Some of the most competitive regions in the states are in favor of a ban. Obviously, people do care or this wouldn't be up for discussion. The ban feels warranted for most as it IS considered too good. Bum is somewhere around #1 in his region and he mains DK. Any 6 year old could pick up D3 and smash the c-stick (set to grab) for an easy win. The whole point of playing a competitive game in the first place is to test each's skills against another's. There is no skill involved in camping for a throw on the character with the biggest non-tether grab range. Counterpicking is an important aspect of the game and anyone should be prepared to switch to another character if yours fares too badly against another, though in no case are said match ups impossible to win. D3 breaks that concept.
Really, it's
impossible to win against D3 as any of these 6 characters? Really? Ever?
As opposed to, say, Sheik's F-tilt lock on Fox which is only
near impossible to win, but that's OK, right? I mean, you only need
two of them for a guaranteed win, so it shouldn't be banned.
There's really no skill in spamming Sheik's F-tilt either. There's timing, but there's timing for chaingrabbing as well.
And so we agree to disagree. A lot of people do think it is indeed too good.
A lot of people do not.
...And? You couldn't possibly be advocating the ban of stages because D3 would hence become the best character in the game
. So what if he is? Why is his position in the tier list an incentive to apply such measures?
Stop talking, please. You're being <insert word here> and you know it.
Make that 13. There are quite a few that do not do all that badly against D3. So again, why not limit the metagame to these 14 (w/ d3)?
Because D3 is not the only reason why walk-offs are banned.
D3's chaingrab is not percentage dependent, Falco's is. Thus, he cannot CG people across the stage like D3 can. And no lol, you can't carry someone across the stage with MK's d-tilt.
Did I or did I not mention the various jab locks in the game? Also, laser locks. I believe MK's D-tilt works the same way laser locks work.
Falco's CG is percentage dependent, but it's still a grab -> death at those %s. In other words, walk-offs would limit the metagame to locks and chaingrabs to death.
Walk-off overcentralizes the metagame on characters which can walk-off combo you to death. Therefore, they are banned. D3 doesn't overcentralize the game on himself as he can only infinite 6 characters.
Sheik's F-tilt lock lasts till 70~80%. That does not make the match up impossible to win for fox. It simply makes it pretty **** hard. There's a difference between hard countering a character and rendering one absolutely unviable for competitive play.
So pretty **** hard isn't enough to ban but "almost impossible" is? Where does the threshold stand? 120%? 100? 150%? No, really, where does your arbitrary threshold stand?
At 70-80%, Sheik Upsmashes, you'll probably die. But hey, it's only slightly worse than D3's infinite, so there's nothing wrong with it, now is there?
Again, where does your arbitray threshold stand? Where does something go from "pretty **** hard" to "must be banned"?
No chaining two d-throws in a row. Simple. And hey, you get a free f-tilt ;]. B-throw deals somewhere around 18% anyways, I'm sure the D3s can cope.
And this is fair, how? After all, 4 of the Big 6 Suck can be running chaingrabbed.
...D3 WILL win every single time. Seibrik sent out a challenge to anyone who would face him and manage to not get grabbed once a stock. 1 grab = 1 stock, unless the D3 sucks llamas' balls. You can even set your c-stick to grab to make it that much easier. Fox vs Pika isn't unwinnable, and afaik, the CG only goes up to 70%. That's no 999%.
Last time I checked, you do not need 999% to knock off a stock. Last time I checked, many people also employ a much lower ceiling before you have to stop infinites.
