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

[MookieRah]

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.

In the post you quoted of me I didn't even mention final smashes for one. Secondly, Final Smashes aren't a real part of a characters moveset. This is the dumbest argument I've seen that is in favor of smash balls, because last time I checked I didn't need to use any items to perform any attack in any other smash game. They are simply a unique item based attack and nothing more.

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.

Smash 64 had a fledgling scene. They didn't really get crazy with smash 64 till after melee's release. There weren't really many tournaments and there was definitely not much in the ways of an organized tournament rule set.

It was only after time, testing, and feedback were they eventually completely banned as the norm.

And one would think that we would learn from all that.

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.

It's apparent that they didn't spend much time trying to balance them either. Also, why does nobody cite Hugs? He was completely and vehemently opposed to smash balls and said they have no place in competitive play. I love Gimpy to death, but it seems like a lot of people just take his optimistic side of things and ignore everyone else.

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?

I can see it now. Everyone with a ****ty FS will opt not to get it and merely use the smash ball as a way to bait any opponent who goes for it, but will forever be **** on if their opponent actually got the ball in the first place. Also, every Sonic and Bowser (come to think of it Dede and Pit as well) will simply laugh at the other characters that have to set up their FS's because if they get it all they have to do is activate it for a near guaranteed KO.

It's pretty apparent that they aren't tournament material.

 

[Zauron]

In the post you quoted of me I didn't even mention final smashes for one. Secondly, Final Smashes aren't a real part of a characters moveset. This is the dumbest argument I've seen that is in favor of smash balls, because last time I checked I didn't need to use any items to perform any attack in any other smash game. They are simply a unique item based attack and nothing more.

I find your argument equally "dumb." You say its a "unique item based attack." I say its a part of a character's moveset that happens to require an item (or a pity FS) and is a key part of a character's balance with other characters. Last I checked, the Dojo puts Final Smashes on the character pages, the same as their other special moves, not on the Items page. Can you prove me wrong? No. Its a matter of perspective and opinion. You are again basing all your statements on "any other smash game" (of which there have been a whole 2 so far) and without any significant evidence from THIS game to back you up. A handful of smashers playing a demo for a couple days, and not even being able to agree on what they experienced amongst themselves, is not enough for any reasonable person to begin making proclamations about the future of the game in the tournament scene.

Again, when the SF series introduced Supers, did the community ban them because they never had to fill up a meter to do a special move before, and they were extremely powerful? This is Brawl, its a new game, its different, it should be treated as such, and any feature as significantly unique as Smash Balls/Final Smashes needs more testing and analysis before short-sighted conclusions are made. I find your arguments to be sadly close-minded. You know, if Sakurai had the same mentality, Smash wouldn't exist at all (or would be the same style as all other fighting games before it).

 

[NES n00b]

No it isn't, Zauron. Just becuase each FS has a unique animation and effect doesn't make it a move.

Sakurai's words himself "The Final Smash is a secret skill that can be performed but once…and only after obtaining an item called the Smash Ball, which is a precious item, indeed.

The basic gist of it? I suppose you could say it’s kind of like a powerful and personalized hammer."

Notice he says it is an item. . . .and that item is like a powerful and pwersonalized hammer. Even though you can say that he added (maybe not), that is the description of it. It is just an item that activates a unique effect and animation for each character. To make them be cooler, they pulled something that you would expect from one character.

It is not the same thing as SF3 specials. I don't remember them having to hit a randomly floating ball to activate their specials.

 

[MookieRah]

I say its a part of a character's moveset that happens to require an item

This item can also be turned off. Unlike every other move in a characters move set. Regardless of if you call it "part of the character" it doesn't change the fact that they simply aren't balanced in the least. Redefining what it is ultimately doesn't do anything to help it be more tournament worthy.

and is a key part of a character's balance with other characters.

Face it, the characters and the Final Smashes aren't balanced. Sonic was pegged as one of the best characters of the demo and has debatably the best FS. Meanwhile DK is mediocre with a FS that was pretty much considered useless. That doesn't sound anything like balance to me.

You are again basing all your statements on "any other smash game" (of which there have been a whole 2 so far) and without any significant evidence from THIS game to back you up.

Umm, I base all my opinions of Final Smashes from the plethora of E for All info. So far you just told me some random guys washed up theory on how Final Smashes are a part of the character and cause of that they should be included. You then talk about balance, which... well.. I'm not going to even go there.

A handful of smashers playing a demo for a couple days, and not even being able to agree on what they experienced amongst themselves, is not enough for any reasonable person to begin making proclamations about the future of the game in the tournament scene.

If they are the same in Brawl as they were in the demo they won't be in the tournament scene for long. If they are magically more balanced, I'd be into seeing how it goes, but currently Final Smashes are horribly imbalanced and random.

Again, when the SF series introduced Supers, did the community ban them because they never had to fill up a meter to do a special move before, and they were extremely powerful?

