Will Alternating Throws be banned in tournament play?!?!?!

[Atlantis]

This is obviously a concern for probably 90% of the people who main the Ice Climbers and intend to play them in tournaments, whether online or organized locally. The main problem in my opinion is that if Alternating Throws were banned, then it takes away one of the most efficient ways to use the Ice Climbers. Why should we be punished for practicing hard and mastering a technique that most brawlers could never dream to do with their characters.

Remember this post is strictly IMO, and this thread is to see what everyone else's opinion is of this matter.

Reasons FOR Banning:
1)If done correctly, it is inescapable and an IC player can KO after grabbing the enemy once in the beginning of the match
2)If DDD's CG may be banned, why not ban all CG's?!?!
3)People complain when they lose to the IC, so they want to take away all the hard work we put into using them

Reasons AGAINST Banning:
1)Practicing takes so much effort and time, and we should not be punished
2)Yes, a alt throw combo can be inescapable if it were done PERFECTLY, but there is human error and the chances of someone screwing up during it are higher than the chances of them not screwing up
3)The CG can be avoided, by not getting grabbed in the first place
4)The Ice Climbers are too cute, why ban their signature technique....no one wants a sad ice climber on their hands. Whenever i see them in the background crying if i lose with them....i cry with them !!!!!!

What do you guys think, is there a way to keep alt throws and CG;s from being banned. I don't know what the verdict is so far, but i hope it stays AGAINST banning.

 

[Corner-Trap]

Here's two nice little articles you might want to read.
What should be banned
Scrub

 

[slacker!]

It's not gonna be banned. Ever.

MAYBE at local small scrub tourneis cause the host got owned by ICs a few weeks back.

 

[Atlantis]

After reading those articles, i definately understand more of what it takes to be banned. I just hope i wasn't being called a scrub for bringing this up....

 

[Surgo]

I wouldn't say "never". Not getting grabbed is practical advice for Melee, but it's something that's a good deal harder to pull off in Brawl when you finally approach for a physical attack (you're going to have to eventually). In addition, "because it's hard" is not a good reason to not ban something. If there was some "feature" where inputting four different commands within four frames automatically stopped the game and declared you the winner, it would be "hard" but it would still be completely ******** to not ban it.

It's obviously too early to say, but say that theoretically high level play devolved into Ice Climbers vs. Ice Climbers (who, coincidentally, are the only characters that are really immune to getting grabbed in the first place). Maybe not, but it's a better chance than Melee. And if it happened that would, without a doubt, be cause for the Ice Climbers chain infinites to be banned. At this point I think it's important to point out that a chain grab is nothing but a combo (just one that takes longer to execute) and should really be treated the same way any other combo is treated.

But while we're on the topic, what are good stages to counterpick (for most characters) to stop the ICs infinite chain? Norfair seems like the best, because it has the most frequent hazards (and is entirely made up of platforms which restrict IC movement in the chain, making it harder to pull off). Brinstar seems like another good choice; its hazards aren't as frequent, but that stage is, like, entirely platforms and uneven ground. I can't really think of any others, but platforms are probably helpful.

 

[Corner-Trap]

Surgo, here's a section from the articles I linked above.

The thing to be banned must be able to be “completely defined.” Imagine that in a fighting game, repeating a certain sequence of five moves over and over is the best tactic in the game. Further suppose that doing so is “taboo” and that players want to ban it. There is no concrete definition of exactly what must be banned. Can players do three repetitions of the five moves? What about two reps? What about one? What about repeating the first four moves and omitting the fifth? Is that okay? The game becomes a test of who is willing to play as closely as possible to the “taboo tactic” without breaking the (arbitrary) letter of the law defining the tactic.

As you can see, banning CG's and infinites is a very hard thing to do. Most other fighting game communities view infinites as nothing more than 100% combos or in the case of smash 0-death combos, so you're right in that regard. High level play in any fighting game has always devolved into top tier character vs. top tier character. If you ban those character then the game will become high tier character vs. high tier character, there is literally no way to avoid this kind of situations at high level play. So banning a character because of that is a bad idea. As for as counter pick stages against the IC's, just pick one with lots of movement and hazards to disrupt them.

