Will this happen or not?

[psicicle]

Are you saying he does not play to win? Really, at a tourney setting with cash prizes, I'm guessing that he will do the best possible move. If I were not number one, but could become number one with such minimal effort as implementing wobbling, I would definitely wobble. I can;t speak for Chu, but I don't see why one would decide not to wobble. Perhaps it is because of a low damage, or that Nana is too far away, which makes wobbling unwise.

 

[halfDemon]

Watch a recent video of Chu. Watch him land a grab at ideal conditions, but not wobble. If he did wobble, which he could easily have done, that would have resulted in a stock and there is no denying it. Why he decided not to is a different story. I don't know his intentions.

 

[Shai Hulud]

To Shai: It's hard to L-Cancel a double sheild. Even so, Fox can't really follow up after a shine (no grab, no waveshine), so you're looking at like 40% for Fox, a stock for IC's, and that's assuming that the Fox is skilled enough to do something if you shield the shine. You can grab the Fox if he jumps too slowly or if Nana absorbs the impact of the shine with her shield.

Assuming the Fox is skilled enough to L-cancel and press down B? Wow, I never thought basic techs were indicative of high level skill. Every Fox player I know can L-cancel and shine to avoid grabs. And what are you talking about saying the Fox can't follow up? He can literally chase down Nana before the stun frames are finished, and on most stages she goes so far that she's already off the edge or near it. Fox can gimp Nana from a single shine easily. This is a substantial risk when trying to shield grab a Fox.

Let's look at the best case scenario for ICs here. The Fox is at 20% damage, ICs at 0. So the Fox comes in with a drill kick. These are the scenarios likely to happen--

1) ICs shield and grab. The Fox L-cancels into a shine. This is by far the most likely result, at least in my experience. If Nana and Popo fly in the same direction, you have a good chance of saving Nana. If not, then Nana will most likely be gimped. Let's say it's 50/50 either way, which it most likely is not, since a good Fox would try to shine to separate them.

2) ICs shield and attempt a delayed grab. Again, if the Fox is good, he will jump out of the shine before the shield-stun is even over. No grab is possible. The Fox then drill kicks again, or runs away and does something else.

3) The drill kick hits and Fox follows up with a shine, leading to a possible Nana kill or other combo.

4) The Fox misses his L-cancel or waits too long to shine or jump cancel his failed shine. He gets grabbed. Let's say the ICs player is good and can start a wobble 90% of the time from this situatoin. He also can finish it 90% of the time. So this is an 81% kill rate from a missed L-cancel.

Sounds extreme, right? But I don't think the Fox is that likely to miss the L-cancel. Maybe 10 - 15% of the time you can get a grab. This means Fox will die approximately 10% of the time when attempting a drill kick, if my estimates are anywhere close to accurate, which they may not be. If they are, then 90% of the time the Fox should either be able to start some kind of combo on ICs, gimp Nana, or run away. I think he has little reason to run away and most of the time would continue pillaring ICs shield given outcome 2.

And don't forget that a grab on Fox at 20%, followed up with a couple standard chain grabs, which noone wants to ban, will lead to death a large portion of the time anyway, depending on location on the stage. At best wobbling seems to slightly tilt the favor of this matchup for ICs.

So why is this a problem?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but here's the argument as I see it:

Me: Wobbling is easy, therefore cheap and imbalanced. Kill it.

Everyone else: Wobbling is hard, therefore not cheap or (overly) imbalanced. Let it live.

I'd say we've got a stalemate, since you can't prove either point.

I'm not saying wobbling is difficult or balanced. I'm saying it's not so cheap or game breaking as to be banworthy. "Cheap" is a scrub's argument and should not come under consideration.

You're right. We can't _prove_ anything just theorizing about it. But we can learn a great deal just observing how wobbling actually effects tournaments. Compare how top Ice Climbers who wobble are performing compared to how they did in the past. I haven't noticed them placing any better at all. Have you?

 

[Cia]

The way I see it, even before Wobbles discovered this breakthrough technique, the ICz were doing fine. So what's changed??

the infinite requires mastery of timing, so i think it should be allowed. i'm sure it's been said over and over again, but shine spike takes practically no skill for rediculously early kills. But they allow it..

A character should not be limited to certain techniques unless hey some how make the match un-finishable

 

[1048576]

I haven't thought about the stock market thing, but I think that you have gotten yourself dug into a hole by saying:
"I don't think Wobbling affects Chu Dat that much because he is so good that he can kill off one grab with or without the infinite."

because that just goes to show that at a high level of play, the ice climbers are not imbalanced, or even significantly better than the other characters. That is pretty solid proof right there.

