10 Min Timer

[sunshade]

Its as slippery a slope as counterpicking stages is.

 

[Tesh]

Changing the rules between games isn't quite the same as picking a stage. Although PS1 is practically counterpicking -3 minutes.

 

[sunshade]

Compare the difference between smash if only played on Final Destination and smash if only played on Battle Field.

Then compare the difference between smash played with 6 minutes and smash with 10.

I don't see how they are different, both are fundamental parts of the game. You need a stage and time while optional is a (reasonably speaking) needed part of competitive play.

 

[Tesh]

Counterpicking stages is a change of :
-where you play
-how you play

Counterpicking the timer is a change of:
-how MUCH you play


It doesn't seem like a bad idea to me, but it seems similar to counterpicking the stocks down to 2.

 

[sunshade]

I dont see any fundamental issue with counterpicking the stock down to 2. In my opinion the game should be played at 2 stocks 5 minute timer due to the defensive nature of brawl.

(I wont be try to change the status quo for something so arbitrary and minor any time soon but in my own ideal ruleset it would be lower)

 

[Player-1]

illmatic is my hero

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Someone mentioned it earlier and it actually struck me as an interesting idea but what if an additional rule was added into the ruleset?

"The loser of a round in addition to getting to select his character second, select a stage (which has not been banned by his opponent), may also choose to add or remove 2 minutes from the timer."

The idea of adding or removing time tickled my fancy. If people are fine with adding time I don't see the issue with removing a bit. A longer or shorter timer does not make the game more or less skillful it just amplifies the urgency of approach.

btw that 2DX video blew my mind across the room.

This sounds interesting...

Counterpicking the general rules? Some might say its a slippery slope.

Well, you can counterpick stages to your advantage...


Something just hit me. Stages are a huge deal... What if, when one player counterpicked the stage, the other player counterpicked part of the settings? Time limit (up to 2 minutes difference on either end), stock count (up to one stock more or less), and if we want to have a huge increase in the amount a player has to adapt to, damage ratio (up to .2 or .3 more or less). That sounds really, really cool...

 

[Tesh]

Screwing with the damage ratio is kind of cool, though on a match by match basis it seems a bit of a heavy change. Lowering it adds more chaingrabs and combos, raising it removes alot of chaingrabs (DDDs eventually just becomes a tech chase setup on the entire cast) and combos but everyone kills earlier.

It would be interesting if there were some research done on altered damage ratio. Who knows maybe the game is a little bit better without DDD/falco/pika chaingrabs.

 

[sunshade]

Something just hit me. Stages are a huge deal... What if, when one player counterpicked the stage, the other player counterpicked part of the settings? Time limit (up to 2 minutes difference on either end), stock count (up to one stock more or less), and if we want to have a huge increase in the amount a player has to adapt to, damage ratio (up to .2 or .3 more or less). That sounds really, really cool...

I would be hesitant on changing the damage ratio. Changing the damage ratio changes the fundamental physics and play of the game in numerous ways.

You play a 2 stock 5 minute match the same as a 3 stock 8 minute match. The only real differences being that in a 2 stock match being gimped or messing up your recovery are far more detrimental to your chances of victory.

If you change the damage ratio suddenly many characters access combo ability and set ups. In addition many characters weaknesses in terms of damage racking or kills become far more polarized.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

It would be interesting if there were some research done on altered damage ratio. Who knows maybe the game is a little bit better without DDD/falco/pika chaingrabs.

Minor note: Falco's CG is not game altering, so him not having one would not matter much. The CG is more of a good way to get from 0%-60%+ easily. He racks up the other 140% before killing someone in other ways easily enough. Not getting a free 60% wouldn't hurt him too much I say. DDD would change many a match-ups against him I feel. And, pikachu I have no idea about. I have not messed with pika's CG enough.

On topic: I have wondered the exact same thing about ratio altering. Does anyone have any idea how this has been applied?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I would be hesitant on changing the damage ratio. Changing the damage ratio changes the fundamental physics and play of the game in numerous ways.

You play a 2 stock 5 minute match the same as a 3 stock 8 minute match. The only real differences being that in a 2 stock match being gimped or messing up your recovery are far more detrimental to your chances of victory.

