Will we have Smash Ball activated as an item in the pro/competitive scene?

[Samochan]

I wonder how fun would be crew matches with smash balls if you can't turn pity fs off. >_>

 

[Sliq]

So many noobs...

 

[flyinfilipino]

So many noobs...

yea they outnumber you liek, 11 to 1

 

[Blackshadow]

Honestly its like a never-ending river of **** flowing right through the middle of Smashboards.

 

[Someguy13]

I sure hope Smash Balls arent allowed because both ZSS and DK (the two people ill be maining) have suckish FS's. ZSS turns into Samus, which I dont want, and looking at the E4A videos DKs is reallllly bad!

Actually DKs FS dosent look all that bad. Theres a video out there where he sends out a huge shock wave that did good dammage nd knock back. It was still pretty easy to doge but it still looked like a good FS.

 

[Airgemini]

I still like the other ones more.

 

[Spottswoode]

So, what will happen at tourneys if it's decided that the item isn't fair, but the game DOESN'T LET YOU TURN IT OFF? It might not be like a regular item in the Item Switch.

 

[The Director]

So, what will happen at tourneys if it's decided that the item isn't fair, but the game DOESN'T LET YOU TURN IT OFF? It might not be like a regular item in the Item Switch.

Wow, they really do outnumber us 11 to 1?

You can turn it off. It's an item. After Sakurai's statements about what a FS is, at first thought I'd say yeah, turn them on...but I might want to actually play the game first before deciding this one.

In reality tho, I've accepted it: FSs will be off in tournys.

 

[Rauzaruke]

Holy crap. What the hell did I just walk into?

The best way to decide this is to host the first Brawl tournament with Smash Balls on. If it appears that they are broken or if they are fair, we can go from there. Until then all we can do is ***** with one another over something we haven't even experienced yet.

 

[MookieRah]

The best way to decide this is to host the first Brawl tournament with Smash Balls on. If it appears that they are broken or if they are fair, we can go from there. Until then all we can do is ***** with one another over something we haven't even experienced yet.

I think the vets would be able to figure it out without risking potential upsets over it. It's pretty apparent from E for All that they are definitely not good for tournament play, and unless something radically changed from the demo you might as well just expect them to not be around in competitive play.

 

[Yeroc]

Oh noes, a few people around the country might get "cheated out of" their biweekly money while we figure out if items or smash balls are as competitively broken as we all first suspected they were. It's the "ban first, ask questions later" mentality that closes the door on any potential exploration into what game factors will make for more diverse and interesting, and therefore longer lasting and livelier, competitive play. The only way we can know for certain is by trying stuff out, and if it doesn't work, we do away with it.

Edit: I'm sure you're quite aware of all this, man. But being so preemptively sure of the outcome of this trial just seems likely to skew your perception of the actual results when they come in.

 

[MookieRah]

Oh noes, a few people around the country might get "cheated out of" their biweekly money while we figure out if items or smash balls are as competitively broken as we all first suspected they were.

I'm not talking about bi-weeklies and smashfests. I'm talking about a big name tournament. Those would be the ideal testing grounds. There is no reason to compromise the first tournament based on this idealism that somehow items are less random or more playable this time around.

But being so preemptively sure of the outcome of this trial just seems likely to skew your perception of the actual results when they come in.

Have you analyzed why I and others are preemptively sure? It's simple really. We've learned how to do things with melee. I don't think we should just toss everything we learn about running tournaments and setting up rules out the window just cause of a few new items and a crazy new final smash system.

I'm all for appeasing the optimists and testing it on the small scale, but pretty much everything I know about the competitive scene is telling me that these things won't be a part of the competitive scene long enough to matter.

 

[5150]

mookierah i think you are my hero. why? because you are so patient. i gave up trying logic with these people and i honestly have no idea how you haven't either.

 

[CHAOSDRAGON88]

I cant wait for brawl! What does pwnd and pwnage also zomg mean? I really dont know, thanks in advance.