You're right. Wobbling probably makes very little difference to Chu. It makes a huge difference to everyone else. Why not kill it. The IC's will stay balanced at the Chu Dat level, and they won't be disgustingly broken everywhere else.

Shai: Do you play Fox? L-Cancelling into a double shield is something most people cannot do consistently, especially with the most technically demanding character in the game. If you shield the shine, and Nana's light shield absorbs the impact, you get a Wobble. Fox cannot get away in time by jumping.

 

[psicicle]

not directing this at anyone in particular, but frame data for the drillshine double shield thing would be useful.

"You're right. Wobbling probably makes very little difference to Chu. It makes a huge difference to everyone else. Why not kill it. The IC's will stay balanced at the Chu Dat level, and they won't be disgustingly broken everywhere else."

That is a good argument, and I do agree that at low levels, the wobble does make the ICs better than other characters. However, once the IC player gets to play better people, the benefits diminish. Does this warrant a tournament specific ban then? I'm divided now.

I play fox, and I have played against foxes with my ICs, and grabbing out of a drillshine is very difficult. THe fox should not have trouble with the double shield; I don't and I don't really play a super technical fox. TO grab out of a drillshine is going to take some practice on the IC's part.

 

[Shai Hulud]

You're right. Wobbling probably makes very little difference to Chu. It makes a huge difference to everyone else. Why not kill it. The IC's will stay balanced at the Chu Dat level, and they won't be disgustingly broken everywhere else.

It actually doesn't make a huge difference for me. I'm relying less and less on it every day, and probably averaging one wobble per match now, often in situations where a simple headbutt => blizzard => dthrow => fsmash plus some edgeguarding would do the same thing. Sometimes though, when I'm lagging a couple stocks I catch up by setting up traps for grabs...so it definitely makes a difference, but I wouldn't stop playing ICs if wobbling were banned universally. It would just make me sad...

Shai: Do you play Fox? L-Cancelling into a double shield is something most people cannot do consistently, especially with the most technically demanding character in the game. If you shield the shine, and Nana's light shield absorbs the impact, you get a Wobble. Fox cannot get away in time by jumping.

I do play Fox some but I don't know anyone else around here who plays Ice Climbers so I haven't really practiced against them.

Does double shield cause 2x shield hitlag on the shine? The Fox should still be able to JC before getting grabbed though... It takes 7 frames to grab, plus whatever delay is incurred from the shine hiting the shield.

 

[Smasher89]

Why banning something that will only makes problem for the less good ones, there´s plenty of people being able to handle it and still win, it´s like peach dsmash against newbies, they cannot handle it, as it´s with people that cannot avoid being grabbed XD

 

[Pythag]

It seems to me that the process for banning things is just keeping high tier high and the low tier low. stupid...

 

[Smasher89]

It seems to me that the process for banning things is just keeping high tier high and the low tier low. stupid...

Quoted for truth.

 

[psicicle]

It actually doesn't make a huge difference for me. I'm relying less and less on it every day, and probably averaging one wobble per match now, often in situations where a simple headbutt => blizzard => dthrow => fsmash plus some edgeguarding would do the same thing. Sometimes though, when I'm lagging a couple stocks I catch up by setting up traps for grabs...so it definitely makes a difference, but I wouldn't stop playing ICs if wobbling were banned universally. It would just make me sad...

same here, I've mained the ice climbers from the beginning, when I didn't know advanced stuff. I don't wobble in friendlies anyway, because in those I play to learn instead of win so I do chainthrows and stuff instead.

 

[1048576]

I rely completely on Wobbling. If it went away, I wouldn't be able to 0-death anybody. Anyway, shine hits Nana's shield: one frame
Fox jumps at best possible moment, with SWD daughter dash like skill (that one is exaggeration : four frames to get off the ground
I assume that Fox cannot propel himself above Popo's mittens in two frames, but I don't know. If this is true, then theoretically a Nana light shield on Fox's shine is a free Wobble, unless the Fox surprises the IC player with another shine or something after Nana takes away the light shield.

Edit: Pythag, you're wrong. The purpose of banning things is to prevet characters from being broken. I would much rather have the option of having a chance to win a tourney with Sheik, Peach, Marth, Fox, or Falco, then only having a chance to win if I play IC's. Now, Wobbling might not make the IC's the only viable character in the majority of tournaments, but that is what we have been trying to discern for nine pages.

 

[psicicle]

doesn't the shine also hit popo's shield?

