Wobbling: To ban or not to ban on our side of the Atlantic?

[Moggie]

@Smasher
Again, thats basically the "don't get grabbed" argument.
Also, Peach, CF & Samus can all get wobbled.
They're just harder to get grabbed (its pretty much the don't get grabbed argument put in characters).

@Shoe
Inescapable instant kill moves = should be banned
Broken stall techniques = Ban worthy (peach bomber stalling, Freeze Glitch, Fox on certain stages, rising pound with jiggly, Luigi's ladder etc)
Wobbling is worlds appart from all accepted techniques.
There's no fine line between it and the second strongest technique in the game (what ever that may be), so how this is supposed to be a slippery slope is beyond me.
If there was even one move remotely similar to wobbling that wasn't banned I'd agree with you, but there is no such thing.

Thanks for answering before I had the chance

Again, I would like to point out that Wobbling is NOT a character dependant move, unlike every other combo in the game. Once it has begun, it CANNOT be escaped/survived by ANY character in the game.

 

[Coen]

I'm sure Pichu can get out because of it's cuteness. ICs won't even dare wobbling a Pichu.

Every move in the game should be like wobbling problem solved.

 

[Smasher89]

Thanks for answering before I had the chance

Again, I would like to point out that Wobbling is NOT a character dependant move, unlike every other combo in the game. Once it has begun, it CANNOT be escaped/survived by ANY character in the game.

Since when is a dittomatch not counted?(old argument) XD sorry but where´s the new argument?
It´s too situational to get banned IMO, and is defeatable and have an impact in the "only shiek/falco" metagame that there´s now...
EDIT: I´ve experience of players quitting because of the uthrow to rest with Jiggs against Fox, shouldn´t he have learned how to avoid it instead of quit smash and start playing WoW?
I would never try wobbling a pichu, the smashes does make the job done against it anyway XD

 

[Marc]

Well, the debate has reached the same point here as it has in the US. I can't force people to not find it too easy and rewarding, and people can't force me to consider it broken and banworthy. I think all major arguments have been posted here and I haven't changed my mind. We'll just have to closely follow wobbling developments in the US scene and maybe talk about this again at a later time. If someone wants me to respond to something I missed or wasn't clear about, feel free to say so. Otherwise, I'm pretty much done with this for now.

 

[Ryuker]

Since when is a dittomatch not counted?(old argument) XD sorry but where´s the new argument?
It´s too situational to get banned IMO, and is defeatable and have an impact in the "only shiek/falco" metagame that there´s now...

Why is it too situational and how is it defeatable cause it aint. No grab has ever been defeatable only escapable after a period of time after which the killing hit could be prevented or escaped by DI. Why do you think the designers made you able to escape the grab? Cause otherwise someone could grab someone and then hit him all he wanted till he could kill him. They might as well have made the grab a instantkill move but they didn't. It seems like a lot of people are forgetting the rock paper scissor system there is in this game. Sometime you get grabbes cause you shield. As a punishment your opponent is allowed to give you some damage and determine what direction he sends you in. That is you punishment for shielding to long or predictable. However the reward has never ever been intended as a instant kill cause getting grabbed is too situational.

A lot are now wandering where do we draw the line. Well I say we draw the line where a situation has turned into one player having complete control and the other having no way of getting out up to a point were someone actually can put down the controller or needs to resolve to real life tactics like screaming or punching someone. When it has reached that point we have moved in the area of banworthy since there is no fight going on anymore. You could argue waveshining is the same but it's not cause it is really really situational and requires a lot more effort and can be prevented so much more easier. Chaingrabbing isn't aswell since it can be influenced by DI and does not lead to a guaranteed kill if DI's correctly.
On top of that there is a time that you can actually act during the setup when someone goes for the kill and influence the way they follow up but in wobbling there is no such case cause of the desynched smash.

EDIT: I´ve experience of players quitting because of the uthrow to rest with Jiggs against Fox, shouldn´t he have learned how to avoid it instead of quit smash and start playing WoW?
I would never try wobbling a pichu, the smashes does make the job done against it anyway XD

Still resting is something that has been balanced a lot more. You can DI the setup. You can DI the hit and survive. If you have to high percentage it can be avoided after the throw. Your opponent has a lot more options to change the situation. On top of that if it misses the jiglly highly likely loses a stock cause she sleeps for a period of time. That is the risc you take. You take no risc with wobbling if you miss you can get away fast enough and have all you options left to block incoming attacks or whatever. You know roy has a instant KO move too however it only instantly KO's after it is charged for so long the opponent could have done so much to prevent it. That's why it's not used much as well.

The more this debate has gone on the more reasons I am seeing for wobbling to be banned or otherwise we need to seriously reconsiderd why we play this game and the other tactics that we banned. People will then argue but what does it add if we would allow all the other banned tactics. That's my point with wobbling exactly. It is basically a shortcut to the other infinites icy's have and a easier version. So it's not even that of a major part of ice climber's game. It has everything thing in it that is banworthy. Why should we allow it. I was hoping to see that answer in this topic but what I'm mostly seeing is comparisons and if we do that we should also do this situation that can all be countered since they are not in the same league.

I'll get into the slippery slope shoe is talking about later when I have time but let me ask him why there isn't a slippery slope if we allow wobbling...?

