The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

xDD-Master · May 1, 2011

Just like to point out that playing competitive Smash is a double standard by itself.

Yika <3
I guess you're right :B

Grim Tuesday · May 1, 2011

That... doesn't even make sense. Lol.

And I don't mean that in a "You're wrong" kind of way. I mean that sentence just... doesn't work. xD

Ghostbone · May 1, 2011

xDD-Master said:
The situation you described is a somewhat wrong comparison. You can't compare Planking & Infiniting. But you can compare planking with grabbing. Planking actually is the action / the cause. What happens when you try to fight against it?: You probably get gimped.
Grabbing is the action / the cause, when you get grabbed: You probably get infinited.

No you can compare them...
Being infinited isn't the result, losing your stock is the result, infiniting is the action, or the cause of losing your stock.
Grabbing is part of infiniting, like grabbing the ledge is part of planking.

And planking is obviously also the action, when you go off-stage you will always take damage (against MK planking perfectly).

Obviously there's differences between the tactics, and limiting planking is much easier than banning infinites, since banning infinites needs a rule that could be a little vague. (Though there apparently isn't a problem with the stalling rule being vague so that isn't really an excuse)

xDD-Master · May 1, 2011

Grim Tuesday said:
That... doesn't even make sense. Lol.

And I don't mean that in a "You're wrong" kind of way. I mean that sentence just... doesn't work. xD

Yeah, missed a word :x
Don't know if it makes more sense now lol

You should focus on competitive and smash to get my point.

ghostbone said:
Obviously there's differences between the tactics

So why do we even discuss XD?
If it's not similar, so we should'nt compare it.

You can compare everything if you really want to and find similarities, but that doesn't make it a good comperison automatically.

Grim Tuesday · May 1, 2011

No... that still doesn't work.

You do know what a double standard is, right?

Oxymoron =/= Double Standard

xDD-Master · May 1, 2011

Grim Tuesday said:
No... that still doesn't work.

You do know what a double standard is, right?

Oxymoron =/= Double Standard

Well I'm not sure.

What I thought is the double standard, that we accept it to play an uncompetitive game, while we (try to) play it in the most (Or at least a very) competitive way.

Grim Tuesday · May 1, 2011

Trying to play an uncompetitive game as competitively as possible is not a double standard.

[FBC] ESAM · May 1, 2011

A double standard is more like hypocrisy than oxymorons.

"Oh we ban something because it is game breaking"

"Well this thing has the same criteria as that, so it should be banned too, right?

"No, we aren't going to ban that."

That's a double standard in terms of smash.

Grim Tuesday · May 1, 2011

What ESAM said is correct.

xDD-Master · May 1, 2011

Ok. I know that already, but I thought this would be a double standard, too, I guess I was wrong

But then, were is the problem xD?

Ghostbone · May 1, 2011

xDD-Master said:
So why do we even discuss XD?
If it's not similar, so we should'nt compare it.

Because they are similar in a lot of ways.

Mostly in the way that they affect match-ups.
MK's planking makes a lot of match-ups heavily in his favour or un-winnable.
D3's infinites make the DK and Bowser (he can ledge-infinite Bowser right?) un-winnable.

There are also cases where the tactics aren't broken.
G&W's planking isn't broken against most characters.
IC's infinites don't break most match-ups.

And limiting/banning the tactics would improve character diversity overall
The problem would be that we limit every character's planking and not infinites.....

Though I think I agree with ESAM really, banning infinites has problems with enforcement, easier to leave them legal. (and not have a double standard of banning some over others)

John12346 · May 1, 2011

What exactly IS wrong with using a double standard, as long as we're also using certain criteria; mainly the skill barrier, among others, for banning...?

Clarification: I'm not supporting such a thing just yet, because I'm still researching it, but I got curious.

xDD-Master · May 1, 2011

Who ever said we should ban any infinites? o_O

All Infinites that are in Brawl atm are totally OK.

Grim Tuesday · May 1, 2011

Just like non-MK planking.

Ghostbone · May 1, 2011

John12346 said:
What exactly IS wrong with using a double standard, as long as we're also using certain criteria; mainly the skill barrier, among others...?

Well, depending on the criteria it might not be a double standard.

Though the amount of 'skill' something takes shouldn't have an effect on whether it should be legal. (especially since that skill is usually only tech skill, which just requires practice on your own)
That is unless of course something is impossible for a person to do because it's so difficult. (in which case a tactic wouldn't need to be banned, as it has no effect on the metagame anyway)

For example, banning IC's f-throw chaingrab because it has the same timing on every character (afaik) is not good reasoning. (especially when you leave all their other chaingrabs legal, just because they take 'more skill')

John12346 · May 1, 2011

Well, that's not exactly what I meant. You could just move the skill barrier around so it covers a level of complexity in the inputs that keeps ICs Fthrow CGs legal but not Dedede's infinite on DK.