 

[Pythag]

hey, I'm just calling it like I see it. If the IC's can wobble, AVOID IT. It's not that hard. But I do love that you'd rather have a chance to use these wonderful "unbroken characters" such as marth, fox, and falco. I think that in itself is ironic at least.

 

[psicicle]

hey, I'm just calling it like I see it. If the IC's can wobble, AVOID IT. It's not that hard. But I do love that you'd rather have a chance to use these wonderful "unbroken characters" such as marth, fox, and falco. I think that in itself is ironic at least.

It is hard. (Notice that if I just left that, I have justified my claim just as much as you have.) If you have ever played an ice climbers around your level, you will get grabbed with nana around. As to the other part, the argument goes that it is better to have a few broken characters than just one- it gives more variety to tournament play.

 

[Pythag]

Sorry, when I posted "It's not that hard" i didn't mean that it's easy to avoid. I play DK and it's hard as crap to avoid them grabbing you. I just meant that the conclusion was easy to come to. Maybe it's just my style of playing, but in any game if I'm continually thrashed, I just eventually work ways around it. (granted it may take a long time).

 

[1048576]

Obviously you find ways around it. That's a given. Oftentimes there is no way around it, though. If Giga Bowser were playable in a tourney he would **** everybody. I would want him banned from tourneys, but some people would be all "STFU scrub just pix Fox and infinite JC shine him to 999 it's a counter" Now, obviously there are ways to avoid being grabbed. The problem is that there is no way to play perfectly throughout a match. If I acidentally shield, I expect to eat like maybe 50 damage, not lose my stock. The fact that wobbling completely prevents human error on the opponents part while still allowing the IC player a large amount of human error (They have each other to break up opponent's combos) is what strikes me as imbalanced.

To that other person with a "p" in his/her username (pscicle?): If Nana light shields and Popo shields normally, which isn't difficult to do, IMO, then the shine will just hit Nana's shield. I think the IC's have enough grab range for Popo to be able to grab Fox if he hits the light shield, but I admit I'm not certain.

 

[Shai Hulud]

Obviously you find ways around it. That's a given. Oftentimes there is no way around it, though. If Giga Bowser were playable in a tourney he would **** everybody. I would want him banned from tourneys, but some people would be all "STFU scrub just pix Fox and infinite JC shine him to 999 it's a counter" Now, obviously there are ways to avoid being grabbed. The problem is that there is no way to play perfectly throughout a match. If I acidentally shield, I expect to eat like maybe 50 damage, not lose my stock. The fact that wobbling completely prevents human error on the opponents part while still allowing the IC player a large amount of human error (They have each other to break up opponent's combos) is what strikes me as imbalanced.

To that other person with a "p" in his/her username (pscicle?): If Nana light shields and Popo shields normally, which isn't difficult to do, IMO, then the shine will just hit Nana's shield. I think the IC's have enough grab range for Popo to be able to grab Fox if he hits the light shield, but I admit I'm not certain.

Your arguments are getting really old.

IT IS ****ING IRRELEVANT IF YOU CAN'T AVOID GETTING GRABBED.

Against someone of equal skill level, you are going to lose stocks. No matter what matchup. It's part of the game. I can't believe I'm having to repeat stuff this blatantly obvious. "Don't get grabbed" is hyperbole, just like "Don't get hit" albeit not as extreme. Even though you have an expectation of getting hit, it's still good advice. "Don't get tippered" is hyperbole. You're almost guaranteed to get tippered against Marth at some point in the match. You'll probably die. Don't get kneed. Don't get shined. Don't get spiked. It's all hyperbole, and the fact that the "avoidance" strategies are not perfect does not make those tactics banworthy.

 

[Pythag]

Man, I'm sorry (1048576) (what does that stand for anyway?) but I just don't quite agree. as a "Low tier" mainer, it seems that if I ever make a mistake against a (insert high tier) I'm going to die. So, if that's the case, should we ban all those moves too? I understand where you're coming from, i just don't agree with it. sorry.

 

[1048576]

Your arguments are getting really old.

IT IS ****ING IRRELEVANT IF YOU CAN'T AVOID GETTING GRABBED.

Against someone of equal skill level, you are going to lose stocks. No matter what matchup. It's part of the game. I can't believe I'm having to repeat stuff this blatantly obvious. "Don't get grabbed" is hyperbole, just like "Don't get hit" albeit not as extreme. Even though you have an expectation of getting hit, it's still good advice. "Don't get tippered" is hyperbole. You're almost guaranteed to get tippered against Marth at some point in the match. You'll probably die. Don't get kneed. Don't get shined. Don't get spiked. It's all hyperbole, and the fact that the "avoidance" strategies are not perfect does not make those tactics banworthy.

