ZSS General Discussion

[sasook]

all big chain pizza sucks, tru story

Uhh....no. Pizza Hut is amazing.

 

[ThreeSided]

Uhh....no. Pizza Hut is amazing.

Pizza hut is pretty lame. I'd have to agree that most Pizza chains suck.

It really depends where you live though, guys. Pizza in New england rocks, compared to pizza in Florida... it was horrible. I hear it's okay on the west coast.

Again, I live in the east coast, and haven't really had pizza elsewhere. So I'm probably spoiled with the really good stuff.

 

[mountain_tiger]

Pizza Hut is nice, especially the deep pan stuff.

What I hate about pizzas is that sometimes when you cut a slice, the cheese sort of stretches and ends up dangling over the edge. That always makes me want to be sick.

 

[sasook]

^I love when that happens, lol.



And no, Pizza Hut is amazing. Like....just awesome. I've never, never, never been there and disliked their food. Ever. And I order from there at least once every 2 months.

 

[ThreeSided]

HELP ME. I've spent the last TWO DAYS writing a very well thought out argument involving the MK ban, only to realize that they CLOSED THE THREAD. It's sitting in my copy-paste right now, and I can't find I place I can put it where people will see it and wont get in trouble! I'll put it right here for now, in case anyone's interested...

Here's the thing; I've been parted on this issue for the longest time. I've switched back and forth since I first heard the concept of the character ban. My first thought was that it sounded ridiculous. Sure, he's hard to fight, but that doesn't mean we should get rid of him. He's an obstacle in the way, and the true way to compete would be to overcome it, not to remove it. I want to have the pride of saying I overcame this difficult obstacle. I wanted to conquer it, and I still do. But I read up a bit, looking at some tourney results, and started to get the feeling that it may just be about having a fair playing field. Needless to say, I was unsure, and I felt for the longest time that I just didn't have enough information to have a fair opinion. Now, after seeing both arguments, and gaining more experience on the subject over time, I've realized that it only really comes down to one subject that has been mentioned, but in many cases, ignored. Most others are really only for show; this is where, as I see it, it really seems to count;

The idea behind a competitive game is, bottom line, to have players compete to see who is the best at the game. With that said, I'll bring up another competitive game for comparison: Chess. Chess and SSB are similar in that they are both competitive games. And as such, the goal of our little "get togethers" we call tourneys are to decide who, by process of elimination, is/are the best player(s). In chess, this is straight forward. A tourney of whatever sort is set up, and players face each other to see who is the better player, until only one remains, and a ranking list is thus made. Brawl is essentially the same, at a basic level. But the two vary on one very specific factor; Unlike chess, at the beginning of a match in SSB, both players do not necessarily have equal opportunities to apply their skill in a manner that will more than likely bring about the victory of the more skillful player.

The reason? Where chess begins with both players having the exact same pieces in the exact same order and exact same opportunity to move them (excluding the small factor of who gets the first move), SSB has varying characters and stages, with different match ups and preferences and the such. Because of this, you can't just duke it out 2/3 on a random stage each time with no one but your main and then conclude that the winner of the match is more likely than not the more skillful player, due to the fact that the characters and stage used could and likely did greatly sway the outcome. The result is that skill is no longer the sole deciding factor. This is a horrid flaw in the system when compared to the straight-forward fairness of chess, and is one we have yet to (and most likely will never) completely fix. We do, however, have a "remedy" which takes a large amount of this chance out of the equation, allowing skill to be more of a distinguishing factor, and we call it "Counter Picking". Counter picking allows the losing player of a round pick a stage to counter the opponent, and then a character to do the same once the opponent chooses their character. This process continues until the match is set with a majority win (usually 2/3). This mixes in with the Majority-win = match concept to dramatically increase the chances that the winning player of the match is the more skillful player.

Example: Player 1 (P1) and Player 2 (P2) duke out their first round with their mains on a random Neutral stage. P1 wins the first round. We can safely assume that either:

A. P1 is the more skilled player,
and/or
B. The combination of stage and/or characters gave P1 the advantage.

There is also always the chance P2 had some sort of crazy bad luck, but then that is a possibility for any game. However, considering these two possibilities, the counter pick system means that when P2 picks his stage/character, the following are the likely/intended scenarios for the second round (* = match end).

