BBR Recommended Rule List v2.0 & General Ruleset Discussion

[-Vocal-]

Lucas has an above average recovery =P

It's not just about eating recoveries though. When it comes down to it, YI and GG both do the same thing - they influence stock count. If you get hit by a bomb on GG "randomly", you lose a stock if you're at mid-high percents. Okay, you lost a stock when you shouldn't have. If your opponent is not able to recover on YI, and the platform saves him, he doesn't lose a stock when he should have. In regards to the relative stock count, it accomplishes exactly the same thing. Now consider that GG's bombs don't kill at low or even mid percents, while YI's platform can save whether you were knocked too far to recover (high percents) or just got gimped (low percents). The difference is how often these stages influence the stock count, which we unfortunately don't have hard data for.

In any case, I'm not saying YI should be banned. I'm saying since we allow YI and even use it as a starter, these other "random" stages aren't so bad.

I think randomness is primarily a problem when it has a negative outcome. Your main complaint against YI is that it can randomly save people when they should have died? The same can be said for Delfino, part of why I love that stage - fewer gimps. It's a facet of the stage, and it's something that players may use to their advantage to help them win. This is positive randomness. GG can randomly explode in your face or, as MMM's video shows, allow you to be thrown into a randomly spawned apple, and even if this does not take a stock from you it both gives the opponent an opportunity to attack that he should not have had and raises your percentage. This is negative randomness. Positive randomness in stages is not a bad thing in my opinion; it may be part of what makes a stage a good counterpick choice for some characters. Negative randomness, on the other hand, is never a good thing.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

That analogy is a decent example, but it neglects several things. Such as that the frequency of random "saves" or "deaths" is far greater on Green Greens than on Yoshis.

More importantly though is that you normally have forewarning on Yoshis. Sure, on rare ocassions it can make saves by quickly rising from the bottom, but generally you can see the platform and know that someone is going to land on it and then act accordingly. You don't really get that on Green Greens when an apple suddenly explodes and kills you without warning.

 

[T-block]

I think randomness is primarily a problem when it has a negative outcome. Your main complaint against YI is that it can randomly save people when they should have died? The same can be said for Delfino, part of why I love that stage - fewer gimps. It's a facet of the stage, and it's something that players may use to their advantage to help them win. This is positive randomness. GG can randomly explode in your face or, as MMM's video shows, allow you to be thrown into a randomly spawned apple, and even if this does not take a stock from you it both gives the opponent an opportunity to attack that he should not have had and raises your percentage. This is negative randomness. Positive randomness in stages is not a bad thing in my opinion; it may be part of what makes a stage a good counterpick choice for some characters. Negative randomness, on the other hand, is never a good thing.

Why should only negative randomness be considered bad? They both influence the stock count from what it would have been without the stage's interference. Fundamentally is there really that much difference between you losing a stock and your opponent "gaining" one? The reason Delfino is different is not because it's positive - it's different because it's much more predictable.

That analogy is a decent example, but it neglects several things. Such as that the frequency of random "saves" or "deaths" is far greater on Green Greens than on Yoshis.

More importantly though is that you normally have forewarning on Yoshis. Sure, on rare ocassions it can make saves by quickly rising from the bottom, but generally you can see the platform and know that someone is going to land on it and then act accordingly. You don't really get that on Green Greens when an apple suddenly explodes and kills you without warning.

Is it actually far greater? That's not obvious to me =\ I've seen Yoshi's make three saves within two minutes in a 2v2, all for the same team. If two players are playing smart on GG and minimizing risk, I don't think it'd be a stretch to say the frequency at which YI influences the match is on the same order as GG.

There's not a lot of warning for the platform at all... if it's already there, sure, but then we could say if the bombs have already fallen, then you know where they are and can act accordingly. The platform rises very quickly... fast enough for Lucas to start his PKT without it, and then eat it by the time he finishes half his circle.

 

[-Vocal-]

That analogy is a decent example, but it neglects several things. Such as that the frequency of random "saves" or "deaths" is far greater on Green Greens than on Yoshis.

More importantly though is that you normally have forewarning on Yoshis. Sure, on rare ocassions it can make saves by quickly rising from the bottom, but generally you can see the platform and know that someone is going to land on it and then act accordingly. You don't really get that on Green Greens when an apple suddenly explodes and kills you without warning.

