Wobbling Discussion Revisited #Evo2kprep

[The Irish Mafia]

I hope we re-discuss this every time Wobbles does better at a tournament than we expect

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I just...I don't. Because you've restated what I said. I never meant to use rest as something comparable to make wobbling ban worthy. I meant to say they're so different you can't compare them considering grim Tuesday had said if wobbling is banned then rest is in the same boat because its just as powerful, but its completely unique from it. I said it can be punished even when successful, I stated the obvious because it was being overlooked. You can say rest is the unique one but that doesn't change my stance, I don't think they're comparable because of how there punished differently.

You understand, though, that we don't ban things on a case-by-case basis (or at least, we shouldn't). We follow logical ban critiera that eliminates the possibility of double standards, and therefore, making a poor decision (because we can always say, "if we ban x thing (that is hated) for y reason, we'll have to ban z thing (that is loved) for the same reason").

It doesn't matter how unique the two moves are if the same ban criteria would affect both of them.

 

[KrIsP!]

I can agree with that. Gayness or whatever dumb name people would like to label things shouldn't warrant a ban. That goes back to the whole ledge grab limit that people started adding laser and bair limits on top of it.

 

[Jockmaster]

Exactly

The only logical and consistent way to ban wobbling is to ban ICs altogether...any other action is going to be too complicated and will set a precedent that allows people to beg for whatever technique is the flavor of the month to be banned.

If you don't want to ban ICs, don't ***** about wobbling. Its part of the character and there is no logical way to go about removing wobbling without a load of stinky horse**** following it

 

[Bones0]

Exactly

The only logical and consistent way to ban wobbling is to ban ICs altogether...any other action is going to be too complicated and will set a precedent that allows people to beg for whatever technique is the flavor of the month to be banned.

If you don't want to ban ICs, don't ***** about wobbling. Its part of the character and there is no logical way to go about removing wobbling without a load of stinky horse**** following it

Honestly, I don't agree with this logic. We banned freeze glitching instead of banning ICs all together. If wobbling really was overcentralizing, or at least really close, I'd be fine with banning it. It just isn't...

 

[Jockmaster]

.

Honestly, I don't agree with this logic. We banned freeze glitching instead of banning ICs all together. If wobbling really was overcentralizing, or at least really close, I'd be fine with banning it. It just isn't...

Well, in my opinion, freeze glitching is completely different because it is a literal glitch in the game. Yeah we allow other glitches to go unbanned (eg yo yo glitch), but something like the freeze glitch actually IS an unnatural part of Melee and is in the purest sense a broken part of the game. It is completely different than grabbing and pummeling with a perfect rhythm that makes the grab impossible to escape from. Freeze glitch is less a part of ICs and more of a hole in the game, whereas wobbling is simply clever use of very deliberate mechanics. This view is a lot more subjective, though, and I know my stance isn't bulletproof.

But when it comes down to it I agree in the sense that wobbling is literally not a problem whatsoever in the metagame as of now. Seems to me like it's a handful of butthurt high-level players and then a ton of ADD stream trolls who are against it for more personal reasons, as opposed to looking at the general health of the metagame.

 

[KevinM]

I hope we re-discuss this every time Wobbles does better at a tournament than we expect

I want to have this EXACT same discussion down to the formatting every time Wobbles gets top 5 even at locals.

 

[HammerTime]

I disagree. Wobbling allowed at nationals but banned at locals defeats the purpose of learning the complicated grab follow trees and the tight inputs for ICs' punishment game as a developing player. Why bother learning this crap if it's all going to be obsoleted by something that's basically strictly superior? Moreover, you're not preparing them for the field that they're going to have to face, which can only be detrimental to their development.