If A (or A and B):
---- C. P1 is much more skillful than P2, so P1 wins the round despite being CPed. (P1 wins match)*
---- D. Combination of stage and/or characters gives P2 enough of an advantage to overcome P1's higher skill, and P2 wins the round.

If B:
---- E. P1 turns out to be more skillful than P2, so P1 wins the round anyways. (P1 wins match)*
---- F. Combination of stage and/or characters gives P2 an advantage which allows P2 to win the round.

So far, the system has worked. The matches that have been completed have been won by the more skillful player. Let's continue with the unfinished matches now:

If D:
---- G. Because P1 is more skilled AND has the advantage of counter pick, P1 much more than likely wins. (P1 wins the match)*

If F:
---- H. P2 turns out to be the more skillful player, and wins the match despite being CPed. (P2 wins the match)*
or
---- I. P1 is either more skillful, or won on counter pick advantage. (P1 wins the match)*

Again, everything seems to work out well. Even in the BFI scenario, it can be assumed that P1 is the more skillful player because he was able to win the first round, which was essentially random. Again, not a foolproof system, but it's much better than nothing.

Now that we understand the system to it's fullest, and why it increases the chances of finding the better player, let's do the same with a high tier character other than MK. Let's choose next in line after him; Snake.

P1 uses snake. P2 uses an unknown character. The two face off. Either;

A. P1 is the more skilled player, and wins,
and/or
B. P2 mains a character who has a bad match up against snake, and/or there is a bad stage for the match up. P1 wins.

or

C. P2 is the more skilled player and wins,
and/or
D. P2 mains a character who has a good match up against snake (lets say Falco), and/or there is a good stage for the match up. P2 wins.

Same scenario. Everything is still going will. Let's continue; (* = match end).

If A (or A and B):
---- C. P1 is much more skillful than P2, so P1 wins the round despite being CPed. (P1 wins match)*
---- D. Combination of stage and/or characters gives P2 enough of an advantage to overcome P1's higher skill, and P2 wins the round.

If B:
---- E. P1 turns out to be more skillful than P2, so P1 wins the round anyways. (P1 wins match)*
---- F. Combination of stage and/or characters gives P2 an advantage which allows P2 to win the round.

If C (or C and D):
---- C. P2 is much more skillful than P1, so P2 wins the round despite being CPed. (P2 wins match)*
---- D. Combination of stage and/or characters gives P1 enough of an advantage to overcome P2's higher skill, and P1 wins the round.

If D:
---- E. P2 turns out to be more skillful than P1, so P2 wins the round anyways. (P2 wins match)*
---- F. Combination of stage and/or characters gives P1 an advantage which allows P2 to win the round.

We can stop here, because we see that everything is essentially the same. Snake can both be CPed when it comes to characters, and stages. In this way, even if the person does not know how to use a character which has a good match up against snake, they can still dramatically sway the chances by CPing a stage that is not good for him, say RC. This allows the proper show of skill to emerge. Snake may be harder to beat for many chracters, and have less character CPs, but any character can CP a stage which gives snake a disadvantage in their match up, such as RC.

Let's try this again, only so that P1 mains MK.

A. P1 is the more skilled player, and wins,
and/or
B. P2 mains a character who has a bad match up against MK, and/or there is a bad stage for the match up. P1 wins.

or

C. P2 is the more skilled player and wins.

Notice how there is only one scenario for winning for P2. This is because there really are no "bad stages" OR "bad characters" for MK. In this sense, there really is no way to effectively "CP" MK; only to find a stage which improves your characters fighting style. But there are no stages which can hinder MK. In this way, the only way yo beat the MK is to be more skilled, where as MK has that, and the possibility of having a stage advantage. Let us continue;

If A (or A and B):
---- D. P1 is more skilled than P2, and wins the round. (P1 wins the match)*

If B:
---- E. P1 is more skilled than P2, and wins the round. (P1 wins the match)*
or
---- F. P2 is more skilled than P1, but does not use any characters which go 50:50 with MK, and though more skilled, is not skilled "enough" to win. (P1 wins the match)*
or
---- G. P2 uses a 50:50 match up character and is more skilled, or doesn't and is more skilled "enough" with their character, and wins.