Supers don't fall from the sky, randomly move around, and none of them can be labeled as useless. Some are better than others, but they all help. They also cannot be beaten out of the other player. Read my statement on how Sonic, Bowser, Dede, and Pit have a huge advantage due to the fact they don't have to set anything up. It's not even on the same page as traditional supers.

I'm not against testing this stuff, I just think it should be done on the small scale first. I don't foresee a need to test it at the huge tournaments when virtually every competitive smasher will experiment with it on their own, as well as attend smashfests and small end tournaments. If you can draw a consensus of testing it on a large scale after the small scale tests the by all means, but considering the information we have it's fairly obvious how things will turn out.

@NES n00b: I was wondering where you were at XD. Nice for you to join in on this debate.

 

[NES n00b]

@NES n00b: I was wondering where you were at XD. Nice for you to join in on this debate.

I do what I can. lol

I have been away from the computer alot more these days.

Nice to see you, too. lol

 

[Zauron]

It is not the same thing as SF3 specials. I don't remember them having to hit a randomly floating ball to activate their specials.

My only point about the SF3 specials is that they were unique to that version of SF and powerful, not that it is the exact same mechanic.

By the same token, I don't remember having to hit something a bunch of times to be able to use an item in Melee. I also don't remember any item you could gain without the item ever actually appearing (pity FS). Or any item that could only have one on the screen at a time, or required you to use your Special Move button to activate, or that caused the whole screen to darken when someone got it, etc.

Smash Balls are as similar to the items of the past as they are to character's B moves. In other words, they are very unique whatever way you percieve them, hence why I say that more testing needs to be done before they are dismissed out of hand. My fear is that those with close-minded attitudes will never accept them just because of Melee's history and major players, and close the door to something that could potentially add a great deal to Brawl's own potentially unique tourney scene and community. If, after much testing and the community as a whole generally agrees they should be banned, you'll hear no argument from me.

 

[MookieRah]

My fear is that those with close-minded attitudes will never accept them just because of Melee's history and major players, and close the door to something that could potentially add a great deal to Brawl's own potentially unique tourney scene and community.

It's not being close-minded actually. I was FOR Final Smash early on, but later when information was released I took a good look at it, re-evaluated it, and then deemed it as a "fun" inclusion that wasn't suited for the tournament scene. So far nobody has presented any evidence that makes me question what I currently think about them. It's not close minded to have an opinion about something -_-.

In other words, they are very unique whatever way you percieve them, hence why I say that more testing needs to be done before they are dismissed out of hand.

Just because it's inherently strange doesn't mean that it's good for the tournament scene. I'd actually like for you to start trying to counter the reasons why I think they are bad as opposed to telling me how unique they are.

 

[Blacktastic]

People, seriously. Look at the community that has developed. We have a good amount of people. Everything is going to be given a chance in SOME FASHION I am sure unless it is blatently obvious that it is overpowered (Heart Container). This is a different game, we have a GOOD community here. The people with a say that matter will spend days or weeks or months if needed to make sure things were given a chance, and if they are deemed banned, WE WILL HAVE PAPERTRAILS AS TO HOW AND WHY.

Stop making a big deal out of it all. X_X.

 

[NES n00b]

The point of me saying that was that it is not a unique move. It is just an item. Something activated by an item, is still an item.

You can use other arguements, but not that it is some character move.

 

[WastingPenguins]

Again, when the SF series introduced Supers, did the community ban them because they never had to fill up a meter to do a special move before, and they were extremely powerful?

C'mon, this only weakens your argument. You said it all-- they fill up a meter to do their supers. Achieving said super has nothing to do with luck-- they are achieved by skill alone. The same cannot be said of Final Smashes. Not even close. If FS were based on a system even remotely resembling Street Fighter's this would be a very different argument indeed.

 

[Frogla]

I retook at the Dk FS which is so called sucky, but in the right situations its stellar.

lets get some pros.

• Good Staller
• This is out long enough to make a good sheild
• This will be killer in teams with your mate knocking them into others FS
• This make DK invincible whats wrong with that
• Small moving stages like Rainbow Ship will be deadly for DKs oppenents.
• Moving stages like ones that would be negative for dks FS are usaully banned

 

[Blacktastic]

I honeslty don't think people really knew how to use DK's FS.

Whether that's true, I don't know. If it is, it still means that timing is required, which still is a balance issue.

 

[AllanT]

though i think smashballs SHOULD be in competitave smash, i highly doubt it will be.

 

[Blacktastic]

I hereby declare we make a rule.

If you think Smashballs SHOULD be in, say why. If not, say why.

Dont just say they should be in because they should X_X. I still don't see how we can have a conversation about this without even having the game.

 

[ihavespaceblondes]

though i think smashballs SHOULD be in competitave smash, i highly doubt it will be.

You're in luck then. Most of us in Tennessee screw around just as often as we play seriously, even at tournaments, so any Brawl event near you is likely to have smash balls turned on. At least while the game is still young, anyway. BTW, where in TN do you live?