****, lost my long post.

You're arguments are getting really old, too. I think we're at the point where we've said everything there is to say and we are now repeating ourselves in an endless loop. Here's where I say: If you get tippered, you don't always die. If you get shined, you don't always die. If you get kneed, you don't always die. If you get spiked, you don't always die. All of these moves only kill the opponent at certain areas of the stage, at certain percentages. If you get wobbled, you always die, no matter what area of the stage you are at, no matter what character you are using, and no matter what percentage you have (unless your opponent is expecting to be grabbed, in which case it shouldn't work < 18%). This is unprecedented in smash, and I label it broken.

Also, just throwing it out there, IC's can take stocks without Wobbling. They have 34% smash attacks, one of which sends straight up, and one sends almost directly horizontal.

Also, why the hostile tone?

 

[1048576]

Man, I'm sorry (1048576) (what does that stand for anyway?) but I just don't quite agree. as a "Low tier" mainer, it seems that if I ever make a mistake against a (insert high tier) I'm going to die. So, if that's the case, should we ban all those moves too? I understand where you're coming from, i just don't agree with it. sorry.

Forgive me moderators, for I have sinned. That whole quoting two people in one post thing is a real hassle for me, so I chose not to do it. If you get tippered against Marth as Donkey Kong you don't always die. It depends on you're percentage and where you are on the stage. If anything, the space animals are the most at risk of death from mistakes. They both have predictable recoveries, they both get juggled forever, and they are both moderately light.

 

[Speedsk8er]

Yes, The Ice climbers are totally broken. I guess that's why they're below Fox, Falco, Marth, Sheik, Peach, AND CF on the tier list, right?

Yes, Wobbling, as a technique is broken but that's it. Whatever. For Brawl, make it so that tilts knock opponent out of Popo's grasp. Fixed.

 

[Pythag]

I hope you were talking to shai, because I feel I've kept a disussionary tone (or at least hoped to) anyway, Didn't someone mention at the begining of this thread that KDJ knew how to get away from wobbling? Because if there is a way of getting out, it should definately not be banned.

 

[N1c2k3]

Yes, The Ice climbers are totally broken. I guess that's why they're below Fox, Falco, Marth, Sheik, Peach, AND CF on the tier list, right?

Yes, Wobbling, as a technique is broken but that's it. Whatever. For Brawl, make it so that tilts knock opponent out of Popo's grasp. Fixed.

Good idea, actually...

 

[1048576]

The tier list has not been updated since wobbling was discovered. Yes I was talking to Shai. There is no way to break out of wobbling aside from unplugging your opponent's controller or something. You cannot escape a grab during hitstun, and the barrage or headbutts and f-tilts keeps you in constant hitstun.

 

[Shai Hulud]

****, lost my long post.

You're arguments are getting really old, too. I think we're at the point where we've said everything there is to say and we are now repeating ourselves in an endless loop. Here's where I say: If you get tippered, you don't always die. If you get shined, you don't always die. If you get kneed, you don't always die. If you get spiked, you don't always die. All of these moves only kill the opponent at certain areas of the stage, at certain percentages. If you get wobbled, you always die, no matter what area of the stage you are at, no matter what character you are using, and no matter what percentage you have (unless your opponent is expecting to be grabbed, in which case it shouldn't work < 18%). This is unprecedented in smash, and I label it broken.

Also, just throwing it out there, IC's can take stocks without Wobbling. They have 34% smash attacks, one of which sends straight up, and one sends almost directly horizontal.

Also, why the hostile tone?

I'm sorry--I've just been getting a lot of flak lately because of how I play ICs and hearing the same tired arguments over and over, which I feel like I have rebutted over and over, is getting to me.

A brief response--why is it significant if those techniques I mentioned kill 75% or 50% rather than 100%? And for the record, wobbling is also situation-specific. It only kills at 20% and above, against a competent opponent, much like Marth's fsmash.

Broken? Of course it's broken. Almost every character has something broken about them. That's not the point. Is it excessively broken, like Akura? The answer is very clearly no (to me). This is the core of the debate--does wobbling break the game? We don't know definitively, but so far there has been no evidence that it does, and I believe the burden of proof lies with those wanting to ban the tactic. Until you show (and not theorize--actually show, from tournament results) that a good ICs cannot be beaten (except in dittos), then wobbling should remain unbanned.

 

[1048576]

That is where we differ. I say theory is sufficient, even if Wobbles owns without his namesake technique. Personally, Wobbling makes an enormous difference when I play IC's, but I can't show it.