Yes, thank you for saying that; when I started typing I was going to include that as part of my post but I forgot about it by the end The randomness on GG is much more constant and more intrusive than YI's, and as for the second point I already spoke earlier about my distaste for instantaneous randomness.

edit: I have a reply to the message above me, but I'll wait til someone else responds so I can make a new post

 

[T-block]

Go ahead and post lol

Again, it really isn't obvious to me that GG is so much more intrusive. It may be more, but it's probably not significantly so... I bet YI and GG are on the same order of magnitude in that respect.

 

[-Vocal-]

Why should only negative randomness be considered bad? They both influence the stock count from what it would have been without the stage's interference. Fundamentally is there really that much difference between you losing a stock and your opponent "gaining" one? The reason Delfino is different is not because it's positive - it's different because it's much more predictable.

Because positive randomness can give a partial edge as opposed to a solid edge, and the goal when choosing a stage is to get an edge. If you know your character has trouble with recovery and you know the ghost can occasionally save you, choosing YI is smart because the other player will generally not be there to edgeguard. I don't see anything wrong with that. Sure, it's random, and maybe someday I will complain as to how I would have won a match if the ghost hadn't saved my opponent on the second stock, but I don't find it intrusive enough to be an issue.

Green Greens, on the other hand, is constantly intrusive. On YI, ghosts appear occasionally, and in my experience it's uncommon for them to save someone. (Your anecdote isn't the norm; that team was lucky as hell though ) This keeps the randomness from being overly intrusive into gameplay. On Green Greens, however, the randomness is constantly an issue. As I said before, every time players pass through the spawn zone, they must airdodge or take the chance of eating an instant bomb to the face. The fact that bombs can instantly materialize means that every action a player takes that occurs within the danger zone is going to be affected by that possibility. This is when randomness becomes overly intrusive.

Is it actually far greater? That's not obvious to me =\ I've seen Yoshi's make three saves within two minutes in a 2v2, all for the same team. If two players are playing smart on GG and minimizing risk, I don't think it'd be a stretch to say the frequency at which YI influences the match is on the same order as GG.

There's not a lot of warning for the platform at all... if it's already there, sure, but then we could say if the bombs have already fallen, then you know where they are and can act accordingly. The platform rises very quickly... fast enough for Lucas to start his PKT without it, and then eat it by the time he finishes half his circle.

I'd like to reword what he said slightly: the randomness on GG has a far greater effect on gameplay than that on YI. This goes along with what I was just saying; the random aspect of GG greatly limits a player's options and affects all actions they take when they are in the blast radius, to the point of being overly intrusive.

 

[Chuee]

Olimar gimping Lucas.
lol

 

[-Vocal-]

You don't believe me? I've done it, several times. All it takes is a properly placed yellow pikmin. Nair doesn't get rid of it, and it absorbs the PK Thunder. I'm not saying it's going to happen everytime Lucas goes off stage, but it can happen. That's not the point of this discussion anyways!

 

[T-block]

Because positive randomness can give a partial edge as opposed to a solid edge, and the goal when choosing a stage is to get an edge. If you know your character has trouble with recovery and you know the ghost can occasionally save you, choosing YI is smart because the other player will generally not be there to edgeguard. I don't see anything wrong with that. Sure, it's random, and maybe someday I will complain as to how I would have won a match if the ghost hadn't saved my opponent on the second stock, but I don't find it intrusive enough to be an issue.

When positive happens and when negative randomness happens, in this case the effect is the same: change in stock count. Are we agreed on that at least? You say positive can be CP'd for - well so can negative. If my character has trouble getting the KO, I might pick GG, in hopes that my opponent will get eff'd over by luck and die to a bomb. That's just as sound as hoping I'll get lucky and get saved by the platform imo.

I'd like to reword what he said slightly: the randomness on GG has a far greater effect on gameplay than that on YI. This goes along with what I was just saying; the random aspect of GG greatly limits a player's options and affects all actions they take when they are in the blast radius, to the point of being overly intrusive.

That may be true, but I see it as a separate issue. The limitations it places on players isn't really due to the randomness as much as it is due to the mere existance of the hazards. If players were always hit by an explosion if they didn't air dodge, you'd still have this complaint, right? I see your point (although the degree of intrusiveness is debateable), but if we're talking only about the randomness, this point doesn't really apply.

 

[Chuee]

You don't believe me? I've done it, several times. All it takes is a properly placed yellow pikmin. Nair doesn't get rid of it, and it absorbs the PK Thunder. I'm not saying it's going to happen everytime Lucas goes off stage, but it can happen. That's not the point of this discussion anyways!