I think we should just ban the technique since it does lead to degenerate gameplay, just not at high level. And even with that said, I feel it slants the focus of what people need to be good at by placing a huge premium on technical perfection because of the nature of the technique. No other technique auto-deaths you in the game as reliably as wobbling from a single error. I say, "single", because the technique is non-interactive once the opening is procured, which removes a huge aspect of the defensive game. Even when Armada hits a Falco with dash attack, Falco actually has a lot of options to escape the ensuing ****. He might die anyway, but he's given a lot of opportunities to play around Armada's combo decisions through DI and interacting with the stage with the trajectories he's ultimately dealt. This is huge and adds tons of depth to Melee. Wobbling does the opposite in that once it hits, provided the IC doesn't mess up, you're dead and you had no say in it.

I don't feel the persistence of a technique like this is healthy for the game because of how far and away it is from the rest of the game and how it adds so little. In fact, wobbling actually takes away from the game by hyper simplifying their grab game because everything winds up revolving around setting up a wobble if Nana is alive and within some semblance of being synced or going to be synced shortly. I feel this detracts from and further polarizes the stage positioning games that occur in matchups against ICs.

I feel that ultimately wobbling takes more away from the game than it gives it. That said, I also understand it's a pain to ban because it's not very well-defined and so forth. So we'd need to define it, decide on some semantics regarding other infinites they can do (blobbling or whatever the blizzard version is), and decide on what course of action should be taken.

On a side note, I find it ridiculous that people want a new tier list when we haven't decided whether or not ICs' best grab combo (and the best punish in the game by far) should be legal as the norm. These kinds of things matter a lot. They change whole matchups. And stuff.

My two cents.

I fully agree with this and I'm an ICs main

 

[Bones0]

.

Well, in my opinion, freeze glitching is completely different because it is a literal glitch in the game. Yeah we allow other glitches to go unbanned (eg yo yo glitch), but something like the freeze glitch actually IS an unnatural part of Melee and is in the purest sense a broken part of the game. It is completely different than grabbing and pummeling with a perfect rhythm that makes the grab impossible to escape from. Freeze glitch is less a part of ICs and more of a hole in the game, whereas wobbling is simply clever use of very deliberate mechanics. This view is a lot more subjective, though, and I know my stance isn't bulletproof.

But when it comes down to it I agree in the sense that wobbling is literally not a problem whatsoever in the metagame as of now. Seems to me like it's a handful of butthurt high-level players and then a ton of ADD stream trolls who are against it for more personal reasons, as opposed to looking at the general health of the metagame.

I don't think whether something is a glitch or not should really have any bearing on whether or not it gets banned. YYG is completely unnatural for Melee's environment just like freeze glitching, but it's permitted because it occurs on a consistent basis and doesn't interfere with gameplay. If freeze glitching didn't make it impossible to continue the game because a player SDIed hits upwards where they couldn't be grabbed or frozen by an ice block so they couldn't be grabbed, I would probably argue that it should be legal as well.

 

[stabbedbyanipple]

Win a tournament with Ice Climbers.

Aight, if this is a legit counter argument, then I should be able to tell this to every n00b who complains about puff/falco/fox etc.

N00b

 

[Bones0]

Aight, if this is a legit counter argument, then I should be able to tell this to every n00b who complains about puff/falco/fox etc.

N00b

That sounds fair... >_>

 

[Jockmaster]

Aight, if this is a legit counter argument, then I should be able to tell this to every n00b who complains about puff/falco/fox etc.

N00b

Ok do that

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Aight, if this is a legit counter argument, then I should be able to tell this to every n00b who complains about puff/falco/fox etc.

N00b

lol

Freeze glitch doesn't need to be banned tbh

 

[Bones0]

lol

Freeze glitch doesn't need to be banned tbh

Ummm, it definitely does. lol

If freeze glitching didn't make it impossible to continue the game because a player SDIed hits upwards where they couldn't be grabbed or frozen by an ice block so they couldn't be grabbed, I would probably argue that it should be legal as well.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

A 0 > death that starts from a grab needs to be banned

But Wobbling is all good?

EDIT: Thought your quote was a sig. If someone SDIs it up, that's their fault lol - no one would actually do that in tourney.

 

[Bones0]

A 0 > death that starts from a grab needs to be banned

But Wobbling is all good?