If you change the damage ratio suddenly many characters access combo ability and set ups. In addition many characters weaknesses in terms of damage racking or kills become far more polarized.

Well yes, that's the point. It forces players to learn more about the game, adapt to more facets of the game, and overall gives the game a far higher learning curve. In the same way that allowing PS2 forces you to deal with lowered gravity and traction, allowing RC forces you to deal with stage movement that can kill you if you don't take care, and allowing Norfair forces you to deal with hazard manipulation, changing the damage ratio makes the player who knows more about the game in all of its facets win. You can't rely on knowing matchups at one damage ratio, you have to rely on knowing several of them. Plus, all that really changes are chaingrabs, the very few true combos in the game, kill %s, and DI strings. Doesn't force you to completely relearn your character unless you're someone like Sheik or DDD, and even then it's not as big as one might think.

You would, of course, have to investigate to make sure that a certain damage ratio doesn't, say, give DDD an infinite or shortstep chaingrab on the entire cast...

EDIT: Yeah, I'm now 100% convinced this should be looked in to. Just think of what we've been ignoring for brawl as a competitive game! Handicaps, damage ratios, entire other game modes... Brawl is an incredible competitive game, but most of that ridiculous depth has been ignored by our short-sightedness regarding modes of play!

EDIT2: Tested against AI

DDD CG

0.9
Standing infinite on DK still there
No CG on MK
No CG on luigi (at least, I couldn't get it)
Could normal CG Ike, Snake... pretty sure it works normally

0.8
As above

1.1
Could not cg Mario at all
Could still CG snake
could still infinite DK...


Shouldn't have to worry about raised damage ratios, as those make the CG harder/more impossible. Lowered damage ratios hardly matter at 0.9 and 0.8.

Falco CG

1.1
CG lasts far less long on everyone...

0.9
Able to walking CG ganon to 110%, MK to 90%... this could be a problem.

0.8
Able to walking CG MK to around 130%.

In short, raising the damage ratio: no problem. Lowering it makes falco's CG potentially very, VERY problematic.

 

[Tesh]

I'm all for entire tournaments to test different damage ratios, but I don't think it should be done mid match. It is a pretty major change to the way every single move interacts with each player. What if I wanted to counterpick you into Brawl+ for match 2? Sure it would technically take skill and knowledge to do well in vBrawl and Brawl+, but that doesn't make it appealing at all.

 

[Life]

I'm all for entire tournaments to test different damage ratios, but I don't think it should be done mid match. It is a pretty major change to the way every single move interacts with each player. What if I wanted to counterpick you into Brawl+ for match 2? Sure it would technically take skill and knowledge to do well in vBrawl and Brawl+, but that doesn't make it appealing at all.

Holy crap, this would be amazing as a side event.

Game 1: vBrawl, strike from entire stagelist, use that stage for whole set
Game 2/3: CP codesets.

It would be a pain to set up but the results would be hilarious.

There's also the option to hide damage percentages IIRC, what if a tournament used that? (Of course, you'd need a new tiebreaker...)

 

[Enzo]

Yeah, I'm just gonna re-peat what I, (And now BPC and Mic) said.

Why are time-outs a bad thing? Every match doesn't HAVE to end by stock, that's the whole point of the timer.

You have to justify a reason to tack a potential 6-10 minutes on per set, or there isn't much reason to change it.

Note: "Bawwww I don't like timeouts", "MK too good" and "My character has a match-up that goes to time where I lose." are not good answers. If you change it for any of those reasons, you're arbitrarily buggering with game balance.

why is marth's grab infinite on earthbound and D3's infinite chaingrab banned then? I'm pretty sure just like how the timer "came with the game", these ifnites did also

 

[Raziek]

They're banned at MLG and some tournaments because people want a crowd-pleasing game.

They should NEVER be banned under any circumstances, but they are.

 

[sunshade]

They are banned because people are scrubs. It is a powerful shame that MLG put bans onto these legitimate techniques because it allows people an excuse to cave into public demand for the removal of that which is fine.

 

[HelpR]

Those bans affect less then 1% of the matches happening in any brawl tourney.

Seriously. Marth vs lucas/ness happens so rarely it's ridiculous, and that's because lucas/ness really arent tourney viable.