If C:
---- H. P2 is much more skilled than P1, and wins. (P2 wins the match)*
or
---- I. P1 wins due to character/stage advantages.

Now this is where things get interesting; first off, we notice that after scenario A (or A and B), the only scenario (due to the fact that we are excluding big mistakes, etc) is that P1, with MK, wins. Technically, the counter pick system has not been broken, because it is still doing it's job; the more skilled player won. However, the problem emerges in scenario
F. This scenario shows the first section in the counter pick system that is broken by MK; P2 does not use any characters which have a 50:50 match up with MK. But what about the Snake situation? He covers a lot of match ups, it's plausible to say that someone might not use any characters which have even a 50:50 match up with him. However, unlike MK, snake can be stage counter picked. Because MK has no real stage CPs, there is nothing to close the match up gap. Because of this, even if P2 is more skilled than P1, P2 will not be necessarily to win the round, and therefore the match (again, we are excluding chanced "big mess up" situations), unless they pass a certain margin of skillfulness (scenario G). Scenarios C and G now turn out to be the same, only with the possibility of requiring even more skill, due to the stages being random neutrals. Let us continue with the third round;

If G:
---- J. P2 is significantly more skilled than P1, enough to overcome the stage CP, and wins. (P2 wins the match)*
or
---- K. P1 wins due to CP advantage. (P1 wins the match)*

If I:
---- L. P2 uses a 50:50 match up character and is more skilled, or doesn't and is more skilled "enough" with their character, and wins. (P2 wins the match)*

Scenario J would require a very large amount of skill for P2, especially if their character is not an even match. Interestingly enough, due to scenario C already having required P2 to be of more than or equal skill as scenario L in order to win, by the time scenario L occurs, it is already clear that P2 is skilled enough to win a round in which they are counter picking, and therefore, after scenario I, after excluding big mess-ups, P2 is always the winner. But once again, it required P2 to be much more skilled with their character than they should have had to have been in order to get here. In fact, by going over the example, you find, again assuming that no "big mistakes" were made by the players, that by the time the third round is reached, it is already clear that the person facing the MK player (assuming the player isn't using MK also) is more skilled than the MK user. But if the MK has choice of Counter Pick, then unless the non-MK user is significantly more skilled beyond a certain margin (scenario J) then the MK will win anyways.

Let us review. We have confirmed the following:

• The purpose of a "gaming competition" (tournament, etc.) is to find who is/are the most skilled player(s).
• Unlike chess, single rounds are not accurate gauges of skill in the SSB series.
• The "Counter Pick" (CP) system is a system designed to allow more accurate gauging of skill by allowing both players to exploit their opponents' characters' innate weaknesses to other characters or stages, in a sense "leveling" the playing field.
• The character known as "Meta Knight" does not have any true weaknesses to characters, OR stages, and therefore cannot be counter picked.

From this, we can conclude that, in essence, the Counter Pick system does not work on Meta Knight. And because the counter pick system does not work on Meta Knight, by our understanding of both the counter pick system and the reason we have tournaments for games in the first place, we can conclude that the use of MK in Brawl tournaments prevents a proper gauging of skill, and therefore does not allow the true "purpose" of competitive gaming to function as it was meant to.

Now, while writing the list.... I had a little epiphany. This was not my point to begin with, but it may strengthen my argument even more...

The pro-ban side defined the word "broken" to mean:

"A word used to describe an element in a video game that does belong, and is above aspects or mechanics of the game."

I personally prefer it reworded as

"A word used to describe an element in a video game that does belong, because it is above aspects or mechanics of the game.",

but that's just my opinion. Either way;

The counter pick system IS a mechanic of the game. I know people are going to argue this, because it is not a "programed-in" mechanic, but it is still a mechanic. Every rule we put into the game becomes a "mechanic" of the competitively played version of the game. In that sense, playing with items on or off is not the same "game"; I mean this of course not in the sense that it is not the same disk or software, but in the same way that Target Contest is not the same "game" as VS mode, playing with items on is not the same "game" as playing with items off, and playing with Counter Picking is not the same "game" as playing without Counter Picking.