 

[Marc]

Explanations and comparisons are used because people who don't want to ban it (yet) are trying to make the proponents of banning it see it isn't THAT different from other tactics in the game. All analogies break down somewhere, that's why they're analogies and not exactly the same thing. It's just to show that there are other tactics in the game that yield great rewards when executed properly and that there are other tactics that seemed broken or at least too rewarding when they were first discovered (NTSC Sheik's chaingrab, and to a lesser extent Jigglypuff's Rest). No serious tournament player ever complains about those things anymore.

The main point is that wobbling doesn't seem broken to many people, including me, and there's no need to ban it (yet). When considering banning something, it doesn't matter if something takes effort and skill or not, it doesn't matter if something is fun to play against or not, all that matters is if breaks the game or not. From my point of view, wobbling is not an instant-win technique. In the worst case, you lose ONE of your FOUR stocks at a low percentage. Chu Dat's rankings haven't changed since he started using it and many people have reported that it is very beatable if you're willing to adapt. Many people have also already done so. Yes, you lose your stock if you get grabbed under the right circumstances, deal with it.

 

[Ryuker]

However all of it has had some penalties that even'd it out but wobbling doesn't. That makes it a very special case and a right time to start determining where the fine line is between something allowed and something ban worthy. We ban stages cause they allow for stalling and we don't want stalling in matches but why is stalling banned but this isn't?

 

[Marc]

No one is argueing that wobbling isn't safe or rewarding. The stalling issue is easily solved by putting a limit on the wobbling percentage and is basically an issue that has to be addressed after the initial issue is solved. That's also the reason I chose not to really bring up the point that enforcing a ban on wobbling is pretty hard, because it's actually much harder than preventing stalling.

Also, there's no such thing as 'the spirit of the game' or 'the intention of the creators'. The default rules have items on, wavedashing wasn't planned on etc. Here's also a little bedtime story: Remen and me were a bit disappointed with Captain Jack at DT10 after hearing him state in an MLG interview that there is no chainthrowing in Japan, while he completely destroyed most people here by the worst grab whoring we had seen till then. Then Amsah came and pushed it even further. At the time, we felt it wasn't fun and not what we were used to, but we accepted it, tried to fight it and tried to implement it into our own game. In the end, it improved our game a lot and I think our community's level benefited from it greatly. Concepts like 'the spirit of the game' change with the times and we can only hope not to be scrubs if we really want to keep improving.

 

[Ryuker]

That's not why I brought up stalling. I don't necessarily mean stalling by wobbling I mean stalling in general. Why isn't it allowed and what makes it so different from wobbling? Isn't wobbling the last stock away the same as stalling a match in the last few minutes by hiding behind a wall or running away on hyrule temple since that was the main reason hyrule temple was banned. Why disallow stalling and do allow wobbling?

See there have been changes with this game that were called lame at first. You might forget but edge guarding was called lame first ( I called edgehogging lame >.>). And why wouldn't it be you were suddenly not allowed to get back on the stage after you put all that effort in returning. However cause there were way's to turn the situation around, ways to still make it back and it actually sped up the pacing of the game and made it more exciting,tactical and required the edge guarder to be precise so we allow it. Both player basically still had options to escape the situation or the other to stay more in control and keep his opponent in a letal situation that could lead them to lose a stock. However it wasn't guaranteed.

Chain grabbing basically did the same only it suddenly made a grab a lot more letal and you had to be more aware of when you were gonna get grabbed however you still had options to escape the chaingrab and that meant it was not guaranteed KO. It sped up the game but cause it was not a instant killing move it is still allowed.

Now peach bomber stalling also came along. However that was banned cause it was a way of stalling the match and a way of getting a really early lead that put some characters in a position that not much could be done. Why does this get banned but wobbling doesn't? Isn't wobbling someones stock away the same as stalling on your final stock with a percentage lead?

The reason I don't think wobbling should be allowed is cause there has always been a core principle in this game. You hit someone and then you follow that person and hit him again and if you have hit him enough the percentage is high enough to allow you to kill someone with a finishing move. Wobbling put's all this in the garbage bin and I don't see why we allow that :S. The only thing left is getting the hit.

If I ever run a tournament I'm gonna ask a question that's not why should we ban this but why should I allow this. That is my question right now. Why should we allow this in the european tournaments. What does it add and don't Ice climbers have other ways of abusing a grab that are slightly less letal but can still result in fast ko's?

I'm not talking about the intention of the creators but you have to agree that when we started playing this game we got rules that this game had. I don't mean items on I mean what we have to do to get a KO. It's granted to you instantly. There is a concept in this game and cause of that concept we are playing up to this day and beyond. That is the depth this game has and wobbling takes away of the depth IMO.

 

[Marc]

That's not why I brought up stalling. I don't necessarily mean stalling by wobbling I mean stalling in general. Why isn't it allowed and what makes it so different from wobbling? Isn't wobbling the last stock away the same as stalling a match in the last few minutes by hiding behind a wall or running away on hyrule temple since that was the main reason hyrule temple was banned. Why disallow stalling and do allow wobbling?

Giving Bowser a headshot with Fox and then running away is instant-win on Hyrule Temple, something that makes it so the opponent doesn't have a chance of winning. While you're helpless while being wobbled, it doesn't cost you the match, just one stock. It also takes one to stall, you have to grab the other person under certain circumstances in order to start wobbling. So basically, stalling when you're in the lead is an instant-win tactic, while wobbling isn't, provided we take care of the stalling issue.

