Time outs.

Raziek said:

But you can't discretely identify it, so you can't ban it.

/problemnotsolved

Click to expand...

Dark Horse said:

And we also can't identify IDC, but we banned it.

/samethinghere

Click to expand...

Kaffei said:

I don't know man, you haven't explained to me why it's stupid, and the time I did ask you to do so you told me to look in the threads. I'd rather hear from you since you are smarter.

Click to expand...

1. Weakens a tactic that does not need or deserve to be weakened. You have about 1% of tournament matches that even go to time, and you want to weaken the only tactic that really conduces that? Yes, and while we're at it, ban ganon for absolutely no good reason. Timing out is a legitimate strategy that we have legitimized by turning on the timer. The only way to make it an illegitimate strategy is to turn off the timer. But we can't due to tournament time constraints, and we shouldn't because imagine what would happen if neither player was forced to approach, ever-it'd be a battle of wills, because approaching is an inherently disadvantaged position. You claim "brawl is about fighting, not running away!", but this is a completely subjective statement. We play to win here, and if you think your best chance of victory is jumping and spamming dair all day, then go ahead and do it. It clearly isn't game-breaking; ask anyone who's beaten a good MK.
2. Forces characters to run into ****. What do TL, Jiggs, Falco, Samus, and Wario all have in common? They will spend most of the game in the air, can rack damage, but have trouble killing (well, falco and wario are debatable, but scoring a safe kill with wario can be a very, very tedious affair and falco's saving grace is being able to lazer you to 170 and then kill with basically anything). Without this rule, these chars have the advantage that they can sit back and spam their projectile attacks/dair from the air while running away. This is a part of their character design, and strengthens them. With this rule, sooner or later they have to jump in and kill you 3 times. And for some of them, this is really, really hard. Samus starts killing lightweights around 140%; jiggs closer to 200% if she doesn't want to use a move like Fsmash or Rest (both of which have ridiculous amounts of commitment and are ridiculously hard to hit a competent opponent with).
3. Is a surgical entrance to the game. You're telling the game, "Screw what you have to say, the winner is now *insert arbitrary criteria here*". That arbitrary criteria could be anything! Remember, you're not stopping a broken strategy. You're stopping something you don't like. At this point, you set the precedent to allow for anything. Hate ganon? Oh, all right, you can ban him. Hate FD? Fine, ban it. Wanna make the game "who can land the most falcon punches"? Fine, go ahead, let's make that the competitive standard. This is incredibly scrubby
4. CAUSES NEW TIME-OUT "PROBLEMS"! Remember those chars I mentioned earlier? Well, what do all of these chars have in common: Snake, ICs, Diddy Kong. Can you guess it? They have obscenely good ground games, can rack monstrous amounts of damage, and are ridiculously hard to approach. Now if TL gets the lead on Snake, he can hang back and force snake to approach-a position that snake is fairly bad in. With this rule, if TL/Falco/etc. gets the lead, who cares? Snake was on the ground longer, he'll live forever, and he stuffs approaches (which these chars need to kill him) extremely well. Furthermore, I might add that MK is amazing at juggling and edgeguarding and only decent at killing; plus he has a ********, approach-stuffing ground game.

MikeKirby said:

Insentives should be placed to prevent stalling/planking. I'm honestly starting to like the rule BPC made where BOTH players lose at a time out. Or forcefully play out the Sudden Death with a 5 LGL rule or something.

Click to expand...

Can you see if MK is leaving enough vulnerable frames for you to hit him? Realistically not, and if he leaves vulnerable frames, it's not broken, so it's not bannable anyway. If he isn't leaving them, it becomes bannable, but you still can't tell.

Click to expand...

Dark Horse said:

Just attempt to attack him. If the attack doesn't work, they're PPlanking. If it does, then it isn't, and you can keep on brawling

Click to expand...

Dark Horse said:

How excactly is it wrong?

Click to expand...

Dark Horse said:

If the attack doesn't work, they're PPlanking. If it does, then it isn't, and you can keep on brawling

Click to expand...

Raziek said:

Hypothetical example:

He leaves 2, 3 or even like 5 vulnerable frames, and is thus, not perfect planking.

You attempt to hit him, but don't hit him, because you tried on the wrong frame, or you missed.

It's not perfect planking, and your attack did not work. Argument disproven.

Click to expand...

rPSI said:

You do realize that to PPlank unbeatably, you still don't have to do it frame perfect. There is a certain room for error in which you still are in an uncompromisable situation.

Click to expand...