Of course, this is the pro-bans understanding of the term, but I generally agree with it.

 

[lil cj]

^^^Thats a good proposal Threesided
I read most of it and you made some good points
Long story short, its all about skill not the character
You can be beast with any character with the right amount of skill!

My opinion on MK, he has helped devloped the meta game
cause people try to find ways to beat him with their character,
which results in them getting better and developing their character
in the process
.......and MK is just too cool!

Back to pizza lol...

^I love when that happens, lol.
And no, Pizza Hut is amazing. Like....just awesome. I've never, never, never been there and disliked their food. Ever. And I order from there at least once every 2 months.

Pizza Hut is great!
But no one has mentioned Cici's Pizza!
Cici's has a pizza buffet

...and Little Ceasars has 5 $ pizzas
cheaper is always better lol

 

[sasook]

They closed the thread? Or did they delete it? I can't find it.

Regardless, he's not banned from what I heard so... all arguments are null. ._.

>.< I wanted a ban.

 

[lil cj]

Cool MK is here to stay!

 

[ph00tbag]

A page old, but ph00tbag all big chain pizza sucks, tru story, papa johns is p. decent though.

I only mentioned Papa John's. Most other stores are pretty terrible. You're barkers if you think Papa John's is only decent, though.

Best place to get Pizza, though, is Franklin St. Pizza and Pasta. If only because they serve Paulaner Hefeweizen when it's in season.

Edit--
Three Sided: The counterpick argument is really a moot point, because it is not really all that highly valued. Most players, if they're genuinely better, will take the loss on a gimmicky CP (if they lose at all), then just beat you again on a neutral. The CP system can be used to throw off people that don't adapt, but amongst the best players, who can adapt, playing on a gimmicky stage is really no different to them from a neutral, so you might as well play neutrals anyway.

The only real point which can be argued on is the fact that MK's pressure game is the only one of its kind in Brawl. Back a while ago, M2K said frequently and openly that he was the only person playing MK correctly. Now, more people are playing MK correctly, and it's very apparent that the way to play him is much more insidious that previously thought. It's all about using his safe pressure moves to limit all but one option. Very few characters have the options necessary to survive that pressure, let alone fight it. Most characters that can do anything against Metaknight have a strong projectile, and basically can only camp him in order to win.

This is the most important aspect of the MK ban debate, and it's kind of sad that the majority of the debate is centered on sensationalistic things like his recovery. The point that needs to be made is that MK's safe pressure game is either too good to allow, or not good enough to ban. More importantly, is the campy metagame promoted by MK's dominance tolerable by the community?

Ultimately, though, the entire argument is really moot. The decision's entirely up to the SBR now.

 

[sasook]

Cool MK is here to stay!

D:

10disapproves

 

[lil cj]

I just noticed your avatar Ph00tbag lol
I didnt know Samus had a big *** lmao

D:

10disapproves

u have to admit that Mk
is one cool character, even though he's broken lol

Zamus can take him

 

[sasook]

u have to admit that Mk is one cool character

No I don't. I never liked him in this game. X_x

Zamus can take him

So thankful for that.



I still wanted the ban. >.<

Pro-ban had the stronger argument, IMO. I was ready to vote anti-ban before I read both sides of the argument.

 

[ph00tbag]

I just noticed your avatar Ph00tbag lol
I didnt know Samus had a big *** lmao

That's not Samus.

That's C. Viper.

 

[lil cj]

No I don't. I never liked him in this game. X_x



So thankful for that.



I still wanted the ban. >.<

Pro-ban had the stronger argument, IMO. I was ready to vote anti-ban before I read both sides of the argument.

Its hard to believe that under that mask
is just a dark blue Kirby with yellow eyes lol

Now that I think about it, the game
would be more fair without MK.
I wonder....

That's not Samus.

That's C. Viper.