The reason I don't think wobbling should be allowed is cause there has always been a core principle in this game. You hit someone and then you follow that person and hit him again and if you have hit him enough the percentage is high enough to allow you to kill someone with a finishing move. Wobbling put's all this in the garbage bin and I don't see why we allow that :S. The only thing left is getting the hit.

What do you have to say about Fox shinespiking people at 12%?

If I ever run a tournament I'm gonna ask a question that's not why should we ban this but why should I allow this. That is my question right now. Why should we allow this in the european tournaments. What does it add and don't Ice climbers have other ways of abusing a grab that are slightly less letal but can still result in fast ko's?

You can't turn issues like this around like that. You also can't consider NOT banning stuff a slippery slope. Unbanning other stuff is also not a way to deal with this. If you want to unban the freeze glitch, that's an entirely different issue and you already seemed to dislike analogies. It doesn't matter if a technique adds something, what kind of logic is that? We should allow this, because it isn't broken. And you're right, Ice Climbers do have insane potential for kills after a grab already, all the more reason why wobbling shouldn't be banned.

I'm not talking about the intention of the creators but you have to agree that when we started playing this game we got rules that this game had. I don't mean items on I mean what we have to do to get a KO. It's granted to you instantly. There is a concept in this game and cause of that concept we are playing up to this day and beyond. That is the depth this game has and wobbling takes away of the depth IMO.

All the 'rules' this game has besides the actual ruleset are in people's heads. Back in the day a certain Peach player found it unfair to use the downsmash against space animals, because it could hurt them so badly. This may look silly now, but there were actually quite some people who thought Peach' downsmash was too gay for the game, because it often was devastating ('free' 60%) at the time with people pressing down in it etc. Totally scrubbish ideas that were completely proven wrong. Also, don't think your reasons to play are the same for everyone.

 

[Ryuker]

Giving Bowser a headshot with Fox and then running away is instant-win on Hyrule Temple, something that makes it so the opponent doesn't have a chance of winning. While you're helpless while being wobbled, it doesn't cost you the match, just one stock. It also takes one to stall, you have to grab the other person under certain circumstances in order to start wobbling. So basically, stalling when you're in the lead is an instant-win tactic, while wobbling isn't, provided we take care of the stalling issue.

Stalling is not a instant win cause the other player can still chase. A fox giving a bowers a head shot still needs to be running away and can't just run stupid circles cause he needs to consider where the bowser is so on.

Getting a grab in these circumstances is also far more occuring then any other infinite or inescapable thing in this game. It can happen at almost any percentage and is unescapable after a certain percentage under 50 % which is really soon. Wobbling has no penaltys to the player for such a powerfull move and is not even a combo.

What do you have to say about Fox shinespiking people at 12%?

For one shinespiked can be techt close to the stage and 2 they are edge guarding situation were your already put in a bad situation and definetly not a benifital one for you however the player still needs to aim the shine spike and has a lot less chances to do it then can be done with wobbling.

You can't turn issues like this around like that. You also can't consider NOT banning stuff a slippery slope. Unbanning other stuff is also not a way to deal with this. If you want to unban the freeze glitch, that's an entirely different issue and you already seemed to dislike analogies. It doesn't matter if a technique adds something, what kind of logic is that? We should allow this, because it isn't broken. And you're right, Ice Climbers do have insane potential for kills after a grab already, all the more reason why wobbling shouldn't be banned.

Why can't I turn the issue around like that. It seem unlogical to me that i have to show reasons why it should be banned but there is not a reason why it should be allowed. I think the last one needs to be valid first.

Why is not banning something that just came up not a slippery slope. If you allow something like this all the other stuff we banned needs to be reconsidered and do we really wanna do this ? It's just as much a slippery slope not banning something as it is banning something. Why can't I just unplug your controller when I grabbed you? Why can't I let somebody hold you when I got a hit on you and that allows me to finish a 50 to death combo. Why can't I do that but at the same time we allow something that basically does the same?
The reason I'm saying there is more stuff icy's can do is to show that they do not solely rely on this which could be a reason why ice climber players wanna keep it there. However it is not the same as the other techniques since it has a really small chance of being messed up and doesn't require much concentration. It also doesn't require you to move and follow up your opponent or follow their DI. That gives it a lot more chance of happening then the other infinites do.

All the 'rules' this game has besides the actual ruleset are in people's heads. Back in the day a certain Peach player found it unfair to use the downsmash against space animals, because it could hurt them so badly. This may look silly now, but there were actually quite some people who thought Peach' downsmash was too gay for the game, because it often was devastating ('free' 60%) at the time with people pressing down in it etc. Totally scrubbish ideas that were completely proven wrong. Also, don't think your reasons to play are the same for everyone.

The core principle is not in people's head it was given to you when you bought this game. It's the game rule. Getting a free 60 % was not true cause it could be teched, DI'd upwards or whatever so the damage was way less. A peach downsmash has lag when missed or hit so can be punished. Basically it was a lot more balanced then wobbling is now. It is also character dependant.

 

[Marc]

Stalling is not a instant win cause the other player can still chase. A fox giving a bowers a head shot still needs to be running away and can't just run stupid circles cause he needs to consider where the bowser is so on.

Super Turbo Street Fighter's Akuma is beatable if the player using him doesn't do anything, what is your point? Yes, you have to not be an idiot who is running right towards Bowser. Even if you are trying to say that it takes skill, for the last time, skill doesn't matter when discussing if a certain technique breaks the game. You can start with banning all top and high tier characters, because it obviously takes a better player to win a tournament with a low tier character. What does matter is if applying a certain technique makes it impossible for your opponent to win, which is obviously the case with the Hyrule Temple example. Screwing it up means you're not doing it anymore.