 

[Yeroc]

5150, I'm trying not to take that as a slight against me since I just happened to say my piece here. I said nothing at all assuming that items would become a regular part of the national scene, a scene I've been a part of and helped build (even only in small parts here or there) long before you or even mookie first joined SWF. I do nothing but maintain the open perspective that yes, just maybe, a change could occur. Maybe items will have been tweaked in a way that doesn't interfere with the nature of the competition. I have my doubts too, not only in whether or not this would actually happen, but also in the community's penchant as a whole to try to maintain the status quo. I'm not expecting Brawl tourneys to magically become "items on-any stage" or anything like that. But if it were competitively viable, I'm assuredly for it. It's opinions like yours, actually, that let me know it's pretty much a lost cause because no one seems interested in the potential change everyone already "knows" items will be banned.

Mookie, my point still remains that we don't know for sure how it's going to play out. Realistically, sure, I agree with you. I don't think things will change. But the potential is there. It's a new game, with new mechanics and contstructs. We don't know the implementations yet, so we really can't say for sure. And one tournament does not a reputation make. There will always be tourneys for people to prove their worth at, so while we're all cutting our teeth on this new system doesn't it make sense to exercise all options available to us, no matter how unfitting they may seem at first?

 

[MookieRah]

long before you or even mookie first joined SWF

Come on now, a month isn't a very large difference in time XD.

I'd like to address that my opinion lies on the assumption that items have the same basic characteristics as they do in melee. That is that they have random spawn points, random spawn times, and random items spawned. If this does not hold true then there really *should* be testing done. Otherwise, it's really just the same situation we have now with the potential that they may have fixed the crates/barrels issue.

 

[Yeroc]

I've been here since early/mid 2003. This is my second account after the first one got deleted in a server error. >_> <_<

The "Random" issue isn't really the same argument though. Crates and barrels everyone can agree were broken. But randomness itself isn't necessarily bad for competitive play, only the way it affects the gameplay. Seriously, if you believe that items appearing in random spots at random times detracts from the core essense of competition, then why haven't we banned Peach? Peach has the ability to randomly instantiate an item, and to top it off she doesn't even have to go and get it, it's already in her hands! I mean by your argument that's broken beyond compare, yet we allow it. Selectiveness, to be sure. There are several other less prevalent situations in our metagame as well. But really, if you're gonna play that card, it should be applied uniformly across the board, no?

 

[SmashBro99]

It'll be banned at most places.

This item takes away from people's "mad skills" like every other item.

 

[Yeroc]

*sigh* Like I said, pretty much pointless to debate against the automatic predilections everyone already has from Melee.

 

[TrueBlue23]

I think they should be throughly tested, like Yeroc said, it always seems like people want to ban first ask later.

 

[sugarpoultry]

Like the way Melee was determined for tournaments, same will apply with Brawl. They will play, and see if its tolerable for tournament style playing. Who knows, none of us know except for maybe those who have played at E4All.

I'm making a guess that they won't be in, just because they take away from skills, which are what tournaments are about. But who knows...

 

[Miamisportsfan45]

I think it's too early to say until we all get the new feel of the game. Though, I'm not the one in charge. So I'll just check up on others opinions and possibly back them up, agree or disagree, and point out facts and my opinion to help support or go against them. xD.

 

[MookieRah]

Peach has the ability to randomly instantiate an item, and to top it off she doesn't even have to go and get it, it's already in her hands! I mean by your argument that's broken beyond compare, yet we allow it. Selectiveness, to be sure. There are several other less prevalent situations in our metagame as well. But really, if you're gonna play that card, it should be applied uniformly across the board, no?

It is regrettable that Peach and Luigi have random elements to it, and I think it's really ****ty to have to deal with that. I've been screwed by it, and I've seen many other players screwed by it. The big difference between Peach and items is that you can turn items off and you can't turn Peach's randomness off. Peach is also a fairly popular character, and one that is very unique in the series. So is Luigi. It is unreasonable to ban them for those reasons.

