come-back? They made a mistake, and they don't deserve to have some even-up in the match handed to them. Stupid logic.

 

[dj_pwn1423]

It randomly appearing at random locations is fair because in my experience even if it appears right next to someone the other player can still sneak in and get the last hit on it most of the time.

Secondly all of them are avoidable to an extent. Even the land masters can be survived or dodged completely and you can even die while using it (one time I won because both of those happened to fox, at the same time). Most don’t even do one hit KOs you if you have low %.

And yes it can make some one who winning win even more but it can also help someone who mad a stupid mistake recover.

But really we’re not saying all tournaments should have items and smash balls. Were just saying the wouldn’t be unfair with them

Oh and one more thing lucario’s final smash doesn’t suck if you think so you have seen me use it.
The only one that does is peach’s, you can usually wake before she done dancing and steal some of her peach’s too.

It does suck, sorry. Jump, second jump, upB. thats all you need to avoid it, heck even a single air dodge works sometiimes

Im sure anyone can press the B button as well as you do...

 

[adumbrodeus]

I like how there are two people who are arguing over what I've been saying... and neither one of them is me. I just think that's the bee's knees (for no other reason than it's an excuse to use the phrase 'bee's knees').

Well sometimes it takes an outsider to recognize when something is entirely a misunderstanding. The two or more arguing are too invested in their ideas to realize that there is no substantiative difference in their opinions.

I'm going to explain this as well as I can, and hopefully someone will understand it. Yuna, I know you can't believe that I could possibly be advocating change simply to be advocating change (and adumbrodeus is totally right in that I'm not advocating replacing the current tournament standard; it's the standard for a reason and that's not likely to change, nor should it), but that's exactly what I'm doing. I'm advocating exploration of options not because we require it to survive, but because it is a vital part of the growth of the community.

I think at this point the vast majority of us understand what you're talking about, at least now that you've confirmed my explination was correct.

That you want alternative competitive formats to become viable and are working towards that goal, because you think it's beneficial to the community.

I am not an outdoors person. I hate getting dirty, and I have an insect phobia. Knowing this full well, I have gone camping before. Why would I purposefully put myself in a situation that I 'knew' I wouldn't like? Simple; because I would never know for sure if I was missing out on something that I could only get by camping without trying the activity out for myself, and lo and behold I did find something I like to do because I put myself out on a limb and tried something new simply for the sake of trying something new (that something being marksmanship).

Not an outdoors person?!

-20 cool points.

Just kidding, I personally love the outdoors, but I won't hold it against you that you have different tastes, regardless, that is my attitude towards new experiences as well.

We all, as members of a community, should want the community to grow, to reach horizons that we might not have though possible (or prudent) before. We should all be trying to find ways to change Smash for the better (and I hear now that EVO is considering using items in their Brawl tourney...). We should all be experimenting with no items, items, heavy Brawl, fast Brawl, Smash Balls, 1v1, 2v2, FFA... anything we can to find what is balanced and what works so that we can have as many accepted standards as possible. There is literally no reason not to as we stand nothing to lose, but everything to gain.

I'd be interested in the FFA for one reason and one reason alone, the mindgame potential for that is insane when you consider how diplomacy will naturally develop as core to the format.

I'm not an items fan, but the other possibilities offer intriguing approaches, but they need to be tested.

As long as we recognize that this isn't an attempt to change the current competitive standard format, it's just an attempt to create complimentary competitive formats, I see no reason not to propose and test as many of these rulesets as possible, balance them, and offer tournaments that cater to them.

 

[MiraiGen]

If I may say something?

This argument is going to go on forever. I've seen it. It always boils down to these two arguments.

"Items (Smash Balls included) are random. As a competition, we want to reduce the interference by the random element as much as possible, so it's a straight-up skill vs skill with no luck interfering."

And the argument against it goes,

"But the more skilled player will be able to react, handle, or beat you to the (Item in question), there's nothing not skill-based about it."