Getting a grab in these circumstances is also far more occuring then any other infinite or inescapable thing in this game. It can happen at almost any percentage and is unescapable after a certain percentage under 50 % which is really soon. Wobbling has no penaltys to the player for such a powerfull move and is not even a combo.

We've already established that it is rewarding, repeating that doesn't make it broken.

For one shinespiked can be techt close to the stage and 2 they are edge guarding situation were your already put in a bad situation and definetly not a benifital one for you however the player still needs to aim the shine spike and has a lot less chances to do it then can be done with wobbling.

Well, the Ice Climbers still have to get a grab in at the right percentage, under the right circumstances and not screw up after that. Which is actually more difficult than hitting someone with a shinespike, which also shouldn't be the point. The effort it takes to do something doesn't matter when discussing if a technique is game breaking. We might as well ban all combo's Sheik has, if that's a factor, because they're much easier to perform than for example Falco's.

Why can't I turn the issue around like that. It seem unlogical to me that i have to show reasons why it should be banned but there is not a reason why it should be allowed. I think the last one needs to be valid first.

Because things are allowed by default, it's the starting position. When balancing a competitive game, you ban stuff that's broken. To get things banned, you'll have to make an effort to prove that it's broken, other people don't have to start with proving stuff isn't broken. So yes, you will really have to come up with reasons why it shouldn't be allowed.

Why is not banning something that just came up not a slippery slope. If you allow something like this all the other stuff we banned needs to be reconsidered and do we really wanna do this ? It's just as much a slippery slope not banning something as it is banning something.

All things we banned so far are items, stages, glitches and pure stalling. Wobbling doesn't fall in those categories. It doesn't screw up a match to a point where it has to be replayed, the stalling can be prevented, there's no random luck involved. It's also something that in theory can be avoided, and in practice can be avoided a lot.

Why can't I just unplug your controller when I grabbed you? Why can't I let somebody hold you when I got a hit on you and that allows me to finish a 50 to death combo. Why can't I do that but at the same time we allow something that basically does the same?

Because that would be outside the scope of the game, obviously. Playing to win ends where you actually beat up your opponent in real life.

The reason I'm saying there is more stuff icy's can do is to show that they do not solely rely on this which could be a reason why ice climber players wanna keep it there. However it is not the same as the other techniques since it has a really small chance of being messed up and doesn't require much concentration. It also doesn't require you to move and follow up your opponent or follow their DI. That gives it a lot more chance of happening then the other infinites do.

It's a powerful technique, of course Ice Climbers players want to keep it. In most cases, it's their best option after a grab. Blabla ease doesn't matter etc.

The core principle is not in people's head it was given to you when you bought this game. It's the game rule. Getting a free 60 % was not true cause it could be teched, DI'd upwards or whatever so the damage was way less. A peach downsmash has lag when missed or hit so can be punished. Basically it was a lot more balanced then wobbling is now. It is also character dependant.

Thanks for pointing out the mistakes people made YEARS ago. A free 60% is very true when people don't know how to deal with it or just don't have the technical knowledge. There was a time when stuff like l-cancelling wasn't even known, mind you. I was giving the example because the debate and whining about it often sounded a lot like what we're doing now.

I've also been saying stuff throughout this debate Sirlin has already said years ago. Please, if you want to participate in debates like this, read his stuff. It's accepted as fact throughout all competitive gaming scenes I know of and really saves me (and others) the trouble of explaining everything. That goes for everyone.

 

[Ryuker]

I'mma reply to this post later but I just wanted to say that I read all that sirlin has posted and understand all of that. However that was years ago and we live in a different time now in that sense. His stuff is not god like or anything or should be seen as something that people believe in as if it was the bible. All go into the rest of your post later. I'm happy that we have this debate now though and that we keep it intelligent and that it seems to be clearing things up.

 

[Marc]

I'mma reply to this post later but I just wanted to say that I read all that sirlin has posted and understand all of that. However that was years ago and we live in a different time now in that sense. His stuff is not god like or anything or should be seen as something that people believe in as if it was the bible. All go into the rest of your post later. I'm happy that we have this debate now though and that we keep it intelligent and that it seems to be clearing things up.

It was true years ago, and it's true now. The Street Fighter scene is much older than the smash scene and was already developed by the time he wrote his stuff. He also expanded on it in a book not so lang ago, so it's still quite up to date. And good luck finding a truely competitive top player who doesn't agree with it. Also, it's not really about believing, unlike the bible. There's some actual reasoning and logic involved.

You seem to struggle mostly with the idea that wobbling isn't 'smash-like'. That is kinda true, there's no technique like it besides the other grab combo's Ice Climbers have. I also feel Ice Climbers aren't like any other character and I've personally never really liked them. Those feelings come from personal ideas about what smash is like or should be like, but they are in no way reason enough to just go and ban something.

 

[shoe]

I say we’re going into circles now, both sides have explained any and every point for at least two times now. In the last posts Marc has basically said everything I wanted to say.

As for your question Ryuker:

I'll get into the slippery slope shoe is talking about later when I have time but let me ask him why there isn't a slippery slope if we allow wobbling...?