Another thing everyone seems to truncate from the debate is that half of the country opted to ban items prior to the actual ban of items. The biggest proponent to keep items in was the midwest. Even a decent of people who participated in items tournaments would have opted to not have items in said tournaments. It was the collective majority that set on this, and the crates and barrels issue was merely the only issue that the item users eventually conceded to.

 

[Someguy13]

*sigh* Like I said, pretty much pointless to debate against the automatic predilections everyone already has from Melee.

Yeah its kinda sad. Smash Balls are not normal items (this is supported by the fact that they have 2 how to play updates but no item update. thats not to say we wont get one but at this point it seems unlikily) and I think if no other item is given a chance the smash ball should. The main reason that its different is that on appering it offers no advantage to any one player and this is something that people dont seem to understand. And then once it shows up you have a bunch of split second decisions to make like do you o after the smash ball or after your opponent as they are distracted by the ball? If they get it do you run or beat it out of them? If you get it do you use it right away or wait untill a better time to use it? A lot of people are worried that Brawl will have less depth than Melee. Well as long as the smash balls active I dont think that would be a problem. Final Smashes cpuld even like a balence for characters (where does Meta-Knight have problems? Finishing opponents off. His Final Smash a great way to KO some one but has a short range so it should probally be comboed into). So thats why I think Smash Balls should be allowed but set to low or very low.

 

[LeeHarris]

This may sound silly, but I think one of our best judges of whether or not the FS should be included is to let proven competitive players play all day with it on and see how frustrated they get with it. If they learn to adapt to the final smashes, avoid them, find weak points, etc, then they will be viable in competitive play. If one player is clearly better than the other, however, yet they still have about an even number of won matches between them, then it isn't suited for the competitive scene.

 

[shadydentist]

We can speculate all we want, but until the game is released, you can't possibly know how broken the final smashes are.

 

[Yeroc]

It is regrettable that Peach and Luigi have random elements to it, and I think it's really ****ty to have to deal with that. I've been screwed by it, and I've seen many other players screwed by it. The big difference between Peach and items is that you can turn items off and you can't turn Peach's randomness off. Peach is also a fairly popular character, and one that is very unique in the series. So is Luigi. It is unreasonable to ban them for those reasons.

But you say on one hand that anything random is detrimental to the competitive environment, and ought to be removed. You can't take out the code controlling Peach's turnips, therefore you have no choice but to remove Peach entirely. There is no room for negotiation according to what you have said. (As an aside, I agree it'll be pretty ****ty to ban ZSS because she's bound to the smash ball and I hope for the alternate start option just as much as you do.) But I disagree with this stark position. As I said before, I feel it isn't randomness itself that is a detriment, but only its impact on the game. People have learned to adapt to the nature of Peach's turnips, and have more or less accepted them as a part of the game. It could, theoretically, be the same with items - if it weren't for the brokenness of exploding containers. Which brings me to your other point:

Another thing everyone seems to truncate from the debate is that half of the country opted to ban items prior to the actual ban of items. The biggest proponent to keep items in was the midwest. Even a decent of people who participated in items tournaments would have opted to not have items in said tournaments. It was the collective majority that set on this, and the crates and barrels issue was merely the only issue that the item users eventually conceded to.

I remember all of this. I imagine I probably sang a much different tune back then. The problem we have here is that our judgement of a game mechanic was based upon a prevailing opinion with only one indisputable fact supporting it. There were other factors obviously, but only one that the other side had no answer for, is what I'm saying. This, really, is why I am currently advocating the thorough inspection of the competitive viability of the item and smash ball mechanic. I can't realistically be an arbitrator on this, but it is my opinion that it would be better if everyone dropped their preconceptions and experimented. We really have nothing to lose by it, and we find out just how broken or unbroken items and final smashes really are, and isn't that really the issue?