There's no reason to really remove the ban on the infinite, as it affects such a small number of matches, as well as making a pair of characters who are barely tourney viable, slightly more viable for tournament use, and the character who is prejudiced already has a rather steep matchup against both characters, with a garuanteed Fsmash out GR, his infinite is really overkill.

Lucas and ness have many more problems as far as matchups go unfortunately, and they're not gonna be leaving LT anytime soon, with this ban present or not

If you want to go after an infinite that affects more of the overall metagame, D3s smallstep on DK or bowser is more advisable.

 

[sunshade]

If we are going to be banning things for the sake of character viability then we should ban metaknight from using the special button againts everyone in E tier or lower.

Metaknight already has an incredibly advantageous match-up, allowing him to use his specials is really just over kill.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

why is marth's grab infinite on earthbound and D3's infinite chaingrab banned then? I'm pretty sure just like how the timer "came with the game", these ifnites did also

They're banned at MLG and some tournaments because people want a crowd-pleasing game.

They should NEVER be banned under any circumstances, but they are.

This. HEY GUYS, BANNING INFINITES IS SCRUBBY. PAY ATTENTION.

If you're willing to ban DDD's/Marth's infinites for the purpose of character viability, then I demand that you ban Blizzard vs. Ganon, and samus's missiles and Zair against Ike and Ganon, and Falco's lazer against Ike and Ganon, and...

The precedent it sets applies to so many other things. It's bad, and those who advocate it should feel bad.

 

[Enzo]

This. HEY GUYS, BANNING INFINITES IS SCRUBBY. PAY ATTENTION.

If you're willing to ban DDD's/Marth's infinites for the purpose of character viability, then I demand that you ban Blizzard vs. Ganon, and samus's missiles and Zair against Ike and Ganon, and Falco's lazer against Ike and Ganon, and...

The precedent it sets applies to so many other things. It's bad, and those who advocate it should feel bad.

Good stuff BPC, youre probably one of the best posters of SWF history, i mean seriously some rules like the ones i stated are outrageous and should only be illegal if you ban all the top tiers extremely easy approaches on ganon

 

[Teh Future]

this weekend the timer was accidentally set to 9 mins without the players noticing.

the match proceeded to go to time lol

 

[Life]

^LOL nice! I take it you still counted the matches though?

 

[SpiritX]

I'd be willing to run away for 2 more minutes.

Lol yeah.

I see more plank and stuff, but if i remember correctly japanesse players use 10 minutes. D:

 

[Tesh]

Yup, japan plays 10 minutes, they don't use stages like RC and pokemon stadium , they don't play for money and they STILL camp like hell.

 

[Raziek]

Yup, japan

Fixed that for you.

 

[Enzo]

Lol yeah.

I see more plank and stuff, but if i remember correctly japanesse players use 10 minutes. D:

So what if the japanese use 10 mins? It's not like we should kneel and accept all of their rules.

 

[sunshade]

Wait the Japanese don't play for money? What is wrong with them?

 

[Tesh]

Its illegal to play for money so they just pay a venue fee and play for honor/bragging rights. Thats what I heard when they were interviewed at Apex.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Good stuff BPC, youre probably one of the best posters of SWF history, i mean seriously some rules like the ones i stated are outrageous and should only be illegal if you ban all the top tiers extremely easy approaches on ganon

Uh... Yeah. Think of the precedent you set. Why are you banning something? What criteria are you using?
You are banning something either:
-Because you don't like it
-Because it makes a matchup unwinnable.

Now if it's the former, I can justify banning anything like that. ANYTHING! FD, Olimar, G&W's bair, Metaknight, parts of MK's moveset, any stage, any tactic, any character, ANYTHING!
If it's the latter, it forces us to follow through on the precedent and ban anything that is similarly matchup-warping. For example, MK's tornado completely abuses Ganon, CF, and several other low tiers. Ban that in that matchup. Marth's range KILLS low tiers, ban marth. Essentially, the precedent you set with rules like that is ridiculously stupid. In banning infinite CGs, you are either saying "it's all right to ban whatever we want" (Worst possible thing for a metagame's survival) or "We ban everything that swings a matchup (very, very bad, as it forces you to ban so many things it's not even funny).