With slippery slope I mean that if we ban one thing we make room for debate of other things being banned. You make it seem as if all Ice Climbers got to do is grab. They need to get a synched grab at over approximately 25%. If we ban Wobbling it would even make room for a discussion of Mewto’s upthrow being banned. Because man, if Mewto grabs people over 140% they get KO’d, and there’s absolutely no way to escape it!! You ban things for being ban worthy, not for having no reason to not ban them. Why don’t we ban Sheik’s f-smash, I see no reason not to ban it, Sheik is already very good without it, it’s not like she needs it.

That’s all for now, we’re repeating ourselves, just like Marc, if there are any questions directly to me I’ll answer them. As for the rest, refer to the last few of Marc’s posts .

 

[Osxcar]

I have been following this thread and I would like to point out something which I atleast find interesting. Here is a part from an article from www.sirlin.net which can help out in this discussion and I recommend everyone to read the whole article:

Boundaries of Playing to Win

There is a gray area here I feel I should point out. If an expert does anything he can to win, then does he exploit bugs in the game? The answer is a resounding yes…but not all bugs. There is a large class of bugs in video games that players don’t even view as bugs. In Marvel vs. Capcom 2, for example, Iceman can launch his opponent into the air, follow him, do a few hits, then combo into his super move. During the super move he falls down below his opponent, so only about half of his super will connect. The Iceman player can use a trick, though. Just before doing the super, he can do another move, an icebeam, and cancel that move into the super. There’s a bug here which causes iceman to fall, during his super, at the much slower rate of his icebeam. The player actually cancels the icebeam as soon as possible—optimally as soon as 1/60th of a second after it begins. The whole point is to make iceman fall slower during his super so he gets more hits. Is it a bug? I’m sure it is. It looks like a programming oversight to me. Would an expert player use this? Of course.

The iceman example is relatively tame. In Street Fighter Alpha2, there’s a bug in which you can land the most powerful move in the game (a Custom Combo or “CC”) on the opponent, even when he should be able to block it. A bug? Yes. Does it help you win? Yes. This technique became the dominant tactic of the game. The gameplay evolved around this, play went on, new strategies were developed. Those who cried cheap were simply left behind to play their own homemade version of the game with made-up rules. The one we all played had unblockable CCs, and it went on to be a great game.

But there is a limit. There is a point when the bug becomes too much. In tournaments, bugs that turn the game off, or freeze it indefinitely, or remove one of the characters from the playfield permanently are banned. Bugs so extreme that they stop gameplay are considered unfair even by non-scrubs. As are techniques that can only be performed on, say, the one player side of the game. There are a few esoteric tricks in various fighting games that are side dependant—that can’t be performed on the 2nd player side, for example.

As the authour points out, wobbling is a tactic which is allowed in the games mechanics and isn't a "bug" which freezes the game or something like that. Especially the part about unblockable CC's is what I think is most like the discussion going on now. It is part of the game so we should learn to adapt and counter wobbling. One counter is to "not get grabbed" which is a very heated argument right now, but still a valid one.

I hope this helps,

Osxcar

 

[Osxcar]

Since edit isn't working for me I have to doublepost. here is the edit I wanted to add:

#¤%&*^!! Of course someone already has pointed out sirlin and his article, but I hope this will still benefit the discussion going on now. At least the people who haven't read sirlin's articles can get the chance now.

 

[Ryuker]

I say we’re going into circles now, both sides have explained any and every point for at least two times now. In the last posts Marc has basically said everything I wanted to say.

As for your question Ryuker:

With slippery slope I mean that if we ban one thing we make room for debate of other things being banned. You make it seem as if all Ice Climbers got to do is grab. They need to get a synched grab at over approximately 25%. If we ban Wobbling it would even make room for a discussion of Mewto’s upthrow being banned. Because man, if Mewto grabs people over 140% they get KO’d, and there’s absolutely no way to escape it!! You ban things for being ban worthy, not for having no reason to not ban them. Why don’t we ban Sheik’s f-smash, I see no reason not to ban it, Sheik is already very good without it, it’s not like she needs it.

That’s all for now, we’re repeating ourselves, just like Marc, if there are any questions directly to me I’ll answer them. As for the rest, refer to the last few of Marc’s posts .

However there are no reasons to ban a sheik F-smash or a Uthrow from mewtwo because 1 mewtwo's game rely's a lot on the uthrow and sheik's f-smash is not killing before x amount of high percentage which goes for mewtwo uthrow too( in that sense they have been limited). There needs to be a reason why wobbling does not fall into the ban area as does peach bomber wall stalling and so on. Have you read amsah's post? He clearly explains that an instant kill move= ban and peach bomber stalling is ban worthy. Then how come wobbling isn't in this area?

That was also what I was presenting that it has become apparent that we need to start drawing a clear line as to when something does not belong in smashing competitions anymore. When do we determine that something has changed the fight so dramatically that there is hardly a fight going on anymore.

Also maybe we should start the don't grabbed arguement again and see how valid that really is.

I'm off to work now so I can't really finish this post so I'll post again later.

 

[ivootjes(nr18)]

Why ban instant kill moves?

Shinespike instant kill
Doc's double bair instant kill
Jigglypuffs rest above 30% instant kill
Lame sheik edgeguarding instant kill
wobbling instant kill

All of this is situational, but it does happen in tournies. That's just the game.