Yeah its kinda sad. Smash Balls are not normal items (this is supported by the fact that they have 2 how to play updates but no item update. thats not to say we wont get one but at this point it seems unlikily) and I think if no other item is given a chance the smash ball should. The main reason that its different is that on appering it offers no advantage to any one player and this is something that people dont seem to understand. And then once it shows up you have a bunch of split second decisions to make like do you o after the smash ball or after your opponent as they are distracted by the ball? If they get it do you run or beat it out of them? If you get it do you use it right away or wait untill a better time to use it? A lot of people are worried that Brawl will have less depth than Melee. Well as long as the smash balls active I dont think that would be a problem. Final Smashes cpuld even like a balence for characters (where does Meta-Knight have problems? Finishing opponents off. His Final Smash a great way to KO some one but has a short range so it should probally be comboed into). So thats why I think Smash Balls should be allowed but set to low or very low.

I agree with you. Unfortunately items and smash balls appear to be under the same constraints so if one goes, the other must also. But hope remains.

This may sound silly, but I think one of our best judges of whether or not the FS should be included is to let proven competitive players play all day with it on and see how frustrated they get with it. If they learn to adapt to the final smashes, avoid them, find weak points, etc, then they will be viable in competitive play. If one player is clearly better than the other, however, yet they still have about an even number of won matches between them, then it isn't suited for the competitive scene.

While I sort of agree with you, that really is essentially the only way to do it, it's not that simple. Real play-testing will take a few months most likely, and using tournaments to do it is not only the most conducive method, it's really the only one that will produce any meaningful results. People play differently when money is on the line. All of the dark unexplored corners of items play would be lit up and shown for what they really are, and only then could we make any sort of informed decision about their tournament worthiness.

We can speculate all we want, but until the game is released, you can't possibly know how broken the final smashes are.

Exactly.

 

[M3D]

If the final smashes aren't completely unbalanced, I would consider supporting Smash Balls and Healing Balls turned on for competitive matches. I think there is a possibility that there will be sufficient risk vs. reward elements built into them that they could add depth without arbitrarily benefitting one team or another.

But we can't really know until the game comes out and we all have some time to test it. Time will tell guys. Let's all keep our minds open until we have the chance to test it.

 

[Zycor]

Only Items I'd like to ban are the cheap items which pretty much guarantee a KO when used (Bom-ombs, Hammers, ect.) I think Smash Balls should remain on because really, it's as random as anything you do in game, not only that but it's also something you can knock out of the opponent, so there is already a counter for it and you can get it yourself and wail on them.

 

[TrueBlue23]

I do believe that random items, or broken ones(Heart, bob omb etc) need to be banned. But others need to be tested to see how truly dangerous they are. And I believe Smash Balls fall into the latter group.

 

[sugarpoultry]

We can speculate all we want, but until the game is released, you can't possibly know how broken the final smashes are.

Tis a true statement.

 

[5150]

But randomness itself isn't necessarily bad for competitive play

stopped reading here.

 

[Yeroc]

Arguing for the status quo doesn't preclude you from constructing an argument built upon logic and facts to address what I've said or allow you to simply dismiss my point of view for being different from yours.

 

[sugarpoultry]

Randomness is bad for competitive play. If it wasn't, there would be items used in tournaments.

 

[GhostAnime]

if it isn't skill, it shouldn't be in a tournament; or at least a good amount of skill. I don't consider dealing with a random explosion skill.

 

[MookieRah]

You can't take out the code controlling Peach's turnips, therefore you have no choice but to remove Peach entirely. There is no room for negotiation according to what you have said.

Item bans are one thing and character bans are another. Please tell me that you honestly don't believe that items and characters have equal relevance. It's not such a hard concept as everyone knows it and understands this. Casual and competitive players alike would be adamantly against a character ban of Peach or Luigi based upon the randomness in their move sets.

By removing items you remove a layer of randomness, and while it sucks that there is no option to make it so Peach only pulls normal turnips it isn't enough to warrant banning a character. The same goes for Luigi's misfires and G&W's forward B.

 

[Team Giza]

Items as a whole should not be banned off of slight randomness. However, if they cause stock threatening randomness that doesn't give reaction time and avoidable capability it needs to be banned. Is smashball too random? Well, I am hoping not but even from the e-for-all videos I have not been able to tell for sure.