 

[Yeroc]

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.

My point is that, from a logical standpoint, you couldn't really have it both ways. It's contradictory and it's arbitrary. You either admit that some randomness is tolerable (and thereby you accept that the only concrete reason items were removed is because of exploding containers), or you absolutely eliminate any portion of the game that contains randomness, in smallest-divisible portions (including characters).

Earlier I alluded to the fact that I otherwise agree with you. I think character bans are excessive and unnecessary. The problem is with the advent of ZSS, the existing distinctions are becoming compromised. As it stands, we only know that ZSS can be accessed solely through use of a smash ball. Bearing in mind I am hoping against hope that Sora decides to implement a switch feature, I am taking the postion that ZSS is more important than the potential changes to the expected gameplay mechanics that allowing smash balls would produce. This argument obviously becomes null and void if we discover that turning on items again means having to deal with exploding containers, which we already know are unsuitable, and so ZSS would become a regrettable but necessary sacrifice for the betterment of competitive play.

I was FOR Final Smash early on, but later when information was released I took a good look at it, re-evaluated it, and then deemed it as a "fun" inclusion that wasn't suited for the tournament scene.

Heh, I went completely the other direction. My initial reaction to smash balls was totally negative, then I began to look for ways to incorporate them into my gameplay and I began to desire their inclusion more and more.

I've been away doing holiday activities, so I feel a little out of the loop now. But Mookie and I at least seem to understand each other. We just happen to have completely different views.

 

[Crispy4001]

Yeroc, it's simple. It's not uncommon for items to change the outcome of a match with two evenly matched players. In fact it's expected.

On the other hand, it's very rare to see the random factor of Luigi, G&W, and Peach's moves have a significant impact on the match. It's not worth banning them because 98% of the time it doesn't make a difference.


It's eliminating the random factor within reason.

 

[NES n00b]

Plus, it is more reasonable to ban other things than characters or a move in their movesets.

 

[Yeroc]

I only want to counter with the personal testimony that I've lost at least a dozen matches to stitchfaces that I otherwise would have probably won.

Also, different, doesn't always mean, worse.

Edit: Iggy would like to disagree with you. Total turnaround gained by nothing more than a lucky turnip pull at about 3 minutes.

 

[MookieRah]

But Mookie and I at least seem to understand each other. We just happen to have completely different views.

Yeah, I know where you are coming from. We can agree to disagree, and that is what makes intelligent debating. I do agree all these things need to be tested, but I don't think it will require such a large testing period for us to determine whether or not they should be allowed. I think it will be pretty obvious what should be done early on given the knowledge we have from running things with melee.

I only want to counter with the personal testimony that I've lost at least a dozen matches to stitchfaces that I otherwise would have probably won.

I have lost a lot of matches due to that crap too, and it's BS. I don't like it, and I don't know of many people that do, but banning a character is pretty extreme, way more extreme than banning items. It's only tolerable because we have no option to turn it off and it would greatly upset everyone (even myself) to be so steadfast against the inherent randomness of some characters.

Also, about ZSS. If Sora LTD doesn't allow for you to play as her without having final smashes, it's their fault. Even with final smashes, that transformation is INCREDIBLY bulky. I hope to god they allow for a transformation, otherwise they are making an incredibly dumb mistake.

I made a post in the sbr discussing possible AR usage to be able to have easy access to ZSS. I figure there would be several codes that would allow for Samus to start with a pity fs or get one after her first stock so you could transform quickly. It has been throughly ignored.

 

[Crispy4001]

I only want to counter with the personal testimony that I've lost at least a dozen matches to stitchfaces that I otherwise would have probably won.

Also, different, doesn't always mean, worse.

I wish that random factor could be eliminated in competitive play as well. You know, so you would have won. (See I'm on your side )

But really I have no problem with change so long as it doesn't come at a cost. The trade-off of a level playing field for more fireworks isn't something most competitive players are willing to make.

 

[Yeroc]

Excellent points Mook. You realize I think your logic leaves open the possibility of items being acceptable in tourneys, and I can tell you think that enough gameplay aspects will remain the same to warrant maintaining the setup we currently have. I think you and I have just about exhausted our discussion possibilities, so I'm probably done with this topic.

Edit: You too Crispy. Good stuff.

 

[MookieRah]

I think you and I have just about exhausted our discussion possibilities, so I'm probably done with this topic.

Yeah, at this point we just sorta have to wait and see if things differ from the demo. I heard that melee's demo changed a lot, so I know it's definitely possible, but still very unlikely.

It has been throughly ignored.

I was wrong about that, just checked on it and it seemed like it got some good responses. Things along the line that lean towards her being able to transform between the two. That and the fact AR won't work properly due to the wii updates :-(.

 

[Yeroc]

I would quite like to get back to the SBR. I've missed it. I should talk to M3D (he's still modding back there, right?)

 

[MookieRah]

I should talk to M3D (he's still modding back there, right?)