 

[training_master(KVF)]

I for one am against banning wobbling, we have one very good IC player here in Finland, and he is beatable, and he does use all sorts of infinites... you just have to play so good not to get grabbed and therefor infinited... play smart, play good technicly and you have a perfectly good chance of winning. but then again, I play IC's also, sometimes, and wobbling is a big part of my game... :D

 

[Nihonjin]

With slippery slope I mean that if we ban one thing we make room for debate of other things being banned. You make it seem as if all Ice Climbers got to do is grab. They need to get a synched grab at over approximately 25%. If we ban Wobbling it would even make room for a discussion of Mewto’s upthrow being banned. Because man, if Mewto grabs people over 140% they get KO’d, and there’s absolutely no way to escape it!! You ban things for being ban worthy, not for having no reason to not ban them. Why don’t we ban Sheik’s f-smash, I see no reason not to ban it, Sheik is already very good without it, it’s not like she needs it.

Shoe, I don't want to sound harsh, but ffs stop making stupid examples.

Shinespike instant kill

That requires you to mind game your opponent of stage first then predict/manipulate where he's going to jump/up+B and then precisely jump in and shine spike.
It can be easily avoided by the defender by NOT going to the edge or hitting the person who attempts the shinespike, it can easily be missed by the attacker by jumping off with a crappy angle or too early, too late (and if that happens he dies).

Doc's double bair instant kill

Again, it requires you to be on the edge of the stage and even if you get hit by a double bair, if your reserve your jump you can make it back on stage (I've done it multiple times and its the same with shinespikes).
And its character dependant, Jiggly would easily survive a double bair, so would peach, so would Samus.

Jigglypuffs rest above 30% instant kill

Wrong, with DI on Dreamland 64 you can easily survive.
Besides, to get someone into a rest position takes either alot of skill from the attacker or stupidity from the defender, its not like its unavoidable.
And if you miss you get punished by the opponents most damaging attack.

Lame sheik edgeguarding instant kill

Right, if you get off the edge you just automatically die right?
Wrong.
How many Sheiks have the skill and insight to perform an edge guard that instantly kills FASTFALLERS.
It doesn't work on every character and it sure as hell isn't a certain kill and if the Sheik screws up badly enough she dies.
Besides, if you go the the friggin edge with a Sheik at a low percentage than thats your own fault.

wobbling instant kill

Instant kill with just one grab on any character anywhere on ANY stage.
Even IF you mess up wich I find highly unlikely for someone who perfected wobbling, the only "punishment" you get is not having an instant kill combo.

All of this is situational, but it does happen in tournies. That's just the game.

How is any character, anywhere on any stage situational?
I still fail to see how this can possibly fall into the same category as Sheiks edge guard or mewtwo's upthrow -_-'

 

[Osxcar]

Amsah: I'm just curious, have you read the article on www.sirlin.net that I linked to earlier?

 

[Nihonjin]

Depends on what you want me to see.
I haven't checked sirlin in ages.

 

[ivootjes(nr18)]

It's situational because a good player won't get grabbed that often, and because popo and nana aren't always together.

I don't even understand why you took time to explain all my examples, i'm only saying that IF you get hit by one of these you ARE dead.

How is any character, anywhere on any stage situational?

How is this even an argument? It wouldn't be banworthy if it would only work against sheik on Final Destination?

Even IF you mess up wich I find highly unlikely for someone who perfected wobbling, the only "punishment" you get is not having an instant kill combo.

I always beat the hell out of my opponent when he misses a grab.

And on top of that, there's also no punishment if you mess up during a chainthrow, and no punishment when you mess up during a combo. It often only means the end of the chainthrow/combo.

This thread is full of scrubs

 

[Osxcar]

"Playing to win" mostly, especially the one about "scrubs". He has a part where he talks about "cheap moves" and what he thinks about them being called "cheap". I find it quite fitting to read that part again, just for this discussions sake IMO.

 

[Nihonjin]

It's situational because a good player won't get grabbed that often, and because popo and nana aren't always together.

Don't get grabbed that often, but they do get grabbed and lose an entire stock because of it.
Now what about the people who aren't that good, the ones that easily get grabbed?

I don't even understand why you took time to explain all my examples, i'm only saying that IF you get hit by one of these you ARE dead.

Why I took the time?
Because its a false statement. Shinespikes aren't always instant kills, neither are Sheiks edgeguards or any of the other examples you listed.

How is this even an argument? It wouldn't be banworthy if it would only work against sheik on Final Destination?

I wouldn't ban it then.
IC's on FD vs Sheik would then simply be the most devastating counterpick ever, but its something you can avoid.

I always beat the hell out of my opponent when he misses a grab.

I'm talking about after they land a grab, and I don't remember you ever punishing me after I missed my grabs -_-'

And on top of that, there's also no punishment if you mess up during a chainthrow, and no punishment when you mess up during a combo. It often only means the end of the chainthrow/combo.

If Marth messes up his chainthrow against Fox/Falco he gets shined (and possibly combo'd)
If anyone messes up a combo against people who recover fast (Luigi for example) you get sex kicked to the face.
If you mess up wobbling, you'll hear your timing is off and you can decide to finish it prematurely with a downthrow upsmash at 140% instead of continuing till +200%.

Funny how most of the people who argue against the banning of wobbling are either IC players or people who have never experienced it themselves.

 

[Ryuker]

The way amsah is fighting your arguments is exactly my point. All the examples he has fought all come down to ONE thing. There is a PENALTY when missed. This is the sould basic of game balance if something is so rewarding it needs to have a penalty that evens it out.
Wobbling does not have this! Try to go after a ice climber again after he missed a grab and you really don't have that much of a opening. Is this really the only reasons you guys can find that makes it unbanworthy, making comparisons that are to different in the end. Can someone present me with a reason why we should allow it?