Chaingrab limitations are scrubby and should only be accepted if everything that makes a matchup unwinnable is removed from the game.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

according to you, what makes a stage ban worthy?

 

[z00ted]

Getting wayyy off topic, like I said this would.

 

[-LzR-]

When it comes to Jebus, things always go waaayyyy out of hands.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

according to you, what makes a stage ban worthy?

Let's see here...
-Excessive randomness that you does not effect all characters equally, that you cannot react to, and effectively changes the course of gameplay (Warioware, debatably Pictochat)
-Overcentralizing tactics
-Being Mario Bros (this one is weak, but come on guys-even if the stage is competitively legitimate, competing there is just something too different to competing anywhere else in the game; unlike stages such as PS2, Norfair, or PTAD, important skills like spacing and zoning are made almost completely irrelevant; abusing the hazards is the only skill left on that stage)

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Let's say that no matter what the timer is, players are going to continue timing other players out. If you say that this is a viable strategy and that everyone should be abusing it, what happens if everyone does start abusing it? The very thing you put in the rule set to help tournaments run on time is now going to make them run longer than they should.

 

[Raziek]

I am NOT amused by the idiocy in the statement you just made.

 

[Tesh]

If you properly schedule your tournament to allow for timeouts, you won't have an issue when people time out.

That is...until metaknights start timing people out at 0% without either player landing a hit. As well as the 1 stock rematch. This is why items should be on. To make sure that someone randomly gets hit and has to approach.

 

[Zatchiel]

This is why items should be on. To make sure that someone randomly gets hit and has to approach.

I'm sigging this, it's too true.

Also, Ill is right with the off-topic dicsussion going down time to time

We also have a definite lot of tourney***s.

 

[HelpR]

I'm sigging this, it's too true.

Also, Ill is right with the off-topic dicsussion going down time to time

We also have a definite lot of tourney***s.

tourney***s? on my smashboards? D:


Also, planking is a legitimate strat, just an annoying and boring strategy, similar to turtling in other fighters.

Also, jebus. Stop posting please. you're a frikkin idiot and have no clue how to debate in favor of your own points.

your suggestion on what would happen if everyone started planking? It REALLY doesn't help your argument in favor of a 10 min timer.

Planking is a legitimate strategy, however, it's a really BORING one, and making the timer longer is a horrid idea because if people DO plank, it'll waste more time

Also, can you please make your arguments clearer? I had to reread your statement like 4 times before I could begin to comprehend what it meant, and even now i'm kinda confused. Are you suggesting that the timer helps to promote planking? Because, yes, that's true. But do you know what else the timer promotes?

That people actually approach. If one side approaches something HAPPENS.

With no timer, both players can sit back until the other one gets impatient and approaches, particularly if neither character has a safe long range attack.

Jeez.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

tourney***s? on my smashboards? D:


Also, planking is a legitimate strat, just an annoying and boring strategy, similar to turtling in other fighters.

Also, jebus. Stop posting please. you're a frikkin idiot and have no clue how to debate in favor of your own points.

your suggestion on what would happen if everyone started planking? It REALLY doesn't help your argument in favor of a 10 min timer.

Planking is a legitimate strategy, however, it's a really BORING one, and making the timer longer is a horrid idea because if people DO plank, it'll waste more time

Also, can you please make your arguments clearer? I had to reread your statement like 4 times before I could begin to comprehend what it meant, and even now i'm kinda confused. Are you suggesting that the timer helps to promote planking? Because, yes, that's true. But do you know what else the timer promotes?

That people actually approach. If one side approaches something HAPPENS.

With no timer, both players can sit back until the other one gets impatient and approaches, particularly if neither character has a safe long range attack.

Jeez.

All I am saying is that once people start realizing that this strategy is almost unbeatable (unless there is a significant skill gap between the players), they are going to either pick up MK and time other people out or just let the match go to time which is the smart thing to do. Let's be serious, once the MK has the stock lead against you, you are pretty much ****ed. the best thing you can do is spam projectiles in hopes that they will eventually approach. If the match does go to time, You most likely were not going to beat this strategy either way so you might as well make the tournament last longer in the hopes that eventually, they create a better rule set.

 

[-LzR-]

You just said MK is good and you are correct but you still fail