But anyway... what makes you say that the skill barrier isn't a good reason for ignoring the double standard when banning something?

I'm still not saying I support it yet, but I'd like to see the counterargument to it.

Ghostbone · May 1, 2011

John12346 said:
Well, that's not exactly what I meant. You could just move the skill barrier around so it covers a level of complexity in the inputs that keeps ICs Fthrow CGs legal but not Dedede's infinite on DK.

But anyway... what makes you say that the skill barrier isn't a good reason for ignoring the double standard when banning something?

I'm still not saying I support it yet, but I'd like to see the counterargument to it.

I meant that the skill barrier makes it not a double standard.... kinda, I was just showing why it's bad in general I guess? Also who gets to decide the difficulty of an action?

Anyway, a double standard would be something more like, banning D3's infinite against DK, and not banning Sheik's chain on FD against Ganon.
Or creating rules to keep specific stages legal, like banning the MK drill-rush glitch on Halberd, homing attack stall on FD. And not doing that for other stages, e.g. banning rudder camping on Pirate Ship.
(Not saying any of those should be banned anyway but if they were it would create a double standard)

I don't think there's any way to work around those legitimately.

Maharba the Mystic · May 1, 2011

planking is gay, infinites are gay. but at least this discussion isn't actually gonna matter. the only member who is even talking this with us is esam (and tech chase was for a lil bit but looks like he's gone now) and esam is only one of the people with a vote in the bbrrc. plus his viewpoint on this is clear (unless im mistaken what you imply)

he doesn't support planking because it wrecks this game and makes stupid to play and causes everyone to switch to metaknight so that it becomes a who gets first hit>go plank for 8 minutes.

he does support infinites because the few match ups they apply too can still be hype and fun to watch as the player with disadvantage can still win by avoiding grabs.

btw lol at grim telling people they make bad comparisons (from the guy who tried to compare snake's utilt to infinites. lololololololol)

[FBC] ESAM · May 1, 2011

I don't exactly think everybody goes MK, but yeah the game degenerates quickly...as opposed to infinites where somebody can just CP a different character (Doesn't have to be MK).

But yeah, other than that you are correct.

Orion* · May 1, 2011

kyokoro_pamuyo said:
If you just lowered the LGL, you can just lower the infinite limit.
Having it at 300% is pretty much like allowing 80 Ledgegrabs.

I lollled

but it's true

Infinites can stop at like 150% it should kill by then

xDD-Master said:
You can compare everything if you really want to and find similarities, but that doesn't make it a good comperison automatically.

I don't think the people you are arguing with will understand that

#HBC | Red Ryu · May 1, 2011

I normally don't support mob voting to remove a stage unless it is clear a large majority of people want to remove it and can support it being removed.

I see this with PTAD and Pipes and think people can justify it. Japes and pirate ship would require me to see if the thing that people claim are broken.

For questionable stages I would go to mob rule and see what people wanted, which seems like PTAD and Pipes have overwhelming amount who want it gone.

The issues with this approach is, are people not thinking and overeacting? In that case I would ask TOs and people who are deemed qualified to talk about it and try to come to a concensous.

For PTAD and Pipes I would be confident insaying people saying they should be banned are right, Japes and Pirate Ship idk, I usually keep an open mind so I would want to see and talk about what is broken there.

Reizilla · May 1, 2011

The whole sponsor thing is a terrible reason and pretty much as bad as Xyro coming in and saying "It is what it is because I think so." The fact that you're trying to pass that as a legitimate cop-out is just... embarrassing.

#HBC | Red Ryu · May 1, 2011

Both are done for different reasons, one is for consistency while the other is, "because I said so"

[FBC] ESAM · May 1, 2011

OK, so we just say so.

Happy now? I give you our legitimate reasons and you don't like them, so you can go **** yourself. If you aren't going to listen to what I say as a legit reason, NOT some stupid BS, I'm gonna stop reading your posts because you are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

Reizilla · May 1, 2011

So about those sponsors... who are they and what makes Brawl so appealing to them?

If you can impose arbitrary rules for the sake of SPONSORS, something that's probably not gonna happen or would've happened anyway, but not for the sake of a better game, that's just ridiculous.

Orion* · May 1, 2011

ESAM said:
OK, so we just say so.

Happy now? I give you our legitimate reasons and you don't like them, so you can go **** yourself. If you aren't going to listen to what I say as a legit reason, NOT some stupid BS, I'm gonna stop reading your posts because you are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

hype, esam goes innn

But real talk

I do partially agree with the above post- makes sense to do it for a better game instead of one appealing to sponsors. However, I truly believe in this situation it's relatively the same so I don't see why people are complaining this much lol.