EDIT: Thought your quote was a sig. If someone SDIs it up, that's their fault lol - no one would actually do that in tourney.

I would do it as long as I had a stock lead...

 

[Grim Tuesday]

And if you had a stock lead, the IC player wouldn't freeze glitch you because that'd be like forfeiting lol

 

[Wretched]

KirbyKaze
No other technique auto-deaths you in the game as reliably as wobbling from a single error.

Wretched
when wobbling is set up, it is pretty much guaranteed.
a single grab virtually guarantees, so long as you wobble correctly, that you will achieve a kill
Even with action replay, there would be no way to break out of the grab.

Kirbykaze
I say, "single", because the technique is non-interactive once the opening is procured, which removes a huge aspect of the defensive game.

Wretched
The best player in the world could get grabbed once, and all of his skill would become irrelevant for that stock.
wobbling removes the players ability to influence the outcome of a stock.
If someone is wobbling correctly, there is no way to influence the outcome of that stock.
It seems the only option to get out of wobbling is to physically punch wobbles.
At little to no percent, Ice Climbers with a single grab virtually guarantees, so long as you wobble correctly, that you will achieve a kill, and the other character has zero influence over this.

KirbyKaze
Even when Armada hits a Falco with dash attack, Falco actually has a lot of options to escape the ensuing ****.
He might die anyway, but he's given a lot of opportunities to play around Armada's combo decisions through DI and interacting with the stage with the trajectories he's ultimately dealt.

Wretched
With smart DI, you can and do get out of combos often, even at the highest level.
SOMETIMES the players make the right predictions, space correctly, and finish combos with death.
you know that at low percents, with smart play, you're promised control to a certain extent over how you're being combo'd, how long you get combo'd, and what moves your opponent has to use in order to continue the combo.
A single hit or grab confirmed even with the best human reflexes doesn't mean that it will lead into death.

KirbyKaze
Wobbling does the opposite in that once it hits, provided the IC doesn't mess up, you're dead and you had no say in it.

Wretched
The best player in the world could get grabbed once, and all of his skill would become irrelevant for that stock.
wobbling removes the players ability to influence the outcome of a stock
If grabbed at a low percent and then potentially regrabbed, there is nothing...

KirbyKaze
That said, I also understand it's a pain to ban because it's not very well-defined and so forth.

Wretched
I know the melee community and most communities have always been hesitant to have such an obscure, arbitrary, and specific rule
*Defines wobbling*

Likes on Kirbykaze's post(s): 7
Likes on Wretched's post(s): 0

Number of posts supporting Kirbykaze's post(s): 10 (counting westballz lel)
Number of posts supporting Wretched's post(s): 0

Number of posts refuting Kirbykaze's post(s): 4
Number of posts refuting Wretched's post(s): 3

Kirbykaze's length: 5"
Wretched's length: 8"

Kirbykaze's girth: 1.2"
Wretched's girth: 2.2"

Pain experienced by **** riders: minimal

 

[Bones0]

Likes on Kirbykaze's post(s): 7
Likes on Wretched's post(s): 0

Number of posts supporting Kirbykaze's post(s): 10 (counting westballz lel)
Number of posts supporting Wretched's post(s): 0

Number of posts refuting Kirbykaze's post(s): 4
Number of posts refuting Wretched's post(s): 3

Kirbykaze's length: 5"
Wretched's length: 8"

Kirbykaze's girth: 1.2"
Wretched's girth: 2.2"

Pain experienced by **** riders: minimal

Idk why you would want to take credit for an argument that's been refuted 7 times.

 

[Wretched]

LOL yeah I know. I just noticed. I wasn't pro-ban in the first place, though :X
Besides, someone challenging your post means you've made them think.

 

[Jockmaster]

Idk why you would want to take credit for an argument that's been refuted 7 times.

Omg Bones <3

 

[Bones0]

LOL yeah I know. I just noticed. I wasn't pro-ban in the first place, though :X
Besides, someone challenging your post means you've made them think.