Yeah, I just checked and he is.

 

[Shinobi22]

My thoughts

I agree that issue is debateable. I personally think the tournament people (people who actually have real competitions, for example usa west vs. usa east) will not use smash balls since they want the brawl to be 100% fair.

My friend always plays Melee with no items though, and when Brawl comes out I think I'll try to convince him to play with Smash Balls on Very Low when I face him.

 

[Zauron]

Heh, I went completely the other direction. My initial reaction to smash balls was totally negative, then I began to look for ways to incorporate them into my gameplay and I began to desire their inclusion more and more.

I was the same way! When I first read this thread, I assumed they would be disabled because of the random item nature (this was before E4A). After all, I'm usually on the other side of the argument - explaining to others why the tourney rules are the way they are, and why items in Melee should be banned.

However, as I read the discussion and more information starting to pour in, such as the unique (and, IMO, more fair, balanced, and stategically interesting than normal items) mechanics for gaining and using the Smash Ball's power, and the videos showing the FS's potential strategic use as well as the skill used to avoid them and potentially even take advantage of opponents' FS's for some of them, I began to switch views.

Around that time, I realized that Brawl should not be viewed the same way, and we'd be doing a disservice to the community to ban something before it had really been fairly evaluated and all potential for improvements to the meta-game, and possible damage to it, had been analyzed. After all, we were quickly seeing how different the game was already, with Melee pros looking like n00bs, significant changes to physics and things like momentum-based air dodges, and so on. I couldn't continue to treat the game as "Melee + more!" (which is all I really wanted - Melee with online and better graphics, more characters, more stages, more options, etc., but that's not what Brawl ended up being) or I would end up doing nothing but complaining about how it wasn't Melee instead of embracing it for what it was and trying to become the best Brawl player, not the best "I wish this were more like Melee" player I could be.

But then I became worried. As someone early in the thread said, once they are banned, they are very unlikely to be un-banned later. It was then I started to join in and argue against banning them, at least at first. I would be very sad if the tourney scene started out without even giving them a chance, and we as a community missed out on an opportunity to have a better meta-game at the competive level because we were too set in our ways from the previous game and depended too much on early impressions and speculation.

It's not close minded to have an opinion about something -_-.

No, its not, but it is close-minded to make a decision about something that can affect other people with so little (and unreliable) information to go on. This is what I fear. When I see someone with influence proclaiming the "way its gonna be" this early, that sets off red flags for me. I'm fine with having opinions, goodness knows I have plenty of them, but I really hope tournament organizers give this particular issue SERIOUS thought and attention before making any firm decisions, because the first couple tournaments are going to have an effect on all future tournaments, especially if they ban stuff right away.

It may seem like just an item with unique attacks to you, but to others, it seems people are wanting to ban a move unique to their character, and in one case, potentially an entire character. That seems bordering on the same level as banning Peach and Luigi to me, when you step back and think about it from multiple points of view. The very fact that this thread has gone on this long shows that not everyone is going to be on board for banning FS's right away, and any tournament organizer should keep that fact in mind if they want their tournaments to be successful.

I still support the idea of having 2 brackets for the first several tournaments - a FS bracket and a non-FS bracket (kind of like having a low-tier-only bracket you see in some tourneys) until one or the other is shown to be more popular/accepted.

 

[MookieRah]

(and, IMO, more fair, balanced, and stategically interesting than normal items)

So the fact that it randomly decides to show up in a random place and randomly moves about and is a far cry from balanced is somehow more fair, balanced, and strategically interesting? I'd say that is more haphazard than most items.

It may seem like just an item with unique attacks to you, but to others, it seems people are wanting to ban a move unique to their character, and in one case, potentially an entire character.

I don't care how people see the FS's, it doesn't make them right for the tournament scene because they follow a highly illogical string of thought that even goes against what Sakurai himself pointed out (thanks NES n00b for your brilliant info regarding that matter!).

And for the love of god, stop bringing up ZSS! Think about it... if you HAD to get a final smash to play as her, what are your chances of getting to play her in a match? There is a chance no smash balls show up, there is a chance that you don't get any smash balls yourself, and so on. You guys don't seem to realize how ****ty that would be if you actually wanted to play as her and Sora LTD was too stupid to allow her to transform. If that happens it's not the tournaments fault for Nintendo making such a ****ty decision.

Also, you have yet to counter any of my points. You just tell me how close minded I am about the whole matter. You also refuse to acknowledge that I am for testing, just on a small scale. It should be obvious shortly after release whether or not they are tournament worthy. That in mind, NOBODY has yet to counter my points on what make final smashes bad for tournament play.

So if someone would create some solid evidence of things that make them more tournament viable, please, by all means debate with me.

 

[Zauron]

So the fact that it randomly decides to show up in a random place and randomly moves about and is a far cry from balanced is somehow more fair, balanced, and strategically interesting? I'd say that is more haphazard than most items.