Reizilla · May 1, 2011

The point is that there are plenty of other changes you could make for a better game. Possibly even having an even larger impact, MK's LGL aside.

#HBC | Red Ryu · May 1, 2011

I'd rather have a consistent stage list, rather than every TO doing what they want at nationals, APEX is an international sue me.

I really would hate having some placing using FD only and others using Nova Scotta stage lists. I would rather have a consistent base to play on, which is probably why I was in favor of strong arming the community.

Maharba the Mystic · May 2, 2011

red ryu..... your avi is so old school amazing!

Supreme Dirt · May 2, 2011

Just popping up to lol at the idea of D3 being offensive.

LOOOOL.

He is easily one of the most defensive characters in the game.

Only difference between Dedede defense is he uses his strengths, his grab game and zoning, to defend. Pit uses his ledge game, which is a pretty good ledge-game for a not-metaknight character, to play defensively.

Anyone who thinks Dedede is offensive knows less about this game than I do, and I still have a lot to learn. (although I am learning quite a bit lately)

Maharba the Mystic · May 2, 2011

.... sorry dirt, but pit and DDD are completely differant in how they are played. that is just one example. not to mention pit can play a good offense, just watch koolaid

Supreme Dirt · May 2, 2011

I know they are played completely differently. I was comparing two completely different ways of playing defensively. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. You can't arbitrarily say "stuff involving grabs is offensive".

xDD-Master · May 2, 2011

Supreme Dirt you have absolutely NO IDEA about how DDD is supposed to play.
LOL at DDD defensive... lol'd so hard.

In a lot of Match-Ups he will get destroyed if he is defensive.
Olimar, Falco, Fox, Wolf, hell even Samus & link, everyone that outcamps him which probably is half of the cast.

But YOU SHOULD NEVER COMPARE DDDS GRAB/INFINITE TO PLANKING ANYWAY!!1111!!!

Alphicans · May 2, 2011

DDD is a very defensive character, and you should feel bad for saying otherwise. Getting camped doesn't mean you go aggro.

Supreme Dirt · May 2, 2011

xDD.

If the only form of defensive play that you can fathom involves planking or projectiles.

Then you are a bad player, do not understand this game in the slightest, and should not be posting in this thread.

xDD-Master · May 2, 2011

Alphicans said:
DDD is a very defensive character, and you should feel bad for saying otherwise. Getting camped doesn't mean you go aggro.

We probably have different definitions of playing defensive.

For me playing defensive means you let your oppenant come to you. Thats not the case in a lot of DDDs Match-Ups. You're the one that needs to approach.

By saying that I didn't say you have to play aggro at all. You still need to play calm and smart, not rushing into everything.

But that can be said about nearly every character in Brawl.

@Suprime: No.

Alphicans · May 2, 2011

That's pretty much the definition of camping.

Camping = defensive but defensive doesn't only = camping

I think marth is a good example of being a good defensive character without much camping ability. He can play aggro, but he has great defensive options (counter, upB for instance) and capitalizes greatly on his opponent acting first (fair for countering).

xDD-Master · May 2, 2011

Well, ok.
After your definition, D3 indeed is a defensive character, because he has good defensive tools/options, even though he can't be played campy.
Did I understand you correctly?
I can agree with that and be fine with it

He needs to approach and start an action (The grab) anyway to get the infinite ~

Life · May 2, 2011

ESAM said:
OK, so we just say so.

I'm late, but do you know how long I asked BRC members (before you joined) to cite their reasons for the stagelist, even if it was literally just that, and got ignored/ridiculed for it?

-_____-

I'd comment on more-recent stuff but it is outside my expertise.

Ghostbone · May 4, 2011

xDD-Master said:
He needs to approach and start an action (The grab) anyway to get the infinite ~

So does MK with planking >.>
He has to hit you to get the lead in the first place.

The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

Smash Champion

Smash Legend

Smash Master

Smash Champion

Smash Legend

Smash Champion

Smash Legend

Smash Legend

Smash Legend

Smash Champion

Smash Master

Smash Master

Smash Champion

Smash Legend

Smash Master

Smash Master

Smash Master

Smash Master

Smash Legend

Smash Researcher

Red Fox Warrior

The Old Lapras and the Sea

Red Fox Warrior

Smash Legend

The Old Lapras and the Sea

Smash Researcher

The Old Lapras and the Sea

Red Fox Warrior

Smash Master

King of the Railway

Smash Master

King of the Railway

Smash Champion

Smash Hero

King of the Railway

Smash Champion

Smash Hero

Smash Champion

Smash Hero

Smash Master

Information

Network