Budget Player Cadet_ said:

All right. The rule aims to stop timing out by making it so that if it goes to time, the player who spent more time in the air loses.
Problems:

1. Weakens a tactic that does not need or deserve to be weakened. You have about 1% of tournament matches that even go to time, and you want to weaken the only tactic that really conduces that? Yes, and while we're at it, ban ganon for absolutely no good reason. Timing out is a legitimate strategy that we have legitimized by turning on the timer. The only way to make it an illegitimate strategy is to turn off the timer. But we can't due to tournament time constraints, and we shouldn't because imagine what would happen if neither player was forced to approach, ever-it'd be a battle of wills, because approaching is an inherently disadvantaged position. You claim "brawl is about fighting, not running away!", but this is a completely subjective statement. We play to win here, and if you think your best chance of victory is jumping and spamming dair all day, then go ahead and do it. It clearly isn't game-breaking; ask anyone who's beaten a good MK.
2. Forces characters to run into ****. What do TL, Jiggs, Falco, Samus, and Wario all have in common? They will spend most of the game in the air, can rack damage, but have trouble killing (well, falco and wario are debatable, but scoring a safe kill with wario can be a very, very tedious affair and falco's saving grace is being able to lazer you to 170 and then kill with basically anything). Without this rule, these chars have the advantage that they can sit back and spam their projectile attacks/dair from the air while running away. This is a part of their character design, and strengthens them. With this rule, sooner or later they have to jump in and kill you 3 times. And for some of them, this is really, really hard. Samus starts killing lightweights around 140%; jiggs closer to 200% if she doesn't want to use a move like Fsmash or Rest (both of which have ridiculous amounts of commitment and are ridiculously hard to hit a competent opponent with).
3. Is a surgical entrance to the game. You're telling the game, "Screw what you have to say, the winner is now *insert arbitrary criteria here*". That arbitrary criteria could be anything! Remember, you're not stopping a broken strategy. You're stopping something you don't like. At this point, you set the precedent to allow for anything. Hate ganon? Oh, all right, you can ban him. Hate FD? Fine, ban it. Wanna make the game "who can land the most falcon punches"? Fine, go ahead, let's make that the competitive standard. This is incredibly scrubby
4. CAUSES NEW TIME-OUT "PROBLEMS"! Remember those chars I mentioned earlier? Well, what do all of these chars have in common: Snake, ICs, Diddy Kong. Can you guess it? They have obscenely good ground games, can rack monstrous amounts of damage, and are ridiculously hard to approach. Now if TL gets the lead on Snake, he can hang back and force snake to approach-a position that snake is fairly bad in. With this rule, if TL/Falco/etc. gets the lead, who cares? Snake was on the ground longer, he'll live forever, and he stuffs approaches (which these chars need to kill him) extremely well. Furthermore, I might add that MK is amazing at juggling and edgeguarding and only decent at killing; plus he has a ********, approach-stuffing ground game.

In short, the rule is scrubby, sets the precedent to ban anything with 1% or more tournament dominance (or, alternatively, whatever the hell we want, which is even worse), creates a host of new problems, and destroys several matchups. It is a terrible rule that makes me ashamed to be a part of a community where some members support it. Calling you both out, TKD and Kadaj.



That first rule was a joke. A particularly bad one. Timing people out is a legitimate strategy. GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEADS PEOPLE! It doesn't need to be weakened or made harder. There is no part of stalling that is broken with the momentary BBR ruleset. At all. Maybe planking, but that hasn't proven itself yet apparently (MMM referred me to a tournament with no LGLs where Kel and OS both attended, planked, and ended up getting 10th or worse place).

So people. Stop saying that "stalling" is a bad thing. It really isn't. If it's the strongest competitive strategy, so be it, that's brawl.

Click to expand...

Kaffei said:

That's better. I can actually understand that instead of "you are stupid".
Another thing that I realized is that what if it's an MK ditto with an air/ground time rule. That would be just so stupid.

Click to expand...

Budget Player Cadet_ said:

So have I earned the right to say "the ground time limit is ********, and those who support it are ignorant, misguided, scrubby, or stupid"? I think I honestly have.

Click to expand...

Budget Player Cadet_ said:

So have I earned the right to say "the ground time limit is ********, and those who support it are ignorant, misguided, scrubby, or stupid"? I think I honestly have.

Click to expand...

Kaffei said:

No. Just explain to them like you just did instead of being provocative.

Click to expand...

Mikachiru said:

^ This. No need to be rude, BPC...

Click to expand...