Yes, I do think Smash Balls are more fair and balanced than other items with their mechanics of gaining them. A typical overpowered item, lets say a Hammer, grants its power to whoever gets there first, and gives advantage therefore to whoever it spawns by first and whoever is faster. A Smash Ball, on the other hand, gives its power to whoever smashes it first. This means just getting to it isn't enough, and gives the opponent opportunity to take advantage of you rushing for the Smash Ball and can try to hit you instead of going for it themselves. It also helps even out heavies and fast characters - a heavy can hit it open a lot quicker than a fast but light-hitting character, who has to chase it around a bit more. Yes, its still random, and I agree that that sucks. But its still more fair than a typical item in that happening to spawn next to you is NOT a guarantee that you will get it, and being faster is NOT a guarantee that you will get it, and going directly to the powerful item is NOT the most sound strategic choice if you think you can get to it first.

Also, you have yet to counter any of my points. You just tell me how close minded I am about the whole matter. You also refuse to acknowledge that I am for testing, just on a small scale. It should be obvious shortly after release whether or not they are tournament worthy. That in mind, NOBODY has yet to counter my points on what make final smashes bad for tournament play.

So if someone would create some solid evidence of things that make them more tournament viable, please, by all means debate with me.

We have been countering your points, you just dismiss our counter arguments.

You don't have any more solid evidence to support your assertions than we do. The game isn't out yet. You have speculation, incomplete information, and biased assumptions to build your case on, just like the rest of us.

When the game comes out and people have actually tried a tournament with FS's on, then we will all have better ground to stand on with our arguments. Until then, your points are no more than educated opinions and not solid enough reason to ban something from the first tournaments. The problem here is your statement that the first tournament should have them banned - that doesn't provide any good data on what it is the tournament might be missing out on. Only by having a tournament (a real one) with them turned on can we fairly evaluate in the actual, final game with actual, skilled players what it brings to the table and whether or not it adds or detracts.

The major points I see from you is the random nature of the Smash Balls and relative power balance. We've already provided plenty of counter-arguments for randomness - random moves from characters are allowed, randomness in counter-pick stages is allowed, randomness in nearly every tournament-level game in existance doesn't prevent them from being used in tournaments with a lot of money on the line, the fact that randomness was not enough to ban items in Melee in the first place, but only the fact that that randomness could lead to instant unexpected death by an exploding capsule appearing right in your hit box in the middle of an attack with no way to react.

For power balance, again, the game isn't out yet, and the moves and counters to them and how they interact with the character's other moves has clearly not been thoroughly examined - the Melee tier list wasn't determined based on the demo you know, it takes a long time to really evaluate all the FS's, just like now we have a much better idea what moves are really good and which ones aren't than we all thought when Melee first came out, I suspect the arguments on overpowered and underpowered FS's may turn out to be flat out wrong after extensive play testing.

The point FOR being in tournaments is the strategic elements they add and the affect they have on character balance. For all we know, many characters may be very dependant on their FS to be in league with other characters, and I can assure you people will be upset if one of their characters' strong points are banned from tournaments without thouroughly researched just cause. In addition, is it really a fair evaluation of skill if a player has spent a lot of work perfecting their FS, and learning how to counter every FS of every other character, and then that skill means nothing in the tournaments? Could it not be that a player who did that would have won a match through their skill, but lost to an opponent that was not as good at countering or applying FS's but it didn't matter because they were banned?

 

[Yeroc]

XD, one more for me, then that's it.

The thing is, it's logically impossible to even try to debunk your argument yet, other than just make the opposite assertion, because there's no real evidence one way or the other. There are indicators, yes, and I can't call you unjustified for saying you think that FS's will be too unbalanced and ban-worthy. All I can do is counter claim that the magnitude of this imbalance (I'm not even going to pretend like it isn't there, because everyone knows there's always some imbalance anywhere you care to look) might not be enough to warrant a ban and that items, on the whole, might prove usable in tourneys, barring the reason I've already tried to establish.

 

[Crizthakidd]

fox Is a reeeeally good char. Plus his final smash is insane he'd be unstoppable character I say for competitive perpouses turn it off

 

[orintemple]

fox I'd a reeeeally good char. Plus his final smash is insane he'd be unstopanle androgged. I say for competitive perpouses turn it off

His FS isn't THAT good. You can stand on top of the tank and not take any damage. It also suffers in stages with areas it doesn't fit.

 

[MookieRah]

lets say a Hammer, grants its power to whoever gets there first, and gives advantage therefore to whoever it spawns by first and whoever is faster.

Moves clash with the hammer and you can hit people out of it. Not only that, sometimes the hammer's head falls off and you are just boned. Not to mention that the head of the hammer is a ****ing ridiculous projectile. There is risk and reward and a way around it. This is equal across the board, even Mewtwo who swings it like it's on crack. So basically, someone who is fast and gets to it first could be screwed.