 

[Surgo]

First of all, Sirlin is not the Bible handed down from God himself, so people need to stop quoting him like he is. That said, I will play along with it for the purposes of this discussion. Then:

It is not hard at all to give a well-defined and discrete banning criteria. The timing is frame specific, just don't allow a regrab within the certain frame. Another well-known example is Dedede's infinite against Mario, Luigi, Samus, Donkey Kong, and Bowser. In this case, you need to regrab within 3 frames after the throw executes. Not difficult to ban at all, just don't allow a regrab within the 3 frame window. It's also very obvious when someone does this, either with the Ice Climbers or Dedede. Even better, banning the specific frame timing bans the infinites but leaves the regular chaingrabs alone.

Second of all, the banning of characters is completely irrelevent to my point. I wasn't talking about banning characters at all, I was talking about the theoretical banning of a tactic that devolved play into exactly one character versus exactly one character, not <high/top tier character> against <high/top tier character>.

 

[Valken]

Here's two nice little articles you might want to read.
What should be banned
Scrub

I want to personally thank you for that.

I find the most interesting thing to be the Soft Ban. I absolutely love that idea. The good players love the game enough to not break it, and the noobs who want to get embarrassed for trying. Absolutely amazing. Won't work in America though.

After reading the article I till wander though. If the ICCG is, in fact, so good that everyone decides to master it and it does begin to dominate the game, then will it be banned? I do believe that it is good enough to get that far, but will it? I don't think so. I think it's on the same lines as Soft Banning. I don't think very many top players will play IC for their CG, simply because it takes away from the beauty of the game.

For that reason alone, I don't think it will get banned. I don't think the ICCG will get banned. Or at least, they will simply ban CGing more than, say, three times in a row first.

The ICs will not get punished. They are simply having fun.

What do you think will be the crowd's response to a World Championship won by someone who CG'd there way to victory every round? Disappointment.

 

[Atlantis]

Yeah, I don't know if there is any confusion. I'm not talking about banning the Ice Climbers, but stopping/banning the use of Alternate Grabs, and Chain Grabs.

 

[Valken]

This is the part that gets me though.

I full heartedly support the use of CGs if they are deemed legal.

However, I will never use them because then I feel like I may have beaten someone who, based on skill alone, may have beaten me.

This does not mean I don't support it, I just personally choose not to.

Does this make me a Scrub? I don't call it cheap or call for a need to ban it, but I will personally never use it. What does that make me?

 

[Ark22]

It is not hard at all to give a well-defined and discrete banning criteria. The timing is frame specific, just don't allow a regrab within the certain frame. Another well-known example is Dedede's infinite against Mario, Luigi, Samus, Donkey Kong, and Bowser. In this case, you need to regrab within 3 frames after the throw executes. Not difficult to ban at all, just don't allow a regrab within the 3 frame window. It's also very obvious when someone does this, either with the Ice Climbers or Dedede. Even better, banning the specific frame timing bans the infinites but leaves the regular chaingrabs alone.

Second of all, the banning of characters is completely irrelevent to my point. I wasn't talking about banning characters at all, I was talking about the theoretical banning of a tactic that devolved play into exactly one character versus exactly one character, not <high/top tier character> against <high/top tier character>.

So you are saying that its legal if a person regrabs after 4 frames? Tell me exactly how a referee would judge between 3 and 4 frames, a time span of 1/60th of a second. That just isn't possible.

I don't think that the alternate throws will be banned. First, they are harder than wobbling as the button input changes as percentage gets higher. Second, there is just no clear way of banning chain grabs as there is no clear way to define what constitutes a chain grab. Plus, there is no way to put a cap on the number of grabs, as refs can't watch every single match to see exactly when a chain grab starts. Tournament directors would have to just ban all Ice Climber grabs, which would be unfair and would be challenged.

