Apex 2013 Smash 64 January 11-13th, 2013 Singles Bracket is now up

[SuPeRbOoM]

looks like I was completely removed from registration...? okay..?

 

[Olikus]

lol why would you not do that? It makes all the sense in the world. That's just a given. If BOTH players want to play one way, why wouldn't you let them? Example would be me and tank doing our hyrule-banned thing

thanks dingus + wintergreen, dingus you make a good point and I'll take it under consideration.

I might not have understood the rule then. But it looked like if both players wanna play on Mushroom Kingdom they should be allowed to that. Which is ****ing stupid. If its to agree on the one of the legal stages than its ofc a good rule =) I guess I just misunderstood.

 

[clubbadubba]

^^its the former, and its still probably a good rule.

 

[Olikus]

wut. but why? Shold people be allowed to use bad rules? Shoudnt rules trumph bad descision? isnt it why we have rules? So it shall be a tourney with the best competitive ruleset?

If people can play on any stage, then people can play with items and handicap as well. Why is MK as a tourney stage more legit than a fan?

 

[clubbadubba]

its only legal if both players agree...

We have a ruleset for those cases when players can't agree, and to save time on 2 players discussing what ruleset they are playing by at length before the match even begins. The legal stages are the minimum stages that you have no choice but to accept as playable options. If both players agree to go to another stage, I can't think of a reason to have a problem with that.

Besides, enforcing strict adherence to the ruleset is very difficult if both players agree . They could just play it out under their rules before the actual tourney match, and then agree to throw the match to whoever won under their agreed upon ruleset. 5 suicides <<<<<< a match on mushroom kingdom. I suppose the other option is to DQ both players if they do it, but that is also worse than a match on MK. TO's aren't really involved in matches unless one player raises a complaint anyway, so this rule was kind of already in effect. The only real difference now is that the loser can't go back on his gentleman's agreement and complain that they played on an illegal stage.

 

[Olikus]

its only legal if both players agree...

We have a ruleset for those cases when players can't agree, and to save time on 2 players discussing what ruleset they are playing by at length before the match even begins. The legal stages are the minimum stages that you have no choice but to accept as playable options. If both players agree to go to another stage, I can't think of a reason to have a problem with that.

Besides, enforcing strict adherence to the ruleset is very difficult if both players agree . They could just play it out under their rules before the actual tourney match, and then agree to throw the match to whoever won under their agreed upon ruleset. 5 suicides <<<<<< a match on mushroom kingdom. I suppose the other option is to DQ both players if they do it, but that is also worse than a match on MK. TO's aren't really involved in matches unless one player raises a complaint anyway, so this rule was kind of already in effect. The only real difference now is that the loser can't go back on his gentleman's agreement and complain that they played on an illegal stage.

I understasnd that its very unlikely that 2 players will play on MK. It was an unlikely suggestion. But still. You shouldnt have bad rules just because they are unlikely to happen. Should soccerplayers use their hands on the ball in matches if both teams agrees on it? Should basketballplayers kick the basketball if both teams agree on it? Should 2 smash players play on MK if both players agree on it?

Ofc not. Rules are rules.

 

[Nintendude]

That's a bad analogy. Not being allowed to use hands in soccer and feet in basketball is a defining characteristic of the sport. The stage that is played on in SSB is not. The object of the game and the way it is being played (5 stocks) has not changed.

 

[Olikus]

That's a bad analogy. Not being allowed to use hands in soccer and feet in basketball is a defining characteristic of the sport. The stage that is played on in SSB is not. The object of the game and the way it is being played (5 stocks) has not changed.

It has changed if you allow stages that are not palyable for competitve play. Im aware of that Im using extreme examples, but the point still stands. Even if its a small chance, it shouldnt be allowed. The "what if" scenario can allways occure. And therefor it shoudnt be allowed.

 

[Nintendude]

And who's saying they aren't "playable"? The point of having banned stages is so people don't have to be subjected to wildly unfair counterpicks, not because they are not playable.

 

[clubbadubba]

olikus, are you aware that in NCAAF the rules are slightly tweaked from conference to conference? And when a school from one conference plays a school from another conference, they play by the home teams ruleset for that game. Usually they will play a set of 2 games over 2 years, so both teams will get a chance to be home. Thus both teams agree to play by slightly different rulesets than they usually will use. Minor rule changes can be agreed upon by both parties in competition.

I guess what you're saying is that it is completely changing the ruleset, not just adjusting it? That is a subjective opinion that you are entitled to, but it seems you are in the minority on this. Its not really a right or wrong thing I guess, so in this type of case I'm inclined to go by majority rules.