I had three ****ing posts deleted before this one. I ****ing hate my ****ing compuer. It can ****ing rot in the ***** **** *** of hell.

I feel better now

 

[The Hypnotist]

I finally read this entire thread and everyone makes very interesting points. However I have come to the relization that in metagame play Wobbling does not dominate. Therefore it's not a problem. If ICs won as many mainstream toruneys as Fox with Wobbling then there might be a probelm, but that's not what's happening.

We also have come to the relization that wobbling is not easy. Espically considering how stupid Nana can be and how possible it is for her to get gimped. Chu Dat has lots of 20-death combos that he pulls of all the time that aren't wobbles, should they be broken, I think not?

The anti-wobblers main argument is that wobbling is inevitable but at the same time I could argue that Nana getting gimped by Fox shinning is inevitable, more likely, and almost as "unfair"

As far as the whole Chu Dat COULd wobble sometimes but he doesn't argument is frankly bullspit. Because we just can't prove it. Period. The matter of the fact is anti wobblers beilve that wobbling is broken and is an infinite. Should toebiting (or w/e it's called) be broke, it's not an infinite...

The ICs are freakin middle or high tier, they aren't top tier, even with wobbling. If wobbling was so easy and broken then we'd see a ton of ICs at tourneys wobbling and winning big cash. But that simply isn't the case and within the metagame, which the tier list and rules are based off of, wobbling is not a major probelm. With that logic, wobbling should not be banned.

 

[sk8tinGam0r]

I finally read this entire thread and everyone makes very interesting points. However I have come to the relization that in metagame play Wobbling does not dominate. Therefore it's not a problem. If ICs won as many mainstream toruneys as Fox with Wobbling then there might be a probelm, but that's not what's happening.

We also have come to the relization that wobbling is not easy. Espically considering how stupid Nana can be and how possible it is for her to get gimped. Chu Dat has lots of 20-death combos that he pulls of all the time that aren't wobbles, should they be broken, I think not?

The anti-wobblers main argument is that wobbling is inevitable but at the same time I could argue that Nana getting gimped by Fox shinning is inevitable, more likely, and almost as "unfair"

As far as the whole Chu Dat COULd wobble sometimes but he doesn't argument is frankly bullspit. Because we just can't prove it. Period. The matter of the fact is anti wobblers beilve that wobbling is broken and is an infinite. Should toebiting (or w/e it's called) be broke, it's not an infinite...

The ICs are freakin middle or high tier, they aren't top tier, even with wobbling. If wobbling was so easy and broken then we'd see a ton of ICs at tourneys wobbling and winning big cash. But that simply isn't the case and within the metagame, which the tier list and rules are based off of, wobbling is not a major probelm. With that logic, wobbling should not be banned.

i agree with that completly dont remove it unless it really starts to pose a threat to the gameplay. u dont see a lot of IC players winning tournaments. I say let the IC wobble. There easy to edgeguard just get them off the stage and keep them off. if ur that upset about the wobbling then just put a limit on it. say u can only wobble for 50%(or any % mlg decides) dmg then u have to stop or disqualified. but dont take out of of the ic moves just cause its broken. in most games they will always get rid of something that the best player has to even the game. look at fox hes top on the list ban something of his to even the gameplay. IC arnt even high tier and there lossing moves cmon. even with wobbles IC will prolly stay middle tier. maybe go high tier but wouldnt make the top of the list. if fox lost his shine he would drop to high tier but still would be godly.

 

[The Hypnotist]

I agree with some of that but you shouldn't be able to put a limit on it, in that case Shiek should only be able to Chain throw until a certain &tage or fox can only Waveshine a few times.

 

[Oskurito]

I finally read this entire thread and everyone makes very interesting points. However I have come to the relization that in metagame play Wobbling does not dominate. Therefore it's not a problem. If ICs won as many mainstream toruneys as Fox with Wobbling then there might be a probelm, but that's not what's happening.

We also have come to the relization that wobbling is not easy. Espically considering how stupid Nana can be and how possible it is for her to get gimped. Chu Dat has lots of 20-death combos that he pulls of all the time that aren't wobbles, should they be broken, I think not?

The anti-wobblers main argument is that wobbling is inevitable but at the same time I could argue that Nana getting gimped by Fox shinning is inevitable, more likely, and almost as "unfair"

As far as the whole Chu Dat COULd wobble sometimes but he doesn't argument is frankly bullspit. Because we just can't prove it. Period. The matter of the fact is anti wobblers beilve that wobbling is broken and is an infinite. Should toebiting (or w/e it's called) be broke, it's not an infinite...