Meanwhile, the smash balls. For some, it's awesome. You can collect it and use it immediately and render the best effects without having to risk losing it due to getting hit. It's also seemingly random as to when you lose it, and not based on a set amount of percent or knock back. Another fun luck issue, yay! Also, some final smashes aren't that great and are either hardly usable or really hard to set up. To the point where there is a pretty good degree of risk that even if you do fight to get the smash ball, you will lose it before you have a chance to reap it's benefits.

I would argue that the hammer is a lot more balanced as a whole, because it doesn't screw anyone in particular. Yeah, it's random, and I hate that, but at least it doesn't discriminate like the smash balls.

We have been countering your points, you just dismiss our counter arguments.

With what? You just tell me that they are new, unique, and all this stuff I already know.

You have speculation, incomplete information, and biased assumptions to build your case on, just like the rest of us.

Please read through what I said. I stated pretty early on that "based on the information we have" this is what I believe, and if this changes, then my opinion will change. So far we don't know if anything has changed, but this is on speculation based on what we know. You have not even bothered addressing any of the issues regarding the obvious balance problems of certain final smashes that i've pointed out, in fact you just state how balanced they are.

random moves from characters are allowed, randomness in nearly every tournament-level game in existance doesn't prevent them from being used in tournaments with a lot of money on the line

Give me a list of games with randomness in it's tournament scene that come from outside sources. Most traditional fighters don't have these issues.

the fact that randomness was not enough to ban items in Melee in the first place

It was merely the fact that randomness was not enough to ban items in one portion of the US, the midwest, in which everyone else eventually came to the point they didn't want items in.

Just because you dismiss our arguments doesn't mean we aren't making them.

The only person with the knowledge to debate me on most of the issues you are bringing up is Yeroc. For the most part you are just riding his coattails with the information he debated with me about.

The point FOR being in tournaments is the strategic elements they add and the affect they have on character balance.

Convince me with evidence against my statements of blatant imbalance. That's what I've been trying to get you to do for a while now.

@Yeroc
The difference between you and him is that you acknowledge the lack of balance.

 

[NES n00b]

Smash Balls from what I see are pretty random. They appear randomly. Float randomly (no predetermined path in the x or y axis or fixed speed). React to hits randomly (they stay or go away. not only that, they go in different speeds if they do move after getting hit. Probably due to hits having no effect on them except when they open and the random flight path of the FSes) It even seems to be random when it breaks open (probably not, but two partial link up b spins and a mario ftilt compared to some of the other times it took to get a smash ball was unusually easy to break damage wise. See Mario FS in gameplay section to see what I am talking about).

The FSes are really imbalanced right now with Wario, Bowser, Pit, Lucas, and ICs having ones that can just be activated with no consequences and some of them are automatic stocks off while others need to be setup or plain crappy. To add on that, the characters that suck without FS still might have a sucky FS. There is no logic of balance in anyway imaginable.

So based on the information now, no, they don't look tourney viable. Later on with modifications from Sakurai or overlooked details, maybe so they will be tested out one way or another. I don't know how you can argue that they look tourney vaible right now.

And of course Jason, I provide the InF0z!!!11!1

 

[Zauron]

You have not even bothered addressing any of the issues regarding the obvious balance problems of certain final smashes that i've pointed out, in fact you just state how balanced they are.

I have never said that, based on current information, the FS's seem balanced. The only thing close is my claim that Smash Balls seemed more fair than other items due to them requiring more than just being the first to get to them to get the FS, and heavy hitters having a better chance of getting them than they do other items.

For FS's themselves, I have only said that we don't have enough information to make that judgement at this time. Hey, remember when Melee first came out? A lot of people thought a lot of characters were unbalanced in the exact opposite way they turned out. For example, it was commonly held that Roy was better than Marth at first. Boy, that turned out wrong.

All I'm saying is, we don't know how balanced or unbalanced they are. They may seem unbalanced now, and I don't disagree with your reasons for thinking they are. But you haven't played the game enough to know that for sure, and neither has anyone else. What may seem rediculously overpowered and unbeatable now may in fact have a severe weakness we don't know about because we haven't discovered it yet. Heck, we've already seen an example of that - at first everyone thought Peach's FS was overpowered, but now we know its really not a big deal because you can just block the effect. Who knows what other details we don't know may change the opinion on relative FS balance, just like opinions on move powers in Melee have changed drastically over the years.

By the same token, what may seem gimp and useless now may in fact be truly powerful in the right hands. That's my point for making sure that SKILLED players that have EXPERIENCE with Brawl in the first few tournaments get a chance to employ FS's in their game so we can really see how they affect the metagame, rather than saying "well, based on next to no information, they seem imbalanced, so let's just ban them now and get it over with. And hey, if you disagree, go try out your own tiny little tournament and test it yourself, while we ignore you and the community as a whole misses out on a potentially great addition because we don't feel like giving it a fair shake."

Give me a list of games with randomness in it's tournament scene that come from outside sources. Most traditional fighters don't have these issues.