A much more likely, and scarier, possibility is that the Ice Climbers become banned from tournament play entirely. I don't think that alternate throws break the game, so I don't think this would happen, but it is still a possibility.

 

[everlasting yayuhzz]

If it becomes too much of a problem, it will be banned. As in...all tournaments being won by Ice climbers doing alternating grabs.

I secondary Ice Climbers, so it won't be too much of a problem for me to just start using them as a main if it comes to that, but if it's too broken for any other characters to win, then it should be banned.

Also, lol @ the don't get grabbed advice. That is so much harder to do in Brawl than Melee. Melee has lag canceling and it was all around faster. Brawl...you approach, and ICs want a grab? You're getting grabbed most of the time. Okay, so you say camp? IC can also camp you, AND approach YOU without having to worry about a single grab combo ending the stock. If it becomes a game of cat and mouse, and the mouse not being Jerry from Tom and Jerry, then it'll be banned.

 

[Corner-Trap]

Banning CG's is unfeasible, banning the IC's is unreasonable.

 

[Surgo]

So you are saying that its legal if a person regrabs after 4 frames? Tell me exactly how a referee would judge between 3 and 4 frames, a time span of 1/60th of a second. That just isn't possible.

Not only is it possible, it's extremely easy to tell. In Dedede's case, going past the third frame means you actually need to move to catch the guy again; it won't work if you stand in place (and you can't actually move if you want to do it within 3 frames). In this case, regrabbing after the third frame is just Dedede's normal chain grab. Ice Climbers basically work the same way when it comes to telling when it's an infinite or not, just with different frame numbers.

Going past the frame means that the infinite will fail to work, and there is a very obvious difference in what you can see on screen. A judge most certainly does not need to have a frame counter in their head.

 

[Surgo]

So you are saying that its legal if a person regrabs after 4 frames? Tell me exactly how a referee would judge between 3 and 4 frames, a time span of 1/60th of a second. That just isn't possible.

Not only is it possible, it's extremely easy to tell. In Dedede's case, going past the third frame means you actually need to move to catch the guy again; it won't work if you stand in place (and you can't actually move if you want to do it within 3 frames). In this case, regrabbing after the third frame is just Dedede's normal chain grab. Ice Climbers basically work the same way when it comes to telling when it's an infinite or not, just with different frame numbers.

Going past the frame means that the infinite will fail to work, and there is a very obvious difference in what you can see on screen. A judge most certainly does not need to have a frame counter in their head.

 

[Corner-Trap]

Do you honestly expect players to be able to perfectly time their attacks 1/60th of a second late every time they do it? You have no idea how completely moronic your suggestion is. There is simply no other way I can put it.

 

[Surgo]

I don't really understand what you're talking about. Dedede's infinite against the five characters listed is easy, and if you do it one frame late, it doesn't work (it fails to grab them). The same applies to the ICs grab: if you do it even one frame late, it doesn't work.

Anyone who has practiced the IC grabs should know how difficult the timing is. That is because if you do it even one frame past the point where it's an infinite, it doesn't even grab them.

 

[Corner-Trap]

Do you not understand how unreasonable it is to expect players to time all they're grabs 1/60th of a second later than usual? If a player does it 1/60th of a second faster then he should have, could we honestly punish them for such a mistake? How can we possibly label a move wholesome and fair unless it's pulled off within a certain frame? How on Earth are we possibly going to monitor such a situation? Are we going to have referee's with a stop watch measuring every time someone does a grab down to the millisecond? You simply do not understand how unfeasible this is in a tournament setting. Your suggestion is simply bad, with way to many flaws in it.

 

[Surgo]

Do you not understand how unreasonable it is to expect players to time all they're grabs 1/60th of a second later than usual?