My bad...
Samus' isnt that big lol

Cool Rich Boy is awesome

 

[ThreeSided]

Three Sided: The counterpick argument is really a moot point, because it is not really all that highly valued. Most players, if they're genuinely better, will take the loss on a gimmicky CP (if they lose at all), then just beat you again on a neutral. The CP system can be used to throw off people that don't adapt, but amongst the best players, who can adapt, playing on a gimmicky stage is really no different to them from a neutral, so you might as well play neutrals anyway.

Having to adapt is difficult. It takes skill, and time, and can throw off your play. You're suggesting that the stage played on isn't a big factor? Because that's what it sounds like. The CP system throws people off, yes, but not just thsoe that can't adapt. They'll all have to limit their game having to adapt, and in many cases, they will get pressured into a mistake. The stage that is played on is a huge factor in who win. But like you said, if the player is truly better, then when they lose on a bad CP, they can just CP and take the win, and assuming they had the first round down (which they probably did), then they win once they CP for the third round. There ya go, better player won. But you can't do that against MK. You have to be even better than him than you should have to be in order to win, because you can't CP him properly. That means it's always going to be either a down hill or even battle for MK. And because of this, he'll often win even though he is the less skillful opponent, which nerfs the whole point of competitive gaming.

 

[SuSa]

They had to win first round if they are losing on their opponents CP.

Also CP's matter a LOT. Some people have some tactics that can only be done on a certain stage.

EG:
Diddy Kong's "Suicide Barrels" on Luigi's Mansion (it's legal some places)

 

[NickRiddle]

So... Any chance any of you can record some matches for me if I send you the replay info? I want my set vs. CO18 online ASAP. (PM me, and I'll check back later today.)

 

[Nefarious B]

The CPing argument isn't really a good one imo, either for CPing characters or stages. I mean, I guess I may be weird but it just doesn't surprise me that there is a character out there that beats all the others. As for stages, there are other characters that you can't really CP well. ROB, Wario, and ZSS come to mind, as they each have like one or maybe two bad stages that are legal.

IMO the best argument pro ban has is overcentralization of the metagame, because I do believe that in order to do okay in tournies you need to be able to hang with MK. The possibility that you might just not meet any MKs on your way up the brackets is so remote that people are forced to either play the characters who have a chance at beating him, or lose (there are the "MK slayers" who can overcome their aweful MK matchup but they are very rare). I mean, I'd be lying if I said that my decision to switch from ROB to ZSS wasn't largely caused by their matchups with MK.

 

[FadedImage]

I think MK is overrated.

he's good, but he's not amazing.

saying that you have to be able to hang with MK to be tourney viable isn't MK exclusive.

You have to be able to hang with Snake and Dedede, and increasingly Marth and Falco.

meh, I'm glad MK stays.

 

[Nefarious B]

Same, I think in a game where defensive gayness is most characters' strategies, it's cool there is atleast one character who can be very good offensively (though imo Wario has the potential to be the most all out offensive character out there), even if some MKs choose to be lame anyways.

And I think if you do fine against Snake, DDD, and MK and have no hard counters you are tourney viable, basically. Anyone with a bad MU against DDD is soooo ****ed when it comes to CPing since he's super easy, same goes with MK I guess though I don't think he's that easy.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Am I a bad person for fapping to her?

 

[Zero]

No, welcome to the club.

On another note, I thought your name was "Bridget Player Cadet" and I lol'd. >.<

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

<3 bridget. I'd tap that and I don't care if it's a boy. xD But I think Slayer and Potemkin are better though...
Anyways, I've been trying out ZSS (a lot more actually since I saw some of the textures >.>)... I can't really figure her out that much though. Gonna look here, see if I can up my game.

 

[Zero]

Any texture is welcome except the nude one. It's too badly done for us elitist ZSS mains. We demand quality.

That being said, the Jill Valentine is AMAZING. It's too good.

The best place to look for basic strategy is in SFP's Guide, it's stickied so it's not hard to find.

Me, I only have eyes for femininity. But I like Dizzy too.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yeah, saw that one... Pretty bad, TBH. Jill valentine?

 

[ph00tbag]

Am I a bad person for fapping to her?

If you're just talking about ZSS in Brawl, you're not a bad person, you just have poor taste.

If you're talking about Samus in general, have a party. Samus is hot.