Or you've offended them with your stupidity.

 

[Strong Badam]

Aight, if this is a legit counter argument, then I should be able to tell this to every n00b who complains about puff/falco/fox etc.

N00b

indeed.
thankfully, no one honestly believes those characters should be banned.

 

[Silly Kyle]

The solution to this problem: Play Peach. <3

 

[The Irish Mafia]

And if you had a stock lead, the IC player wouldn't freeze glitch you because that'd be like forfeiting lol

On freeze glitch:
Freeze glitch creates an endgame scenario because it removes a large variable from the game: your opponent's control of the character, outside of the influence of SDI. The only time a freeze glitch does not result in the end of the game is if the frozen player has more stocks than the opponent. If that's the case, there are two possible, though unlikely scenarios that can take place that will result in the IC's player being incapable of killing the opponent.
1) If the frozen player is uthrown by nana and then frozen, then Popo requires a platform (and lucky positioning) in order to grab them and release them from the glitch for the kill. Furthermore, the frozen player is able to SDI the opponent's hits into a position where they cannot be grabbed. If there is a way to turn the freeze glitches' endgame scenario into a winning situation, this is it. Regardless, having a stock lead is required, or hypothetically you could get a large enough percent lead and then sdi their moves to a position on screen where they'd be incapable of hitting you before losing your lead, but that's just silly.
2) The IC's can use blizzard or ice block on a high-percent frozen opponent and literally freeze them. If they are in the ice block state and have a stock lead, they cannot be released from the ice block, nor grabbed while in this state, which is necessary to release them from the freeze glitch to kill them. However, an IC's player would probably only use these moves on a high percent frozen opponent by accident, so this scenario is unlikely.

So why has Mafia done all this thinking about freeze glitch? Well, for one, they (jokingly) legalized it at a local. I asked them to ban it before the tournament started, and they didn't. So I went ice climbers in pools and freeze glitched people. I won a set in under a minute: game 2, he switched to shiek and forgot to transform. He did it as soon as the match started: I got on his platform, did a simple grab-release handoff to Nana, and won the match before he even got to play. The TO's changed the ruleset before pools were even finished. They had to, because I was clearly preventing people from competing with me. The range of situations where I won by performing the glitch and putting down my controller greatly outnumbered the situations where anything else could happen, and the majority of the other situations end with me taking a stock for free. It was a friendly reminder to the local community as to why this **** needs to stay banned.

Is any of this relevant to a different infinite? HELL ****ING YES IT IS. In fact, freeze glitch is relevant to just about every discussion we've been having lately in deciding what should and shouldn't remain widely legal in tournament. This is the only broken, easily exploitable crack in the coding of Melee; it's one true blemish. Before declaring any tactic, strategy, or combo illegal, this is the standard we need to try it by. In my eyes, pretty much every thing else in this game's current ruleset- every matchup on every stage- is, in some sense of the word, fair. We play such a limited fraction of this game, but with our set of arbitrary restrictions, we somehow walked away with a balanced game.
BWUHH MAFIA MELEE ISN'T BALANCED I GET ****** UP AND DOWN BY SPACIES EVERY WEEKEND AT LOCALS
Then explain why we see variety in the top level. Explain why amazing fox players still are incapable of getting the gold at nationals. Explain why falcon players win against sheiks. Explain Arizona.
There's a very simple explanation. This is a game that requires you to outplay your opponent. You need to both watch, think, and react at the same time to be good at this game. Yes, we have a tier list that dictates which characters have the best tools to do so. Those tools are only as good as the players that use them. Good characters can lose to bad characters if the player using the bad character abuses their strengths, veils their weaknesses, avoids the opponent's strengths, and exploits their weaknesses. That's how a matchup works.

In order for us to discuss Wobbling's place in this game, we need to define it. It's insane to me that no one has tried to do this before.
This is what I see: If a player can win with consistent wobbling, and ONLY wobbling, then I see it fit as banned. If the tactic requires more skill than simply executing the tactic when it is required, then it involves two players competing; that means options. That means you can choose right or wrong. You have options off the stage vs fox, but a lot of people get shinespiked at zero and die, and I don't think we'll be banning that anytime soon.