Okay, you're either trolling me or you're really not getting it. I'll use the Dedede example again, because it's easy and the frame numbers are known: if you hit the grab command within three frames, you grab them successfully. But if you do it after the third frame, you do not grab them. That means that the only way you can grab them is if you do it within three frames. Doing it on the fourth frame means that the grab does not land.

So yes, it is a reasonable way to ban things, because if you manage to time it one sixtieth of a second later than usual...it doesn't even work. The grab does not land.

 

[Corner-Trap]

You must have never played in a tournament before in your life, or you would understand how unreasonable this is. If someones finger slips and grabs a mere 1/60th of a second early can we reasonably punish them for doing so? You must have super human eyes to monitor fractions of a second at a consistent rate. People already have trouble timing things within 10 frame windows, yet you expect everyone to time things within a 1 frame window or receive a penalty? Take a long time and review everything you have suggested so far, if you still don't see the massive flaws within your statements then theres no way I can help you.

 

[Surgo]

It doesn't have to be an immediate "once and you're done" thing, I'm pretty sure warnings have been given in most places in the past. That's completely irrelevent, though. My point was that a ban that was both discrete and well-defined is very possible, a point which I believe I have shown to be the case by offering an example of such a ban.

I have to take issue with this, though:

People already have trouble timing things within 10 frame windows

Wavedashing without appearing to leave the ground meant airdodging three frames after inputting your jump command (if you did it earlier than that, it wouldn't work) and plenty of people managed to do that quite well. And that's not even approaching ten frames.

 

[Corner-Trap]

God your head must be as thick as a brick wall. Since you're going to cite Sirlin saying your rule is descrete, then I guess you must've skipped over the enforceable section.

Also in a fighting game, a move might be “unfairly” unblockable, but only when that move is executed in a certain situation with precise 1/60th of a second timing. Did the player execute it during that “unfair” time window? Or 1/60th of a second late? Perhaps he accidentally executed the move at the unfair time through sheer luck. Is he to be penalized? Imagine trying to enforce a rule that states “You may usually use move X, but there’s 1/60th of a second where you may not use move X.”

 

[showmeyagoose]

Panda Edit: Silly post.

 

[Surgo]

I didn't cite Sirlin at all, somebody else did. I wasn't aware that Sirlin had a trademark on the word discrete...if that's the case, somebody had better go inform all the mathematicians!

There's a very obvious difference here from the quote you just made, and that's that the move does not even work at all if you're past the spot. There is a very, very obvious difference from when Dedede executes the grab in the first three frames, and when he does it in the next three frames. The obvious difference is that it doesn't work. So yes, I can imagine trying to enforce that rule. In fact, it's pretty easy!

Your quote does not apply to this at all, because in the instance the author writes, there are a number of possible circumstances:
* The user of the move executed it with perfect timing. The receiver blocked on time, but because it was executed in the window of opportunity, the block failed.
* The user of the move executed it with perfect timing. The receiver did not block on time, and the block failed.
* The user of the move executed it with imperfect timing. The person on the receiving end of the move failed to block, and thinks it was because of nonexistant perfect timing on the attacker's part.
* The user of the move executed it with imperfect timing. The person on the receiving end of the move successfully blocked.

That's four possible circumstances, one of which (the failed blocker accusing the failed attacker) is a pure and often faulty judgement call. The infinite in question here, however, only has two circumstances:
* The user executed it correctly. The receiver is grabbed.
* The user did not execute it correctly. The receiver is not grabbed.

Both of these are obvious to tell what happens (the receiver is either grabbed or he isn't) and, thus, easy for a judge to enforce.

And let's not forget that the quote in question is talking about the judge enforcing the rule, not the players abiding by the rule. Hand slips can be dealt with individually with warnings: is your hand really going to slip on the grab button three times in one match, within a 3 frame interval while you are throwing someone?