The ICs are freakin middle or high tier, they aren't top tier, even with wobbling. If wobbling was so easy and broken then we'd see a ton of ICs at tourneys wobbling and winning big cash. But that simply isn't the case and within the metagame, which the tier list and rules are based off of, wobbling is not a major probelm. With that logic, wobbling should not be banned.

QFT ^^^^^^

 

[Team Giza]

Wobbling: The kink in our community

Wobbling has been a tricking and controversial tactic in our community lately. For every major tournament that allows it there is another major tournament that bans it. This cut in our community is no even a regional issue like other differences in high level game set up, such as Japan’s two levels set up. Wobbling has been controversial nearly everywhere around the United States for smash tournaments and other events. Is it banned or isn’t it? It changes from tournament to tournament in the same area and it causes metagame to get confusing and change too much. This has become an issue because other fighting game communities are looking down on our inability to get together and make a decision, and a well thought out decision, on this issue.

For all the new players, and potential future players, it would probably be best for me to explain what wobbling is. Wobbling is an Ice climbers’ infinite that is performed by grabbing and having Nana use to forward or down tilt at a certain time after Popo’s holding jab. This makes it so the opponent is stuck in a grab getting hit repetitively with no chance to escape unless the performer messes up on his execution on timing the tilt after the holding jab. Sounds a bit unfair, right? Well we will get into that later.

There have been many changes in the Smash community lately. We have begun to be accepted by the other fighting game communities as a serious competitive game community. However as soon as we started to bond with our fellow fighting communities we already start to face a problem because we have this glaring kink in our community over whether or not wobbling should or shouldn’t be banned. Of course the other fighting game communities, which are much more organized when it comes to concepts like this, have begun to look down on us because of our stumbling over what we should do about the wobbling issue.

Before I go on any farther I would like to state right away that I am going to be defending keeping wobbling as a variable tactic in all major tournaments for the time being and I am going to explain it right here in the easiest way I can. I think that tactics should be banned unless the community has proof that it is totally broken. The point is wobbling has been known for more than 3 years now and it’s been applied to competitive metagame for a least one year now. However, we still do not see loads of Ice Climbers entering tournaments. We still do not see wobbling Ice Climbers winning major tournaments over and over and over. The playing field was not switched to an Ice Climbers game. I feel that I can safety say that wobbling does not break the game because of this.

You can throw the idea of Evo South at me with Wobbles the Pheonix taking home the victory, but what about what happened in Evo East? Obviously the game does not get totally shaken down to the point were beating the Ice Climbers as any other character becomes impossible. It is not like wobbling Ice Climbers always win their matches. Yes it gives Ice Climbers more of an edge than they had before but it still hasn’t put them in a position were they have caused a tournament to just be beasted over by the wobbling tactic.

Now allow me to fight off a lot of the anti-wobbles arguments with some quotes from a wonderful competitive gamer and game designer, David Sirlin.
The follow two quotes are from Playing to Win, Part 2: Mailbag;

"But I really have a tactic that wins every time! Tower rushing in Warcraft 3 [or camping in Unreal Tournament, or whatever else]. It's not that I'm a scrub, but the game is more fun when I don't use that tactic and when I play against others who also don't use it."

In this case I am using the point with wobbling. Recently I have been told by my local tournaments that we weren’t allowing wobbles because it made the game less fun.

Bad news for you. You are a scrub. You can't e-mail me and claim not to be a scrub, yet exemplify the only pre-requisite! (Well you can, but please don't.) What's worse is that the tactics stated are always tactics I know for a fact not to be "too good." Does tower rushing win every Warcraft 3 tournament? No. Are all the best Unreal Tournament players hardcore campers (players who sit in one spot on the map)? No. Then what are you complaining about? Learn the counter to the strategy. If there is no counter (there is a 99.9% that there is, but you don't know about it), then enter some tournaments, win them all and prove it. If you manage to do that, then fine, you've exposed the game as a degenerate one that you should probably no longer play. Otherwise, expand your horizons and learn more about the game. I suppose you could continue to play your homemade version of the game against other scrubs, but I think you'd be missing out.

Now this is pretty much what I have been saying throughout this whole post. That wobbling does not win every tournament; in fact it doesn’t even win 25% of tournaments. So how can anyone in the community even begin to say its broken?

I think it is about time we start learning from the other fighting game communities and stop trying to ban everything that causes a little bit of discomfort until we are actually have proof that it is indeed broken and makes the game unplayable in a balanced setting. I think its time we wobbles out this kink in our community and unban wobbling from all major tournaments.