- If we ban wobbling, we are assuming a player who has practiced that tactic to the point of 100% consistency, and only that tactic, would be capable of winning a match.
- This assumes the practiced player will be able to get at least four grabs, which also assumes the opponent will get grabbed four times.
- It assumes that when those grabs are obtained, Nana will be both alive, and in the vicinity (a platform distance away, at most, depending on percent). If not, it assumes the opponent will not mash out before either a regrab is preformed or the wobbling has commenced.
- It assumes the player will not drop the wobble, due to pressure, environmental distractions, or their own human error.

In my opinion, that's too many variables. I don't believe we should ban wobbling until someone proves those conditions can be fulfilled, and a match can be won with wobbling alone. If Wobbles is capable of winning a tournament by wobbling each and every stock away, one at a time, then yes, let's ban it. I think he's the only person capable of doing it, but if anyone else does it first, then let that be evidence enough.
Until that happens, adapt. Kill nana first. Don't get grabbed. Outplay your opponent and outthink their tools.

 

[GimR]

If you understand how to mash you will NOT get wobbled until like 50 to 70%. Here's why: Nana has to finish her grab animation and then the jab d-tilt timing has to be started. You have plenty of time to break out.

Wobbles got some clutch wins at KoC2 not because of Wobbling but because his opponents didn't understand the correct counter strategy to Wobbling. That's their fault not his

 

[-ACE-]

Yeah GIMR speaks the truth. Fly broke out quite a bit, wasn't having that ****

Keep it legal.

 

[GimR]

I feel the banning of Wobbling has halted the metagame. After it's legal for a while it won't be nearly as good. And as Ace said, Fly was breaking out at absurd percents.

 

[♡ⓛⓞⓥⓔ♡]

I think banning things in general is bad, and should not be done unless absolutely necessary.

I think IC's are not such a great a character, it's ridiculously easy to kill Nana because she's a ****ing ******. And Popo alone is like playing a low tier. I love watching IC's with wobbling legal because it creates a massive polarity and a lot of tension. On one hand IC's are so vulnerable, easy to desynch and easy to ****. On the other hand, if they get that one grab, provided that they are synched, you are dead. That's why watching IC's is so much fun to me because it really can go either way.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

On freeze glitch:
Freeze glitch creates an endgame scenario because it removes a large variable from the game: your opponent's control of the character, outside of the influence of SDI. The only time a freeze glitch does not result in the end of the game is if the frozen player has more stocks than the opponent. If that's the case, there are two possible, though unlikely scenarios that can take place that will result in the IC's player being incapable of killing the opponent.
1) If the frozen player is uthrown by nana and then frozen, then Popo requires a platform (and lucky positioning) in order to grab them and release them from the glitch for the kill. Furthermore, the frozen player is able to SDI the opponent's hits into a position where they cannot be grabbed. If there is a way to turn the freeze glitches' endgame scenario into a winning situation, this is it. Regardless, having a stock lead is required, or hypothetically you could get a large enough percent lead and then sdi their moves to a position on screen where they'd be incapable of hitting you before losing your lead, but that's just silly.
2) The IC's can use blizzard or ice block on a high-percent frozen opponent and literally freeze them. If they are in the ice block state and have a stock lead, they cannot be released from the ice block, nor grabbed while in this state, which is necessary to release them from the freeze glitch to kill them. However, an IC's player would probably only use these moves on a high percent frozen opponent by accident, so this scenario is unlikely.

So why has Mafia done all this thinking about freeze glitch? Well, for one, they (jokingly) legalized it at a local. I asked them to ban it before the tournament started, and they didn't. So I went ice climbers in pools and freeze glitched people. I won a set in under a minute: game 2, he switched to shiek and forgot to transform. He did it as soon as the match started: I got on his platform, did a simple grab-release handoff to Nana, and won the match before he even got to play. The TO's changed the ruleset before pools were even finished. They had to, because I was clearly preventing people from competing with me. The range of situations where I won by performing the glitch and putting down my controller greatly outnumbered the situations where anything else could happen, and the majority of the other situations end with me taking a stock for free. It was a friendly reminder to the local community as to why this **** needs to stay banned.