 

[Corner-Trap]

Here's a simple question, what if someone accidentally hits the grab button during that 1/60th of a time frame, what kind of punishment will he receive? How can you deduce whether it was an accident or not. What if a ref is not present, will we leave it to the players to decide if it was an accident? Will we have a ref for every single match played? What I'm trying to do, is to get you to see the flaws within your suggestion. These rules can simply not exist in a tournament setting, once you acknowledge this then we can make progress.

 

[Surgo]

We'll take the questions one at a time:

Q: Here's a simple question, what if someone accidentally hits the grab button during that 1/60th of a time frame, what kind of punishment will he receive?
A: Warning is not unreasonable, as I've already said.

Q: How can you deduce whether it was an accident or not.
A: I believe I already said this in my previous post. You did read it, right?

Q: What if a ref is not present (I removed the last part because it made this question loaded)
A: Call one over, and have him or her watch for the rest of the match or at least for the next stock or two.

The next question was loaded based on my perceived answer to the last one, so I won't repeat myself.

 

[Corner-Trap]

We'll take the questions one at a time:

Q: Here's a simple question, what if someone accidentally hits the grab button during that 1/60th of a time frame, what kind of punishment will he receive?
A: Warning is not unreasonable, as I've already said.

Q: How can you deduce whether it was an accident or not.
A: I believe I already said this in my previous post. You did read it, right?

Q: What if a ref is not present (I removed the last part because it made this question loaded)
A: Call one over, and have him or her watch for the rest of the match or at least for the next stock or two.

The next question was loaded based on my perceived answer to the last one, so I won't repeat myself.

How many warnings can a player get? Say if a player can get 3 warnings, but what if the player accidentally pressed the button 3 times? Whose to say he didn't do it on accident?

Do you expect players to stop in the middle of a match to call in a ref? How many refs do you expect to be in a tournament. What if we had 10 matches involving the IC's but only 5 refs? Do we postpone the matches till a ref can come over?

Have you ever ran, participated, or in any been a part of a tournament? If so then you would see how your suggestion simply does not work in a tournament setting.

 

[Surgo]

Irrelevent and loaded questions removed once more:

Q: How many warnings can a player get? Say if a player can get 3 warnings, but what if the player accidentally pressed the button 3 times?
A: Yeah, your hand accidentally slipped in a very specific three frame window on a very specific button three times. Oh, was it really an accident? Tough ****.

Q: Do you expect players to stop in the middle of a match to call in a ref?
A: No. A simple "Hey man, could you bring the ref over here?" shouted out to a spectator in the crowd should be sufficient.

Now I have a question for you: if the grab infinites devolved the game into nothing but Ice Climbers vs Ice Climbers, would you rather see such a ban in place, or go on playing such an obviously shallow game? (And probably by yourself, as few other people would.)

 

[Corner-Trap]

Irrelevent and loaded questions removed once more:

Q: How many warnings can a player get? Say if a player can get 3 warnings, but what if the player accidentally pressed the button 3 times?
A: Yeah, your hand accidentally slipped in a very specific three frame window on a very specific button three times. Oh, was it really an accident? Tough ****.

Q: Do you expect players to stop in the middle of a match to call in a ref?
A: No. A simple "Hey man, could you bring the ref over here?" shouted out to a spectator in the crowd should be sufficient.

Now I have a question for you: if the grab infinites devolved the game into nothing but Ice Climbers vs Ice Climbers, would you rather see such a ban in place, or go on playing such an obviously shallow game? (And probably by yourself, as few other people would.)

Someone accidentally pressing the grab button three times within a specific time frame is possible. Sure it would be hard to believe that it was an accident, but you can't deny the factor that it may very well have been. As you can see, this is too opinionated and matches can be decided on the refs biases.

Calling in a ref in the middle of a match will take players away from the game which you should never do.

Every fighting game in history has devolved into top tier vs. top tier, banning the top tier would just make it into high tier vs. high tier. Dittos are very common within tournaments, which you would know if you ever go to them. Banning techniques is even more troublesome, because they lead into a myriad of variables that must be accounted for. If tournaments devolved into IC vs. IC, it honestly wouldn't bother me since thats how tournaments are in the first place, just a bunch of dittos.