 

[Olikus]

And who's saying they aren't "playable"? The point of having banned stages is so people don't have to be subjected to wildly unfair counterpicks, not because they are not playable.

whos saying they arent playable? I believe most players here on smashboards. Why do you think people wanna ban hyrule? so fox doesnt gets an unfair counterpick? No because the stage are broken with tornadoes and tents and what not. And the other stages that are banned are even worse.

Okay let us just go through why some stages are banned in a competitive ruleset. We choose some stages to be legal to make the best competitive play possible. Some stages harm this and therefore gets banned. Just as items and just as handicaps. Theres no reason to allowing a factor that are worsening the competitive game in a tourney match, just because 2 players agrees on it. If 2 players wanna play on sector Z that’s great. But its called a friendly. Not a tourney match.

It has nothing to do with yoshi is good on zebes and ness is good on sector Z so we bann them so they dont counterpick it. Its because they harm competitive play.

 

[clubbadubba]

^^I responded right before you just posted btw.

Theres no reason to allowing a factor that are worsening the competitive game in a tourney match, just because 2 players agrees on it

1) Whether or not something ruins competitiveness is subjective. The ruleset is a result of the overall subjective opinion of the community. Saying a "banned" stage is bad for competition is subjective. Hyrule is a perfect example where there are opinions on both sides. Subjective brokenness of stages is not as black and white as you make it seem.

2) Why shouldn't we allow it if 2 players agree upon it? As far as I'm concerned, all you have a right to complain about in a ruleset is the fairness of the matches YOU will be playing in. This rule can ONLY make things more fair IN THE EYES OF THE PLAYERS IN THAT SET. You may disagree and say they are playing on a broken stage, and that's fine, but they will in turn disagree with you.

 

[Nintendude]

We clearly have different definitions of "playable" so there's really not much worth discussing. Hyrule is a playable stage yet I lean pro-ban because the stage lends itself easily to prolonged stalemates. Tent combos and tornadoes have nothing to do with it.

 

[Olikus]

^^I responded right before you just posted btw.



1) Whether or not something ruins competitiveness is subjective. The ruleset is a result of the overall subjective opinion of the community. Saying a "banned" stage is bad for competition is subjective. Hyrule is a perfect example where there are opinions on both sides. Subjective brokenness of stages is not as black and white as you make it seem.

2) Why shouldn't we allow it if 2 players agree upon it? As far as I'm concerned, all you have a right to complain about in a ruleset is the fairness of the matches YOU will be playing in. This rule can ONLY make things more fair IN THE EYES OF THE PLAYERS IN THAT SET. You may disagree and say they are playing on a broken stage, and that's fine, but they will in turn disagree with you.

1) I know every opinion is subjective. But a worldwide competive ruleset shall allways try to be as objective as possible. And I agree on that hyrule is a perfect example on both sides. However MK is not. I would guess close to 90 percent if not more of the best players in the world agrees on that MK is not a stage thats suitable for the best competitve play possible.

2) with this analogy your basicly saying both players can play with items if they agrees on it in a tourney match. The reason why I dont favor this is because I think rules are a good thing in competitve play. And my points for that is mentioned in my earlier posts.

We clearly have different definitions of "playable" so there's really not much worth discussing. Hyrule is a playable stage yet I lean pro-ban because the stage lends itself easily to prolonged stalemates. Tent combos and tornadoes have nothing to do with it.

Yeah we do. So Im okay to not discuss further. I actually go so far that I will say some stages creates luck.

 

[TANK64]

looks like I was completely removed from registration...? okay..?

Yea. There's some WEIRD stuff going on.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course both players should be able to agree on any stage...

 

[clubbadubba]

wait we're done with this already? what am i supposed to do at work?

So lets say that if over 50% think a stage is unplayable, it gets banned.

What if we looked at Saffron? Probably less than 90% of people who are against Saffron. It might be 70-30 or 60-40, idk. But hypothetically, if a stage is considered 'playable' by 40% of the community, then it will still be banned, but do we prevent those 40% from mutually agreeing to play on it? What if its 51-49%? Tell the 49% they cant' use it?

If you say majority always rules and a banned stage is a banned stage, that doesn't seem right to me when opinions are so evenly split.

If you say that "49%.... well okay they can mutually agree to that", then what is your % cutoff for mutual agreement and why?

 

[Nintendude]

Speaking of Saffron, I'm going to advocate that it be a legal doubles CP stage as it was in Apex 2012. I'm not sure if anyone actually picked it last year but it's an option. I'm assuming we will run some sort of unofficial doubles tourney on Saturday or Sunday as we did last year.