Slight randomness is still fine even in high level competitive play for games. So saying randomness in general causes stuff to need to be banned isn't fair. But if things are unavoidably random (like exploding capsules in melee) then they need to be turned off.

 

[Zauron]

Item bans are one thing and character bans are another. Please tell me that you honestly don't believe that items and characters have equal relevance.

And this is excatly why Smash Balls need more consideration than just "they are an item and must be banned." They are part of each character's uniqueness. Banning Final Smashes in Brawl is the equivalant of banning Down+B moves in Melee. You are eliminating what makes characters different from each other, and greatly affecting their relative balance in the tier lists. Imagine what the tier list would look like if Down+B were banned from tournaments. I expect a similar drastic change if Final Smashes were banned.

Let's look at another argument I've seen - Final Smashes suck for some characters, yet are very powerful for others. Um, same thing as Down+B moves. Some characters, say Mario, would be hardly damaged at all by the removal of Down+B. Other characters, like Peach and Fox, would lose a lot of their power. Shiek would be removed from the game entirely if you couldn't select her by holding A at the beginning of a match.

Now, obviously, banning Down+B moves is a rediculous idea, even if it were possible. Yet somehow banning another move unique to each character seems perfectly reasonable to you, just because it happens to share a resemblence to a factor that was not traditionally important to character-to-character balance in the past - normal items.

Let's also not forget that the Smash Ball is NOT a typical item - it has to be broken open, flies away from you when hit, can be stolen once gained, and for many character, requires strategy to use and opens you up for counters if you waste it. And, again, has unique properties depending on your character. No items in Melee are ANYTHING like this, so its a bit early to make conclusions based on past play experience when dealing with something completely new like this, don't you think?

As you said yourself as well, items weren't banned in tournaments right away in Melee, even though 64 Smash had been around for a while and could have been used as an example of what should happen as you are trying to use Melee now. Nor was many other things that are now. It was only after time, testing, and feedback were they eventually completely banned as the norm. Why should Brawl not be allowed to go through the same process? Those that went to E4A commented that the game feels VERY different, and the developers clearly put a lot of effort into the Final Smash feature. Why should it not get the same level of testing in the tournament scene as Melee's features got? You didn't see the SF3 tournament scene ban Supers when they first came out did you?

Finally, lets not forget what Smash Balls add to the competitive play - there's a whole new level of depth to deal with now. Do you go for the Smash Ball, or go for your opponent who's distracted by it and get free hits in on them, then maybe get it for yourself? When he has it, do you retreat and get him to waste it, or go after him hoping to steal it? These options weren't available for normal items, as it was just whoever got to it first got the item. It is often said that what gives Smash, and other fighting games, real depth is the number of choices available at any given time. Smash Balls and Final Smashes add more choices, more depth, and thus require additional skill to learn how to best apply and counter them.

 

[Sliq]

This thread is filled with failure. Jesus Christ would be disappointed if there was internet in Heaven.

 

[WastingPenguins]

Finally, lets not forget what Smash Balls add to the competitive play - there's a whole new level of depth to deal with now. Do you go for the Smash Ball, or go for your opponent who's distracted by it and get free hits in on them, then maybe get it for yourself?

Okay, stop right there. It really doesn't matter whether or not you choose to go after at it at any given time. The balls path around the screen is completely random. Videos have shown that once you start bashing away at it, it MIGHT float away, it MIGHT stay there and let you get it, your opponent might hit it first and then it MIGHT float towards you, it MIGHT float somewhere else...

C'mon, the argument against Smash Balls has NOTHING to do with the situations once a player breaks it open. Most will agree that there's some interesting new strategy that could develop from the moves themselves. The problem is that WHO gets the moves is completely random! And face it, if your opponent happens to get several Final Smashes in one match, by virtue of random chance and nothing else... that just ain't fair, and if they are anywhere near your skill level you WILL be at a HUGE disadvantage.