 

[Surgo]

Every fighting game in history has devolved into top tier vs. top tier

Sigh, no. Top tier vs top tier is one thing, but the evolution I am speaking of is much more comparable to Akuma (in Super Street Fighter II Turbo, specifically).

I am quite aware of everything you are talking about. You really do need to stop making assumptions about me or my background, and cut the ad hominem.

 

[Twin Dreams]

If the Ice Climbers go on to dominate tournaments with infinite chain grabs, they will be banned.



Q. Why not just ban Infinite Chain Grabbing?

A. What is the difference between me chain grabbing twice and me chain grabbing one hundred times and me chain grabbing one thousand times? I never truly reach infinite.


Q. Why not just ban ALL chain grabbing?

A. What is chain grabbing? The correct answer is grabbing someone within the knock back of a throw. What if I grab them 1 frame AFTER the the knock back? What if it is normally escapable, but I grab and happen to grab them again?


Q. Why not ban grabbing?

A. What if someone accidentally grabs? What if someone accidentally grabs twice? Thrice? There will be a "tolerance" level. If a tolerance exists, then it is not banned. It is either allowed or not.


Q. Why ban Ice Climbers?

A. If it comes to pass that this dominates tournaments, here is the expected projection.

1. Ice climbers will win major tournaments using this move.
2. Many people will learn Ice Climbers because infinite throws don't work on them.
3. The deluge of IC players will wash out remaining competition. All that is left is ICs.

This will lead to a ban of ICs. Why? Because it has killed the entire metagame. It is different than Top tier vs. Top tier. Because upper and high have a chance against top. It has become a tournament of a single character. You have eliminated 99% of the cast. By banning the ICs, a majority of the class becomes availabe. Thus, a ban is warranted in this situation. When ICs dominate tournaments, they will be banned.






The challenge: Whoever is against banning ICs because of this....


You need to implement a rule into tournament rule templates that bans infinite chain grabs.

 

[Corner-Trap]

IC's are no where on the level of ST Akuma. IC's have already been shown to have quite a few disadvantageous match-ups. ST Akuma had a 9/1 advantage against every other character in the game. So you simply can't compare the two.

EDIT:

Twin Dreams, I highly doubt Brawl will turn into IC's vs. IC's because there are characters better than them.

 

[Twin Dreams]

IC's are no where on the level of ST Akuma. IC's have already been shown to have quite a few disadvantageous match-ups. ST Akuma had a 9/1 advantage against every other character in the game. So you simply can't compare the two.

EDIT:

Twin Dreams, I highly doubt Brawl will turn into IC's vs. IC's because there are characters better than them.

If ICs can infinite every character at the risk/reward of the standard grab, then I will regard them as the best character in the game. However, I'm not even sure if this works on everyone. I'm just now getting into ICs in case they are the best character in the game. I can go to any tournament who hasn't banned this and use it to my advantage.


Does this work on every character? I was able to do it to a few characters in training mode at 999%. I assumed, then, that it was. (I have my own place now, so I don't get the chance to test things as effectively as I used to. I would normally have my brother help me test. )

 

[Taymond]

@Surgo, here's some issue's I saw with your analysis of the matter. For starters, you have made no mention about how many grabs is too many. Are you saying that grabbing even once, directly into another grab, should be disallowed?

Secondly, here's the problem with attempted frame-enforcement. Say someone was playing someone who wasn't the smartest player in the world. Despite the fact that the DDD player waits 4 frames, not three, the opponent does not properly DI, and the chaingrab still succeeds. This DDD player is performing within the rules, but the poor performance of his opponent masks this fact. It will appear that the DDD player is not waiting the appropriate amount of frames.