 

[LLDL]

Jel and banze, I accept your MMs.

Current list of MMs:
Nintendude, $10
firo, $10
ballin4life, $10
boom's puff on DL, $10
Battlecow, DL only $10
Tank, $5
chain-ace, Fox ditto DL, is $5 good?
Jel, $5
banze, $10


Sensei, I will face your Puff for $5 on DL only.



Money to be had: $80
Come get some.

$5.00 is fine =)

 

[Olikus]

wait we're done with this already? what am i supposed to do at work?

So lets say that if over 50% think a stage is unplayable, it gets banned.

What if we looked at Saffron? Probably less than 90% of people who are against Saffron. It might be 70-30 or 60-40, idk. But hypothetically, if a stage is considered 'playable' by 40% of the community, then it will still be banned, but do we prevent those 40% from mutually agreeing to play on it? What if its 51-49%? Tell the 49% they cant' use it?

If you say majority always rules and a banned stage is a banned stage, that doesn't seem right to me when opinions are so evenly split.

If you say that "49%.... well okay they can mutually agree to that", then what is your % cutoff for mutual agreement and why?

For making rules there must allways be a line on whats allowed and whats not. There are a good chance that many people wanna play with items as well. If there are subjects that are very close that you describe here. They should go up for a new discussion and see why so many disagrees on the subject. And how things work here I dont think you should be scared of that scenario really. Lately more and more of the best players agrees on that hyrule is not playable. If you took the 50 best players in the world a large favor would be for banning hyrule from what Ive seen. Still its a neutral. The stages that are banned in the competitive ruleset is the ones that allmost everyone agreed on banning.

But If you feel that many people wanna have MK, yoshi Islansd, items and what not ofc bring it up and we can discuss it. But you allso gonna come with argument on why the stages are playable. IM actually not in just majority voting. But allso try to find the best objective rules. Which ofc is hard but allso what we should strive for.

edit: im going out clubba but we can discuss more later today =)

 

[clubbadubba]

but i won't be bored later lol!

 

[Olikus]

but i won't be bored later lol!

:o then we say we both had a good run. And thanks for the discussion. =)

 

[Nintendude]

Anyone have top-8 predictions?

 

[Yobolight]

1. Isai
2. Superboomfan
3. Jaimehr
4/5/6/7/8: Ballin4life, Kefit, Sensei, Firo, Tank

 

[clubbadubba]

Of the ppl currently signed up (plus boom even though he got kicked out lol):

1) Boom
2) Isai (who will he play THIS year?)
3) Jaime (the perpetual 3rd place)
4) Sensei (kinda depends if he's been training for 64 though)
5) Kefit (I think sensei will win their battle in a close one this year
6) Firo (end of the cream of the crop after firo)
7) Low-tier-or-no-tier (surprise breakthrough, poor man's Jaime)
8) ballin (maybe? don't let me down dude)

Notable's left out:

banze: not enough enough to put in top 8. could very well crack it

nintendude: gotta base it off of the last time I played him, and sorry but you were not playin top 8 smash dude

tank: I feel like tank is ever so slightly more prone to trying to be super fancy and mess it up on his last stock, so I gave ballin the edge.

battlecow: Normally I would have put bcow in top 8 over low tier and ballin, BUT i was looking through the list and there was a name I recognized from last year that will be bcow's undoing! TearBear, a brawl player, but he mains kirby in 64 and is decent. Bcow loses to him and fails to make top 8.

jel: decent, but not top 8. had a good draw in the loser's bracket last year, but I don't see that happening 2 years in a row.

kero: Who knows? I hear he's good now....

knitephox: lol he would except that he's not even trying

chain-ace: no mercy in the first round next time dude, i wanted to play you! Will finish much better this year

RBN: is he coming Jaime?

Potential game-changers if they sign up:

megavolt
valoem
sheer
ybombbb
alpha
CLUBBA

 

[LLDL]

Superboom I'll get that corrected. Chibo was working on updating the refund system, and I guess something funky happened with a couple people's orders. But should be trivial to fix.

 

[Nintendude]

Who the heck is low tier or no tier?

 

[LLDL]

I've played him many times on kaillera, I've never met him though

Also I'm going to try and sign up Parallax before the deadline

 

[Battlecow]

Huh is that really all the competish there is? Top 8 is a lock for me, and you can quote me on that.

1. isai (clutches it with mario)

2. boom

3. banze

4. alpha (depends on how good he is with the 64 controller)

5. jaime

6. Kefit

7. Sensei

8. BATTLECOW

and yeah I'm terrible against kirby everyone should cp their ****ty kirby tertiaries against me

 

[SheerMadness]

I think Alpha would have registered by now if he were really going.