Um, lets see, every sport out there? There's way more money involved in your average sports tournament and they have tons of random factors to deal with. They don't cancel sports games because of bad weather unless its REALLY bad, you just have to deal with it. Same thing if, say, a star player randomly is out of commision for that game, that's just too bad, you deal with it.

Then let's say, card games played on a high level such as Magic: The Gathering. They shuffle the decks you know. That's pretty random, and there's a lot of money involved in those tournaments too. Let's not forget professional Poker players, lots of money involved there!

In terms of video games, most all have random factors involved. In fact, you take the random elements out of many of these games and they would be hardly recognizable as being that game any more. Most the major FPS's and racing games have random elements to deal with. The only games I can think of that DOESN'T have randomness as a key component is your example - "traditional fighters", and non-random board games like Chess and Go. Well, if that's what you want to play, why are you looking forward to Brawl again?

The only person with the knowledge to debate me on most of the issues you are bringing up is Yeroc. For the most part you are just riding his coattails with the information he debated with me about.

I was part of this discussion before either if you were. I'm not riding on anyone's coattails. I already made the same arguments Yeroc is making months ago in this thread. I've just been too busy lately to jump in with my comments, and only have time now because of Christmas.

Convince me with evidence against my statements of blatant imbalance. That's what I've been trying to get you to do for a while now.

No, that's pointless. I can't. Because I have no more data than you do. Neither of us can make a firm argument about the actual balance of FS's with each other and taking into account the rest of a character's moveset at this time, I don't see why you are even attempting to. Get back with me once I've played the game a month or two.

Again, its completly illogical to ban something based on this much information. Try a REAL tournament or two with, at the very least, 2 brackets, one with FS and one without, and get some real skilled players that have actually tried using and countering them on a professional level, then you can argue they are unbalanced and I may very well agree with you.

Because right now, the only arguments I'm hearing are speculation based on information from a group that weren't even consistant in their findings (remember the "Ink Drop Cancel" everyone got excited about and then turned out didn't exist?), and that's fine - argue away on what you believe is balanced or not, that does no harm. I won't bother you. I just don't want you and others like you to push for a ban on something in the first tournaments before we have enough REAL evidence.

You say it shoud be apparant right away if they are usable in tournaments, I disagree. We didn't truly understand all the little details of Melee and what affected balance "right away", just look at the tier list (which didn't even start for a long while into the game when people had already changed opinions several times on what was and was not balanced and powerful and gimp and so on). We need to give at LEAST several months after the game comes out and at least a couple big tourneys before we can really begin to understand every nuance of FS's and decide if the community as a whole would rather have them on, off, or perhaps even 2 sets of tournament rules.

If we just ban them now, its very unlikely they'll ever be un-banned, and the community may miss out on something that could have ended up being a key part of the meta-game if it had been given half a chance. On the other hand it may not, and I don't know the results any more than you do, but all I'm arguing is that its worth it to try and find out at first even if the first few tournaments end up being a bust (which they probably will anyway since everyone will be pretty n00b-ish) on the chance, however slim it may seem now, that the majority of the competitive players will actually end up preferring them once they try them in a real tournament setting. How is wanting to give a new feature a fair chance unreasonable?

 

[MookieRah]

They don't cancel sports games because of bad weather unless its REALLY bad, you just have to deal with it.

They train to deal with it when it comes, and usually they have a good idea how it is going to end up by how the weather looks.

Then let's say, card games played on a high level such as Magic: The Gathering.

You are comparing smash to a card game. Smash is about technical skill and mind games. It isn't about spending lots of money on cards, deck preparation, a whole lot of knowledge, and mindgames. They aren't very comparable.

he only games I can think of that DOESN'T have randomness as a key component is your example - "traditional fighters"

Funny how the most comparable games don't have many random outside elements. This was my point, btw.

I've just been too busy lately to jump in with my comments

You could have fooled me. You were responding to my posts REALLY fast last night, and every post you have made have been decently long.

Neither of us can make a firm argument about the actual balance of FS's with each other and taking into account the rest of a character's moveset at this time

Again, you bring it up as part of their move set -_-. BTW, I have made a firm argument about the imbalance of final smash's based on all the info we have on them.

I just don't want you and others like you to push for a ban on something in the first tournaments before we have enough REAL evidence.

This is "REAL" evidence. Even Yeroc said that what I said has some merit. I figured you would take the smarter high road and go around the magnitude route, but instead you are telling how just because we don't know how everyone's moves work I don't know enough to make this statement. That's BS, cause while there are more FS's it is still obvious that the current ones have no balance and it is likely that there are more really good ones and more incredibly ****ty ones.

We need to give at LEAST several months

I think a month would suffice. Look, FS isn't rocket science there aren't much in the ways of nuances with FS. The only nuances I can see is the times people choose to activate them. It's not hard to look at, test, and decide on. It really isn't. This isn't even on the same level as traditional items in smash. They are obviously imbalanced and the good ones are randomly distributed amongst the cast so it furthers imbalance by giving great FS's to great characters and vice versa.