What if the opponent DI'd towards DDD just enough to make up for the distanced travelled in 1 frame, keeping him in re-grab range. DDD is doing exactly what he's supposed to. He's not doing the "true" CG, what he's doing is perfectly escapable, but it may not always be clear that the failure to escape is the opponents fault. If properly countered, yes, that frame means the difference between success and failure, but if improperly countered, DDD can continue the grab, even with 4 frame wait, instead of 3.

1 frame difference is not literally detectible by human observation. As you said, the only way we can, in fact, tell how many frames have been waited is whether or not the CG continues or fails. But if it were possible, through opponent error, to continue the CG with 1 extra frame, it would appear to all human observers that DDD was breaking the rules.

The frame difference is easily observable in an ideal situation, yes, but not every situation is ideal. What action should be taken here? Everyone watching will feel that DDD is breaking the rules, even though this robot-of-a-player waits exactly 4 frames between grabs, every single time. Do you see, then, that frame-determined bans aren't necessarily practical?

 

[apmpnmdslkbk]

I totally agree plz imagine that i am giving you a standing obation.

 

[Corner-Trap]

If ICs can infinite every character at the risk/reward of the standard grab, then I will regard them as the best character in the game. However, I'm not even sure if this works on everyone. I'm just now getting into ICs in case they are the best character in the game. I can go to any tournament who hasn't banned this and use it to my advantage.


Does this work on every character? I was able to do it to a few characters in training mode at 999%. I assumed, then, that it was. (I have my own place now, so I don't get the chance to test things as effectively as I used to. I would normally have my brother help me test. )

Yes the IC's infinites do work on every character, but I doubt they'll be the best character because of it. The IC's had infinites in Melee that were a whole lot easier to perform yet they weren't considered the best, nor were they banned. The IC's have several bad match-ups which is probably whats going to hold them back from top tier, so would it make sense to ban a mere high tier character? I also doubt that they'll be whored out in tournaments because players will continue to not play them for the same reasons they didn't in Melee. One, they consider them cheap and that all they have is throws. Two, they consider them to hard to play and not worth the time. Three, the cuteness factor offsets them.

 

[Speedsk8er]

For the love of GOD, it's called SPACING. Nintendo gave us freaking Ness's Melee grab range. Any player with any semblance of spacing should be able to avoid getting shield-camped.

 

[Atlantis]

This is the part that gets me though.

I full heartedly support the use of CGs if they are deemed legal.

However, I will never use them because then I feel like I may have beaten someone who, based on skill alone, may have beaten me.

This does not mean I don't support it, I just personally choose not to.

Does this make me a Scrub? I don't call it cheap or call for a need to ban it, but I will personally never use it. What does that make me?

In relation to one thing you said....."they may have beaten me on skill alone.."

The chain grabs are very skillful....they need a high level of timing and concentration to be done, so if you can grab and CG them to death...that is VERY skillful.

 

[Binx]

First of all, Sango good stuff, @ anyone who doesnt understand that the DDD chain throw after the three frame window is just his normal chain throw that only works 3 or 4 times vs every other character you may need to start taking the short bus to school.

@ Frame enforcement - Can't happen right now because Smash is not popular enough to have judges for it, also if you shout for a judge and the DDD keeps infiniting you until he gets there and is a stock ahead your screwed unless no one there can vouch for you. So my solution in DDDs case is to advise that either 1) no one plays those 5 characters at all at the risk of being chain thrown forever by DDD or 2) is to revert back to number one, we didn't ban Sheik's chain throws vs half the cast, even if it didn't kill you it might as well have because now you are off the edge and you will die lol.

As far as Ice Climbers dominating the meta, I kind of doubt it, maybe they will have a huge advantage vs a certain number of cast members because those people can't out range them but it isn't unwinnable, and as far as I can tell the "don't get grabbed" motto should still be fine in this game.

 

[salaboB]

The chain grabs are very skillful....they need a high level of timing and concentration to be done, so if you can grab and CG them to death...that is VERY skillful.

But it's only skill on the IC side, once you're grabbed and they begin no amount of skill on the victim's side will help -- that's when bans come into play.