I've seen a couple vids of banze and his crew. He has a solid pikachu. Just as solid as any other non Boom/Isai north american player I've seen. He could def top 8 with the right bracket.

Tank will pwn if he plays efficiently. He has a tendency to try to do training mode combos in matches though.

 

[prisonchild]

1. boom
2. isai
3. jaime
4. sensei
5. firo
6. ballin
7. kefit (if he doesn't get tired he could be higher)
8. tank

dark horse: banze

 

[Kefit]

The tournament will never end because Battlecow is going to stick to his guns even after I leave my tournament match versus him in the middle of a game to catch my flight back to Seattle. Since the tournament will be unable to continue, some will suggest that the tournament results simply adopt the identical top four results from the last two major NA SSB64 tournaments:

1) Boom
2) Isai
3) Jaime
4) Kefit

However, detractors will point out that I can't be in top four if I'm not around to receive a payout. This will spark intense debate, concluding with the decision to completely randomize tournament results via a complex Hyrule tornado based scheme. After much careful execution of this scheme, the results will be as such:

First through 32nd place: MATTS
32.5 place: Nintendude (some suggest he rigged this placement in an attempt to present himself as a neutral tournament organizer)
33-47: Daigo
48: Boom screaming "I'M DEAD"
49-80: A single long unbroken death combo at the hands of Isai

Meanwhile, Battlecow will insist that these results are a sham because no tournament results can be determined until his match with Kefit ends. He insists that he will remain by his controller and ensure that the N64 is not powered off until the match finishes. Experts believe this may take until Apex 2017, although research in this field is still developing at a rapid pace.

 

[m3gav01t]

bleh, nevermind.

 

[Battlecow]

Yo is kefit homeless? Or is the weather in seattle just that bad? 'Cause I'm pretty sure he just died of exposure

 

[LLDL]

Well, seeing as how some things were said that need some clarification, I figured I may as well step in and clarify so I don't seem like some kind of braggart/**** talker.



I'm not trying to be cocky here or anything, but last year at apex, I won a solid majority of our friendlies together. I was winning with such a margin that at one point, you exclaimed, "WTF? You're beating me worse than boom does!"

I'm not saying I'm better than you; I know I'm not. The reason I told this to weedwack was because I was talking to him about how at apex, it was really interesting to see how play styles countered one another. There were a number of instances where I was really surprised to see how people matched up. In a couple of tournament matches and in a lot of friendlies, the person I thought would have a surefire win against a given opponent would actually lose to them or have more trouble beating them than I expected, and I used this as an example.

Also, yeah, not gonna lie, it felt pretty great to hear that I was beating you worse than boom, who is orders of magnitude better than me. So I suppose, in all honesty, yeah, I was bragging a bit.

At any rate, I just wanted to explain some of the things said so that there's no bad blood between us and to prevent people from getting the wrong idea.

Also, I'll register for Apex as soon as I'm done with finals and ****. For real this time.

Actually Kefit was just trying to rebut the bit about you decimating him. To decimate is to knock of 10%. Most people wrongly use that word as a substitute for destroy or obliterate, when really decimate is to merely shave 10% off. Thus prompting him to come with his statement about the 90% advantage.

 

[B Link]

megavolt
valoem
sheer
ybombbb
alpha
CLUBBA

YBOMBB and *** vwls confirmed to ME very recently that they're going

YBOMBB just signed up

I'm inclined to go now because this tourney is looking really good, in terms of attendance, and Canada needs some more rep. I could go now if I get enough Christmas $. Look out for me near the deadline lol

 

[weedwack]

So some of my posts were a bit aggressive.

But I really don't take kindly to condescension of any type.

Didn't mean to create any non-hype tension between anybody.

 

[Battlecow]

Oh **** forgot you were my host

I should not be pissing you off

my bad man APOLOGIES

 

[m3gav01t]

Actually Kefit was just trying to rebut the bit about you decimating him. To decimate is to knock of 10%. Most people wrongly use that word as a substitute for destroy or obliterate, when really decimate is to merely shave 10% off. Thus prompting him to come with his statement about the 90% advantage.

Oh, haha, I had no idea that was the actual definition of decimate. Good to know. Now I feel like kind of a ****, but I also did want to explain where weedwack's comment came from so it didn't seem like I was **** talking or something.

 

[weedwack]

haha youre good battlecow. was referring more to kefit calling me puny. that bit wasn't too cool.

 

[m3gav01t]

Oh ****, who else are you housing, weedwack? Also, I'm done with finals on Thursday and I haven't played smash in far too long...