 

[1048576]

I disagree with your major premise. I do not think we need additional tournament proof that a tactic is banworthy before we ban it. Yes, there are many options to counter wobbling. The problem is that humans play smash in tournaments. Humans make mistakes, otherwise everybody would powershield everything and SHL would be a noob tactic. When the IC player can play worse than his opponent about five times more often than the IC's opponent can play worse than him, then we have a very unbalanced tactic. Think about it, there are plenty of ways to counter Giga Bowser. He is slow, he is a large target, and his recovery is very predictable. Do we allow Giga Bowser in tourneys? No, because he is unbalanced, meaning that the controller of Giga Bowser can make many more errors than his opponent. Wobbling is essentially the same in this sense. Are we scrubs for not allowing Giga Bowser in tourneys? Most definitely. Maybe we should unban Giga Bowser, seeing as we apparantly need proof that anything in this game is unbalanced. Whaddaya think?

 

[psicicle]

I disagree with your major premise. I do not think we need additional tournament proof that a tactic is banworthy before we ban it. Yes, there are many options to counter wobbling. The problem is that humans play smash in tournaments. Humans make mistakes, otherwise everybody would powershield everything and SHL would be a noob tactic. When the IC player can play worse than his opponent about five times more often than the IC's opponent can play worse than him, then we have a very unbalanced tactic. Think about it, there are plenty of ways to counter Giga Bowser. He is slow, he is a large target, and his recovery is very predictable. Do we allow Giga Bowser in tourneys? No, because he is unbalanced, meaning that the controller of Giga Bowser can make many more errors than his opponent. Wobbling is essentially the same in this sense. Are we scrubs for not allowing Giga Bowser in tourneys? Most definitely. Maybe we should unban Giga Bowser, seeing as we apparantly need proof that anything in this game is unbalanced. Whaddaya think?

Generally, action replay is not allowed in tourneys...

and theory without proof is just a hypothesis, according to the scientific method. Firstly, there is no tournament proof. Secondly, this particular thought experiment cannot have taken into account all the subtle nuances of play.

No problems have been caused by wobbling yet, and the problems that it presents are relatively minor enough so that a ban right now with no tourney justification is... unjustified.

Either way, theory does not take into account as many variables as real life. Waiting for tomorrow to see whether it rains is going to be more accurate than a weather forecast.

With the giga bowser argument, it is just a matter of the degree to which something is "broken". For example, I would pick up a penny on the floor and keep it. However, I would not keep a credit card, which is (ususally) worth far more than a penny. I would probably return it somewhere or mail it to the company. You can't say that because you would go to that trouble with something of a large potential value, you should go to the same measures with a penny. This is the analogy I am making with wobbling.

Also, right now even when I try to incorporate wobbling into my play, it rarely works until my opponent is at 50% or so. In addition to that, in play I usually find nana in some sort of lag when popo has grabbed. All of this results in wobbling being pretty tough to pull off. i usually win too, so my skill as a factor is somewhat dubious.

Putting up a shield does not result ina lost stock because you can jump out or WD back or sidestep and the ICs may be farther than a grab's range away. The 7-frame thing grab thing is vastly offset by the small range, as well as a decent amount of lag at the end. There is enough lag after a grab that it can be punished.

 

[Team Giza]

I disagree with your major premise. I do not think we need additional tournament proof that a tactic is banworthy before we ban it. Yes, there are many options to counter wobbling. The problem is that humans play smash in tournaments. Humans make mistakes

All banned tactics in tournament games have been tested in tournament settings before being banned. Even Akuma in Super Turbo was allowed in tournaments until it was clear that he was broken. Heck, even Gill in 3S was allowed in console tournaments until he was deemed banned! Gill! GILL!!!!! I think with this knowledge its pretty safe to say that if the smash community ever wants to get respect from other fighting game communities and actually sen as a true competitive game by the competitive community as a whole we need to allow wobbling in tournaments until it is obvious that it is broken.

Akuma thing went a little too far, since they didn't ban it til tournaments were swarming with Akuma and his unstoppable fireballs. But think about Wobbling thus far... it has been allowed in quite a few tournaments, so there is some tournament proof. And guess what? The majority of it actually proves you wrong. ESPECIALLY at higher level tournaments which is what we are mainly arguing. The big players have been able to get around it, and they are human regardless to what people may say about players like Forward, Cort, and Azen. These aren't just normal Ice Climbers they are taking about, they are taking out the best of the best. We have some tournament proof and guess what... it says the opposite of your hypnosis.