 

[Nihonjin]

I'm not fighting his arguments, I'm disarming them.
I'm done arguing, Im just here to show the flaws in people their arguments.

 

[7!11]

Woah, Amsah convinced me. Good stuff.

Btw where do I find Evo South results?

 

[Smasher89]

In a situation where shinespike hits outside the ledge, not making the opponent fly towards the stage, it´ll result in a KO depending on situation, the only difference with shinespike that I right now can remind is that if you screw up, like in your oppinion a wobbler never do they might fall to a SD, which won´t happen more than occasionally, and is really really rare, noone plays 100% perfect. Seriously, there´s always someone capable of beating the one at the top, or will be, like what happened att RoS3...

Ryuker-More characters played at tournaments besides fox/falco/shiek?, IC´s makes people play samus/peach and Captain Falcon more, which adds to the variation of characters amongst some top players, is there anything wrong with more chars used? oh another thing, a shiek might not win a european tournament, as IC´s is the only "counter" against her, which only shiekplayers wouldn´t like, Samuses, Peaches and CF's would maybe get higher too..
And more people may open their eyes and starts to play for win beating that "cheap" wobbler...

Isn´t double fair from shiek situational and a "easy" KO? (towards the ledge or beside in the air)
Who is the other IC player in this discussion who mains them?

I got wobbled at RoS1 in friendlies, 0-80 a couple of times, why didn´t that player win RoS1 using the technique at that time? (I´ve got the CD from RoS1, which is a HUGE difference in how people play today), at that time they (read top players) might have been grabbed and KOd more often than today.

Can you prove that every single grab is a KO as you keep saying, or every single unpunished tried grab?
And that it´s 100% impossible to avoid (top players in the US keeps avoiding the grab), seriously, just counterpick mute city, brinstar or something if does not want to get wobbled and smashed instead...

 

[Ryuker]

In a situation where shinespike hits outside the ledge, not making the opponent fly towards the stage, it´ll result in a KO depending on situation, the only difference with shinespike that I right now can remind is that if you screw up, like in your oppinion a wobbler never do they might fall to a SD, which won´t happen more than occasionally, and is really really rare, noone plays 100% perfect. Seriously, there´s always someone capable of beating the one at the top, or will be, like what happened att RoS3...

Thanks for proving my point ^^.

Ryuker-More characters played at tournaments besides fox/falco/shiek?, IC´s makes people play samus/peach and Captain Falcon more, which adds to the variation of characters amongst some top players, is there anything wrong with more chars used? oh another thing, a shiek might not win a european tournament, as IC´s is the only "counter" against her, which only shiekplayers wouldn´t like, Samuses, Peaches and CF's would maybe get higher too..

You don't need wobbling for that ice climbers have other infinites that actually require you to move. They follow the normal concept in which you let go of someone and attack them again and they have a chance to DI how small that may be the chance is there. All wobbling is right now is a easier way out to get a infinite and a replacement technique. And because it renders the other one powerless we just got the first real situation were you absolutely can't get out of.

Isn´t double fair from shiek situational and a "easy" KO? (towards the ledge or beside in the air)
Who is the other IC player in this discussion who mains them?

No it isn't.....
[/QUOTE]
I got wobbled at RoS1 in friendlies, 0-80 a couple of times, why didn´t that player win RoS1 using the technique at that time? (I´ve got the CD from RoS1, which is a HUGE difference in how people play today), at that time they (read top players) might have been grabbed and KOd more often than today.
[/QUOTE]

So that player actually sucked I guess cause I never heard of something like this happening there. Also I'm not arguing about it being able to win tournaments I'm arguing about it ban worthynes and how it changes the concept of smash and ditches a lot of the smash principle. Bomberstalling is banned why? Where is that line cause I don't think we made that clear enough....
[/QUOTE]
Can you prove that every single grab is a KO as you keep saying, or every single unpunished tried grab?
And that it´s 100% impossible to avoid (top players in the US keeps avoiding the grab), seriously, just counterpick mute city, brinstar or something if does not want to get wobbled and smashed instead...[/QUOTE]

You can still wobble on those stages or did you forget? And if perfected the chances are really really highly likely that it results in a KO so that makes it a instant kill. And not it is not a Instant KO in certain situations but it does happen a LOT.

 

[Marc]

Ryuker, you made up a rule stating every strong technique should have a penalty, so we're done arguing. If there were such a rule wobbling should be banned, but that rule only exists in your head. So while it seems perfectly logical to you, there's something wrong with your logic to begin with.

The same goes for Amsah, there's no law saying killing of a grab to this extent shouldn't be allowed. You might think you have done well in responding to shoe's arguments, but he is already reaching out to try and get you guys to understand, doing more than he needs to do. You're basically saying, 'you suck for not fixing my logic', which is a really gay way to approach this. The maint point behind all the analogies, examples and explanations is that wobbling isn't game breaking. So good job on breaking down analogies, but you still haven't proven wobbling breaks the game, meaning you're still nowhere. While you're getting people to keep explaining stuff again and again, that only strengthens their case and beliefs.