That's stalling.

 

[Jockmaster]

That's stalling.

It depends on what your definition of stalling is. If it is considered a continued action by one player (the one stalling) that prevents the match from being played (eg Peach bombing on stupid stages), then freeze glitching isn't stalling. It is one action, one setup that results in a situation that no longer must be "sustained" by one player. It isn't "stall-ING" (if that makes any sense).

You just freeze a mutha****a then bam game over if you have stock lead.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

No need to play with semantics, if a TO sees that **** he can call it stalling and I don't think anyone is gonna argue; not like it'd have to result in a DQ anyway, the ICs player would just have to kill 'em.

I'm not advocating the freeze glitch being legalized though, and this is the reason; it doesn't add anything to the game AND it's a bit of a grey area to limit it's broken uses while keeping its legitimate uses. All I'm saying is that it could be legalized pretty easily, so all the people who are like "omg freeze glitch is sooooo broken" really don't understand the situation, imo.

 

[The Business]

The solution to this problem: Play Peach. <3

peach is pretty good at not getting wobble de wobble de wobble wobble de wobble de wobbled.

also wobbling is very broken, but i still don't think it should be banned.

 

[Jockmaster]

No need to play with semantics.

That's where you are completely wrong mang. Semantics are EVERYTHING in regards to bans. You can find out a lot about your general mindset on the legality of things just by looking at how you word your argument. Definitions for bans are of the utmost importance.

If "stalling" is defined as something that is a continuous action, and I freeze glitch once to render my opponent useless, and some bad-smelling TO walks up to me and says "HEY MAN STOP STALLING" I'll be like dude I am playing the game like normal right now. The other guy is just frozen as ****. And then I could do that legally because **** him he never said there was a rule against it.

 

[-ACE-]

Broken but very avoidable. People have problems admitting the second part, either because they are too lazy to mash buttons, or too lazy to not step up their "don't get grabbed" game. When is the last time IC's won a national? give me a break. If Ganon's chaingrab on spacies was as easy as Doc chaingrabbing Fox on FD someone would make a thread saying Ganon is broken, lmao.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Jock: Did you take in the rest of my post, man?

Semantics matter when making bans, I agreed with this

it's a bit of a grey area to limit it's broken uses while keeping its legitimate uses

But if we don't have it specifically written in the rules that you can't use Masterhand, yet we ban him anyway, I'm pretty sure we could theoretically let the freeze glitch slide under some subjective, arbitrary limitations if we were so inclined.

 

[Jockmaster]

But if we don't have it specifically written in the rules that you can't use Masterhand, yet we ban him anyway, I'm pretty sure we could theoretically let the freeze glitch slide under some subjective, arbitrary limitations if we were so inclined.

I'm not gonna lie I am totally confused as to what you are trying to say

 

[Grim Tuesday]

My original post about all this was "Freeze glitch could be legal", not should - "could". Do you disagree?

 

[Jockmaster]

My original post about all this was "Freeze glitch could be legal", not should - "could". Do you disagree?

Well yes, unless it is explicitly stated that ICs FG is banned in the tournament I don't see how it would technically be illegal. Like I said it doesn't fit any definition of stalling I've ever seen

 

[Grim Tuesday]

It doesn't fit the definition to the letter, but it isn't unreasonable to see it as stalling.
In the same vein, very few rulesets explicitly ban Masterhand, but it isn't unreasonable to assume that he's banned, or for the TO to tell someone they can't use Masterhand.

Rules aren't concrete, is what I'm getting at, so legalizing Freeze Glitch wouldn't lead to any shenanigans and, therefore, people need to stop treating it as some unstoppable force. This ain't rocket science lol.