Anyways, this will be my last post for now, I'm about to go visit a good friend who just came in from Japan!

 

[Gill]

Short answer to the topic: No. They add randomness, the competitive scene wants there to be as little randomness as possible. End of discussion.

 

[Zauron]

You could have fooled me. You were responding to my posts REALLY fast last night, and every post you have made have been decently long.

I was referring to "lately" as in the past several weeks. This week I'm on Christmas break, thus have a chance to rejoin the discussion.

This is "REAL" evidence. Even Yeroc said that what I said has some merit. I figured you would take the smarter high road and go around the magnitude route, but instead you are telling how just because we don't know how everyone's moves work I don't know enough to make this statement. That's BS, cause while there are more FS's it is still obvious that the current ones have no balance and it is likely that there are more really good ones and more incredibly ****ty ones.

Yeah, like Peach's FS which is way overpowered according to many at first. Oh wait, its not. Sorry, but this is not sufficient "REAL" evidence about current FS's. I don't disagree with your points about why they seem imbalanced at the moment. But I say given the drastic changes to the mechanics in Brawl, no one has enough experience to be making that judgement call.

We've already seen things from the demo that turned out wrong or misunderstood on further examination, what makes you so sure your current evidence is being correctly interpreted?

There's a good chance that the crappy FS's may turn out to be much better than it seems now once we see more practical uses for them, and the great ones may be less effective than they currently seem when used against people that know what they are doing. Its also possible that those with great FS's may have weaknesses we don't yet understand, and those with crappy FS's may have great abilities otherwise we don't know enough about yet.

Its likely that there will be characters badly balanced either way, but until we have WAY more playtime under our belt, there's no way to say for sure which tier list will have the least number of outlyers - one with FS's included or the one without. If including FS's ends up making a tier list with less characters at the obvious top and bottom and more hovering around the center, that sounds like a good reason to give them serious consideration to me (personally I'm a little tired of seeing the same 5 characters so much at tourneys).

I don't proclaim to know if they are going to be balanced or not, and I haven't seen anyone else here claiming that they are definitely well-balanced and should be included in all tournaments forever. The argument here is not whether or not they are balanced - no one REALLY knows for sure yet. The real argument is between testing them thoroughly with real high-profile tournaments (again, perhaps as a second bracket) and enough time to evaluate them, vs presuming we know enough now and should ban them right away and wait until later to decide to un-ban them.

My stance is that it is unreasonable to ban them from the first major tournaments right after the game comes out, since that effectively destroys the chance of them ever being allowed in the future even if it would have turned out that players would have preferred them. Nothing banned from major tournaments is likely to be un-banned later, and smaller tournaments follow the examples of the larger, hence it makes sense to err on the side of not banning something until everyone is sure that is the correct choice. Its the most fair way to approach major new mechanics like FS's.

 

[WastingPenguins]

Comparing Smash to turn-based strategy games like Poker and Magic is dumb because Smash is not turn-based. These games are not comparable at all. It is MUCH better compared to action-based games and sporting events.

With this in mind, the argument that "football teams don't cancel their games because of bad weather" is just terrible. Think of it this way-- adding items to Smash is like football teams intentionally playing in bad weather. And trust me, if you watch football at all, no one wants to play in wind, rain, or snow. It interferes with the game in a very negative way. By your standards, should football be played ONLY in poor conditions because that would be the best test of the player's skill?

Anyway, have you guys ever even PLAYED poker or Magic or any of these games-with-luck you're talking about? Players DO get ****** over unfairly, even when they are more skilled than their opponent, even if your strategy and tactics are superior. Sometimes you will just get unlucky. Some people like to cite the Law of Averages as a blanket fix-all but c'mon-- in a best-of-3 set of Smash Bros. with similarly skilled players, one player is bound to get lucky more than the other. The sample set of three or five matches is not even remotely big enough to expect the luck to even out. It might, it might not-- and the tourney rules are set up to get rid as many "mights" as possible.

 

[RyokoYaksa]

Having large-scale tournaments for a new game is just asking to be upset by undiscovered broken factors. It's simply not a good practice when the entire playing population is still trying to figure out a competitive game. Within the first year of Melee, most of everything was "small scale." I would expect Brawl to follow the same path, so as to experiment and eventually develop an MLG level ruleset. Metagames need to develop before the bigtime tournaments can exist and actually be taken seriously, which a lot of people don't seem to understand. For a game as variable as Smash, this takes at least a year of smaller, experimental tournaments. Even past that point, rulesets will still be changing.

One year is going to give us plenty of time to experiment with the tournament viability of the Smash Ball before large scale tournaments have a chance at appearing. If it is proven to be broken, we can be happy banning it knowing that it was actually proven to be broken, and not because of paranoia that was arbitrarily untested.

We might as well be discussing if Brawl will be as tournament viable as Melee, which is far from perfect.