And it will continue that way forever. I've seen it played out a million times. I really believe that people who use the second counter-argument have never played competitively for money and had an item/Final Smash/environmental hazard **** their game up and rob them of victory.

Call it asinine, fine, it's what I think.

Though I think the best argument for Final Smashes being removed from prize-competitive play is the fact that they count as an Item, and therefore their spawning rate is entirely dependent upon what other items are allowed in.

Items in competitive play.

Can, open, worms, everywhere.

 

[karadoc]

And the argument against it goes,

"But the more skilled player will be able to react, handle, or beat you to the (Item in question), there's nothing not skill-based about it."

I don't think anyone is using that argument. I think we all agree that items would add some randomness to the outcome of each game.

 

[cobaltblue]

Items/smash balls can have a place in competive play.

Its just that all the pro SB people here are too lazy to make their own turnnies and rather hijack the current standard. The ISP league on the other hand seems to be getting some place to establishing a standard.

 

[Tyr_03]

The fact that this thread exists really depresses me.

 

[Justpeachey1029]

I'm not sayin that that is what is fun for everyone, that's why I said, in my opinion. I'm just saying I, not everyone, just me, finds it more fun when it is really random, and you don't know what is going to happen.

 

[Exile724]

I read the title and I'm just going to say this..


Final smashes ruin the fight theirs my advice..

 

[Yuna]

It randomly appearing at random locations is fair because in my experience even if it appears right next to someone the other player can still sneak in and get the last hit on it most of the time.

What about the other times?

Secondly all of them are avoidable to an extent. Even the land masters can be survived or dodged completely and you can even die while using it (one time I won because both of those happened to fox, at the same time). Most don’t even do one hit KOs you if you have low %.

You can only die using it if you're an idiot. The same with Marth's (heck, you can even cancel it).

Landmasters cannot be dodged entirely. If they're hanging on the ledge, jump off the edge and hit them. No amount of dodging will help with a constant huge hitbox out. Landmasters will not automatically take off two stocks, as some seem to think, though. 1, at most.

Certain FS:es that are one hit KO-moves at 0% can be comboed into (unavoidable). Also, there's the problem with camping and how FS:es give you invincibility. So if you try to hit someone, they could just hit B and then you're screwed.

Then there's the imbalance. And how they're broken, some KO you at 0% with a single hit (which is unblockable). Even if you manage to solve the randomness issue, there's still all of this (and more).

And yes it can make some one who winning win even more but it can also help someone who mad a stupid mistake recover.

Why would anyone think is good in Competitive gaming? You make a mistake, you lose (or you play splendidly and win). You don't hope for a lucky random spawn to win you the game!

But really we’re not saying all tournaments should have items and smash balls. Were just saying the wouldn’t be unfair with them

Yes they would. I've already said why one bazillion times. The fact that you can't grasp that doesn't change reality. No, you are not the Scarlet Witch.

Oh and one more thing lucario’s final smash doesn’t suck if you think so you have seen me use it.
The only one that does is peach’s, you can usually wake before she done dancing and steal some of her peach’s too.

What game are you playing and can I have some of what you're smoking?

Lucario's Final Smash does suck. The only way for it to hit is:
A) The opponent is an idiot.
B) You launch the opponent far, far off-stage and his DI is ****ty so he has to recover low or at ledge-level. This way, you might be able to nail him with it with a well-timed FS when he tries to recover. In no way guaranteed depending on what character he uses, though.

And, even if it hits, you can still Tap-DI out of it. Yes, you heard me.

Peach's Final Smash is in no way as crappy as Lucario's. For one thing, it inflicts 49% damage at point blank range, even if they don't fall asleep. The damage scales down dramatically if they're further away but at least she gets guaranteed damage.

No one can possibly wake up before she stops dancing if they fall asleep from it. It's not possible. Do not lie about things easily checked up on.