 

[shlike]

this thread never ceases to amaze me

i love being a zss main

 

[mountain_tiger]

Here's what I don't get. A lot of people say that ZSS has one of the biggest learning curves in the game. But really, I didn't find her that hard to pick up at all. The only parts about her that are difficult to learn are how to recover without being gimped, how not to spam side B and DSmash and how to chaingrab. IMO, I'm semi-OK with ZSS, and I managed to learn most of that within 4-5 weeks (compared to Peach which took me 3-4 months lol).

 

[ph00tbag]

Here's what I don't get. A lot of people say that ZSS has one of the biggest learning curves in the game. But really, I didn't find her that hard to pick up at all. The only parts about her that are difficult to learn are how to recover without being gimped, how not to spam side B and DSmash and how to chaingrab. IMO, I'm semi-OK with ZSS, and I managed to learn most of that within 4-5 weeks (compared to Peach which took me 3-4 months lol).

But compare learning ZSS to characters like Kirby, G&W, MK, DDD... Most characters are a lot easier to pick up than ZSS.

In fact, there are several aspects to ZSS that are unconventional. None of her smashes kill, her dsmash is slow and only hits on one side, her grab is slow (always leads to a higher learning curve), and her third jump is her down B (and it has some unique properties that need to be studied). All of these things require getting used to, and most of the workarounds are not readily apparent.

 

[shlike]

according to confucius darkwater

fsmash kills.


On a serious note,

all of zss' ground moves are setups

ALL OF THEM

(unless you count over b but meh)

her playstyle is exclusive to her

where your primary concern is spacing, not getting hit, baiting, punishing, etc

she is a VERY light character your DI has to be GREAT to do well with her, especially against snake, marth, dedede, etc

im not gonna say she's the hardest character to learn but she is most definetly up there.

 

[ph00tbag]

all of zss' ground moves are setups

ALL OF THEM

Except fsmash.

 

[mountain_tiger]

But compare learning ZSS to characters like Kirby, G&W, MK, DDD... Most characters are a lot easier to pick up than ZSS.

I tried learning Kirby, but after around 6 weeks or so I still sucked with him and gave up. I can't really commen on the others, though, so I'll take your word for it.

In fact, there are several aspects to ZSS that are unconventional. None of her smashes kill, her dsmash is slow and only hits on one side, her grab is slow (always leads to a higher learning curve), and her third jump is her down B (and it has some unique properties that need to be studied). All of these things require getting used to, and most of the workarounds are not readily apparent.

Only the thing about smashes not killing and the down B third jump bothered me much. But since I main Peach perhaps I've just gotten used to the idea of a character being totally different lol.

 

[ph00tbag]

I tried learning Kirby, but after around 6 weeks or so I still sucked with him and gave up. I can't really commen on the others, though, so I'll take your word for it.

His playstyle's really intuitive; he's got a very standard basic moveset, so learning one character with a standard moveset means you can pick up Kirby pretty fast.

Only the thing about smashes not killing and the down B third jump bothered me much. But since I main Peach perhaps I've just gotten used to the idea of a character being totally different lol.

That might have something to do with it. You're not stuck on any standard moveset thought process, so you can adapt quickly.

 

[shlike]

have you ever played anyone (or a specific character) so much that you learned how to play the character(s)?

this happened to me with marth

its kind of hilarious

 

[sasook]

Dunno why I'm posting this here, but I feel like I've been accepted by this community so....I'll put it here anyway. xD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CXHu0SH0DM

Hope you guys enjoy.

 

[ph00tbag]

Whatever happened to our community combo video project, anyway?

 

[shlike]

who knows :/

i need to get some recent vids up of me anyway

and so you do phoot

who would make it though i dont have any of the necessary software/hardware

 

[NeoZero]

Well, charby's release like 2 of his own videos, maybe we can just edit it and say it's the "boards".

As for our's, we have the intro done, but we need more video clips, that's why it never got anywhere.

Cake's kinda left us too >.<

 

[Nefarious B]

Nick could make a combo vid by himself out of all the stupid stuff he has online: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmfGERA5A5U&feature=channel_page 2:48 holy ****.

Also, Galeon for best partner ever?

 

[NeoZero]

Wow, just, wow.