And about Giga Bowser, he isn't legal because he isn't playable. You actually have to hack the game to play as him. If he was a playable character they wouldn't ban him until they had tournament proof, "they" being other established fighting game communities.

Seriously, we our risking even losing our Marvel friends over this issue... it is not a pretty picture.

 

[knightpraetor]

in general i don't really care whether people wobble...first time encountered a good wobbler in a sheik vs IC matchup i lost two stocks to wobbling...instead of just chaingrabs to death...

but honestly sometimes i feel like i hate the arguments you people make..i feel like instead of trying to balance out current top tiers overpoweredness you're just trying to add more broken components that don't add to the enjoyment of the game...but go ahead and allow wobbling if you want..it's not any more broken then what i can do with waveshining or sheik's chain grab...honestly those are the only two abilities i consider to have nearly the widespread brokenness as to unbalance the game for a vast number of players..but fortunately most of that applies to char that aren't competitive at tourney level anyways.

So while i would prefer if we played pal version so more chars were viable, and i would prefer if waveshining was banned...it's still fine if IC's can wobble, that just means the tournies will still be won by marth , fox, falco, and sheik, with 3 other chars having a decent chance (falcon, peach, IC). Honestly it's kinda sad that the gap between tiers is so large..but meh..i'm hoping in brawl for revival of smash 64 type throws (knockback and kill)

i don't really get why people complain quite so much...under current rules counterpicking can really kill ICs

PS- People with post problems, in general just don't quick reply and go advanced and post..that helps me when it's bugging...also, always copy it all to memory before hitting the post button

 

[h1roshi]

"wobbling" is a funny word, thats is all. class dismissed...peace

-hiroshi

 

[choknater]

team giza hit it on the ball. kudos to you man

 

[1048576]

Why don't we allow AR in tournaments? That seems arbitrary.

 

[Team Giza]

1048576... I never thought you would stoop this low. Seriously, of all the people I've ever talked to, you were the only one who has ever put up a decent argument about why wobbling should be banned in tournaments. You offered up the argument of human potential and frame rates earlier in the topic and I felt that it was, by far, the best post countering wobbling I have ever read. However, many people countered with tournaments results and examples of other games where frame rates like that are countered on the norm (namely Virtua Fighter). But now you are going as low as comparing wobbling to Action Replay? I read something very interesting on another board that I think I will repost here to explain my point more clearly (since obviously I suck at posting).

That's what you call "cheating". There's a difference between something like wobbling, and using codes to say max out your score. Cheating in this case is a situation where the element of skill is almost, if not entirely removed from the result of gameplay.

In this case, wobbling is far from a sure-fire way to win a match. If it was, everyone that was serious about winning a tournament would be doing it. The player has to _see_ an opportunity to trigger it, _take_ that opportunity, and _maintain_ the technique, all three of which are difficult in competition play. Sure, there are infinite combos in one or two other major tournament fighters. Certain moves in say Tekken, in a counter context, do incredible damage (e.g. Paul's lunging punch does around 70% damage despite being fast and easy), and there's even a 100% move/combo or two (e.g. King's 100% throw combo). None of them are banned, and it doesn't adversely affect the competition in those games. You don't see everyone playing King just because they only need one good throw to finish a round, for the simple reason that these things do _not_ make them invincible.

I do think that it says something about the SSBM competition community that they can't make a solid decision about this. The fact is that similar, and sometimes even more effective tactics have been developed in the past in such games, and in virtually all cases, said tactics are still allowed in tournament play because they are just another facet of it. The fact that Evo is allowing wobbling and their decision (or lack of one, as the case may be) hasn't backfired in practice, I think, says it all.

Another thing to remember about 0 to death combos and infinites in SSBM is that you have 4 stock. Meaning any time you get caught in something like it you only lose one of them, which is 1/4 of your end of the game. This makes them even less devastating than infinites and 100% combos in Marvel vs Capcom 2 (which is a game that is widely considered balanced enough for high level competitive play even with a few infinites, 100% combos, and good resets). The fact that a game like MvC2 can allow so many things that are just as powerful as wobbling causes to a single stock (a stock being one of your three characters in MvC2), then why cannot a game like SSBM be fine playing at high levels with this in it when you even have more chances after it happens?

The topic has proved various ways around the wobbles and that people can beat it at tournaments. The proof is all in tournament results which so far they have seemed to proof, almost undeniably, that wobbles is, in fact, not broken. However perhaps future tournament results will proof me wrong. But we shouldn't falsely accuse this technique as guilty of being broken until we can proof otherwise. Wobbling is innocent until proven guilty, if proof ever comes in that it is guilty of the crime of breaking the game then it will be the time to ban it.