If I may say something?

This argument is going to go on forever. I've seen it. It always boils down to these two arguments.

"Items (Smash Balls included) are random. As a competition, we want to reduce the interference by the random element as much as possible, so it's a straight-up skill vs skill with no luck interfering."

And the argument against it goes,

"But the more skilled player will be able to react, handle, or beat you to the (Item in question), there's nothing not skill-based about it."

We have many more arguments against FS:es than that. The fact that "their" side doesn't acknowledge them most of the time because they can't refute them doesn't change that.

 

[SAMaine]

It takes skill to grab the Smash Ball, therefore using a Final Smash takes SOME skill.

 

[Pikachu'sBlueWizardHat]

I'm the thread creator, is there any way I could lock this thread, or do I just have to let it die? I feel like this thread has run its course and too many people are showing up who haven't read the rest of it.

 

[OverlordCrono]

Both sides of this have good points. In one hand, you have an interesting new take on the competitive scene, as the Topic Creator has suggested. On the other hand, it can be broken and unfair, especially if you were ahead in a match and the opponent cheaply KOs you with their FS.

I don't mind the use of Smash Balls, but thats just my opinion.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Both sides of this have good points. In one hand, you have an interesting new take on the competitive scene, as the Topic Creator has suggested. On the other hand, it can be broken and unfair, especially if you were ahead in a match and the opponent cheaply KOs you with their FS.

I don't mind the use of Smash Balls, but thats just my opinion.

You can't say things like that here. Both sides do not have good points. One side is advocating using something with random chance to be used in competitive play, which as been established as a stupid idea multiple times. No, it will never happen, and that's that. If you want to use Smash Ball, you can host your own tournaments, just as long as you recognize that it will never be a standard way to play and the community will never support it.

 

[thesage]

You can't say things like that here. Both sides do not have good points. One side is advocating using something with random chance to be used in competitive play, which as been established as a stupid idea multiple times. No, it will never happen, and that's that. If you want to use Smash Ball, you can host your own tournaments, just as long as you recognize that it will never be a standard way to play and the community will never support it.

Lolwut? I thought you were pro items >_>;

 

[Jack Kieser]

Lolwut? I thought you were pro items >_>;

I am pro Smash; the format means nothing to me if people are enjoying it. Look, on the specific topic of this thread, Smash Balls are not conductive to 1v1 play; they are almost built from the ground up to screw up 1v1 balancing. I like Smash Balls, but for 2v2 play; the 'ISP' project isn't even using Smash Balls for 1v1 play, while all of our prelim testing has shown that they could work for 2v2 play just fine, and even enhance the team mechanic.

Smash Balls can be conductive to tournament play, but only in moderation and in specific formats. 1v1 won't work, and I've based that on plenty of testing. Do I think they can work in other formats? Yes, I do.

 

[OverlordCrono]

You can't say things like that here. Both sides do not have good points. One side is advocating using something with random chance to be used in competitive play, which as been established as a stupid idea multiple times. No, it will never happen, and that's that. If you want to use Smash Ball, you can host your own tournaments, just as long as you recognize that it will never be a standard way to play and the community will never support it.

Uh, isn't that your own opinion? As I far as I can tell, nothing has been set in stone yet. Smash Balls may be allowed, they may not. Who can tell as of yet? And I only stated that I felt both sides had a reasonable argument, and that I did not mind using them in my matches, I never said "smash balls r fair lik it or gtfo" or anything like that. Sheesh.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Uh, isn't that your own opinion? As I far as I can tell, nothing has been set in stone yet. Smash Balls may be allowed, they may not. Who can tell as of yet? And I only stated that I felt both sides had a reasonable argument, and that I did not mind using them in my matches, I never said "smash balls r fair lik it or gtfo" or anything like that. Sheesh.

Part of that post was facetiousness, but that's the way these boards are now.

 

[goodkid]

Smash balls are really unbalanced.