Oh, and all the proponents of banning wobbling are doing now is fighting small arguments and starting debates about whether chain throwing takes skill and effort or not. It doesn't matter if chain throwing is hard or not, it's not what we're discussing. The only comparison that is made, is that there are more rewarding techniques out there when executed properly. Yes, wobbling is not completely like those techniques, but nobody said that! Skill and effort shouldn't play a part in this debate to begin with. Wobbling isn't instant-win, wobbling doesn't break tournaments on a large scale, wobbling hardly makes a difference to begin with. Yes, it is very rewarding. No, it is not broken.

 

[KirbySSB]

The same goes for Amsah, there's no law saying killing of a grab to this extent shouldn't be allowed.

No, but there should be. That's the point of this thread isn't it?

 

[Ryuker]

Ryuker, you made up a rule stating every strong technique should have a penalty, so we're done arguing. If there were such a rule wobbling should be banned, but that rule only exists in your head. So while it seems perfectly logical to you, there's something wrong with your logic to begin with.

It's a basic game design rule and I think it should definetly be considered. What would you have against it if we desided on rule that says after the first hit is landed the match ended?

The same goes for Amsah, there's no law saying killing of a grab to this extent shouldn't be allowed. You might think you have done well in responding to shoe's arguments, but he is already reaching out to try and get you guys to understand, doing more than he needs to do. You're basically saying, 'you suck for not fixing my logic', which is a really gay way to approach this. The maint point behind all the analogies, examples and explanations is that wobbling isn't game breaking. So good job on breaking down analogies, but you still haven't proven wobbling breaks the game, meaning you're still nowhere. While you're getting people to keep explaining stuff again and again, that only strengthens their case and beliefs.

Deal with it. Right now were are the only ones having to think of reasons. Why don't you give me a reason why it should be allowed?Also there is no gay way right cause wobbling isn't gay as well right? Gay is for scrubs right? I'm not trying to prove it breaks the game although it does break the gameplay since it throws alot of it in the garbage bin.

Also I am already proposing that we start determining the line. We are in some way the boss of how we want this game to be played and although we want to allow as much freedom as there is possible there is a line...
Why is peach wallbombing not allowed. I find it hardly as gay as wobbling and hardly as damaging to the match...

 

[Nihonjin]

Marc, edit your post next time (this is the friggin' 10th time atleast that I have to merge your posts).

And KirbySSB basically said what I wanted to say.
Ofcourse there is no rule, thats why we're arguing aren't we?

 

[Marc]

It's a basic game design rule and I think it should definetly be considered. What would you have against it if we desided on rule that says after the first hit is landed the match ended?

How is it a rule? I already said Ice Climbers and their moves are unique, that doesn't mean they break some rule. Should we just kill everyone that is unique in some way because they're breaking a rule that doesn't exist? I also don't get your first hit comment, it just sounds ******** and I don't see how it relates to wobbling.

Deal with it. Right now were are the only ones having to think of reasons. Why don't you give me a reason why it should be allowed?Also there is no gay way right cause wobbling isn't gay as well right? Gay is for scrubs right? I'm not trying to prove it breaks the game although it does break the gameplay since it throws alot of it in the garbage bin.

The reason wobbling should be allowed, is because it doesn't break the game. So you WILL have to prove it DOES break the game. If banning doesn't happen on the condition something is broken, it becomes quite random. That is exactly what Scamp, shoe etc mean. If you don't ban stuff based on logic, it will become a slippery slope. And you use the word 'gay' too much. :3

Also I am already proposing that we start determining the line. We are in some way the boss of how we want this game to be played and although we want to allow as much freedom as there is possible there is a line...

The line always was and always will be: does it break the game?

Why is peach wallbombing not allowed. I find it hardly as gay as wobbling and hardly as damaging to the match...

Because it breaks the game. You get a lead, and you can press the win button by bomber stalling. Wobbling is not a win button. Using it does not win you the match. It gets you one out of four kills. Also, we're not discussing that right now and your opinion on what is gay and what isn't doesn't have to with anything.

Marc, edit your post next time (this is the friggin' 10th time atleast that I have to merge your posts).

And KirbySSB basically said what I wanted to say.
Ofcourse there is no rule, thats why we're arguing aren't we?

I actually like people to see when I post something new. Certain people also seem to not read my posts very well, so I decided to make it more convenient for them. :3 I'm trying to respond to everything in one post, so don't start *****ing when I don't succeed every once in a while.

And no, this topic isn't meant to come up with a rule to validate your opinion.

EDIT: And for the record, I saw your post after I posted my previous post. So merge it or whatever if you find it so disturbing.

 

[Nihonjin]

I find attacks that prevent who ever suffers it from doing anything at all game breaking.
Wobbling does that.
You call it "Rewarding" I call it Game breaking and thats exactly the problem with this discussion. Its endless.

 

[Marc]

Game breaking means that something is the single best technique to use at a tournament, your only chance to win. It would mean tournaments would be Ice Climbers only, it would mean no character would stance a chance. If a technique is truly broken, no one can beat it, not even a better player.

You're used to being able to do stuff when you get grabbed, hit etc. Wobbling doesn't allow you to do that. True, it's different, it's not much fun either, but that doesn't mean it breaks the game.

 

[Nihonjin]

Then in my opinion its time to redefine the term "Game Breaking".
Or create a new term "Tournament Breaking", because even if it doesn't mean instant win in a tournament, it does mean a completely screwed up lower part of the bracket because IC players manage to beat people they shouldn't.
*I'm done with this btw, its not getting us anywhere*

 

[Coen]

If everyone starts to play ICs, there won't be ANY problem with wobbling anymore. Super IC Brothers =D

According to Sirlin we should, shouldn't we?