Olimar can't even force me to use PKT2 anyways.

 

[-Vocal-]

When positive happens and when negative randomness happens, in this case the effect is the same: change in stock count. Are we agreed on that at least? You say positive can be CP'd for - well so can negative. If my character has trouble getting the KO, I might pick GG, in hopes that my opponent will get eff'd over by luck and die to a bomb. That's just as sound as hoping I'll get lucky and get saved by the platform imo.

Yes I can agree in that there can be a change in stock count in both occasions, but that's not my reasoning for saying GG is bad (and, actually, stock count isn't really a part of my reasoning at all). Negative randomness can occur on other stages as well - the cart in Pictochat, the Klap Trap in Japes, and to some extent the fire plumes in Norfair. I don't have any problems with this. However, those hazards are not a constant threat. The cart can only spawn once in a game and the plumes can be avoided the majority of the time, and only occur every once in a while. The Klap Trap is fairly constant and is the most similar to the bomb issue of Green Greens, but I even categorize those two seperately; the Klap Trap occurs in a place where you would not ordinarily be trying to fight your opponent from, whereas the bomb space in Green Greens is in the main fighting ground.

This brings me to the main reason I'm opposed to Green Greens. Whereas other random aspects are both forewarned and unconstant, bombs constantly spawn in Green Greens with no warning at all. If you would like to continue to push the YI example, then look at it this way: the ghost, in your average game, may save one person once. The bomb space, on the other hand, is a constant threat and constantly affects gameplay on that stage, and I believe Green Green's hazards reach the point where they have too large of a control on gameplay.

That may be true, but I see it as a separate issue. The limitations it places on players isn't really due to the randomness as much as it is due to the mere existance of the hazards. If players were always hit by an explosion if they didn't air dodge, you'd still have this complaint, right? I see your point (although the degree of intrusiveness is debateable), but if we're talking only about the randomness, this point doesn't really apply.

If players were to always be hit by an explosion, I would say that is too powerful of a constant hazard to have in a legal stage; the only thing even close to it I can think of is Norfair, and the analogy there is weak at best. And I'm not only talking about the randomness; I'm talking about the specific characteristics of the randomness (that being that it occurs without warning) and the effect it has on gameplay (which is quite large, too large).

edit @Chuee: I'd reply, but it's still off topic I'll say that you may be right though.

 

[T-block]

Er...couple things: the Klap Trap is not random, and is easily predicted with the help of the timer. It's cycle is just over ten seconds. The bombs are not a constant threat either... if they've already landed, there is nothing random about them. They become a predictable stage hazard - you hit them, they explode. The randomness is a problem when they haven't landed yet - you jump into one, or one falls into your attack etc. with no warning. Keep in mind that no blocks will fall if the top layer is already filled. If you don't attack the blocks, it won't be long before the threat of random bombs goes away, and you're left with only the ones on the stage already, which have no randomness about them.

I've played plenty of matches on Green Greens where neither player unintentionally detonates a bomb. I've also played matches where players get saved twice by falling blocks. I've played plenty of matches where Yoshi's doesn't save anyone, but I've played matches where multiple saves happen. Arguing over frequency isn't going to get anywhere since we don't have hard numbers to back it up.

Let's say Green Greens worked like this: every time you pass over the block space while not in hitstun, it drops a bomb on you. This is how the stage works - it's programmed to react to your passing over the blocks by dropping a bomb on you. You can still airdodge to be unhurt from the explosion. This places limitations on players, and these limitations are what you're complaining about, right? My point is, it's not the randomness that forces these limitations - they would exist even if the stage weren't random, so it's a separate issue.

 

[Master JBone07]

Item Tournaments

I don't like Item Tournaments.

I don't either!!! Without items, it would be a fair match(depending on the player & fighter he's/she's using). With items, you would win without much trouble, that is, if you are better at the game than your opponents, and know how to use items better than your opponents!!!

 

[-Vocal-]

Er...couple things: the Klap Trap is not random, and is easily predicted with the help of the timer. It's cycle is just over ten seconds. The bombs are not a constant threat either... if they've already landed, there is nothing random about them. They become a predictable stage hazard - you hit them, they explode. The randomness is a problem when they haven't landed yet - you jump into one, or one falls into your attack etc. with no warning. Keep in mind that no blocks will fall if the top layer is already filled. If you don't attack the blocks, it won't be long before the threat of random bombs goes away, and you're left with only the ones on the stage already, which have no randomness about them.

I just felt the Klap Trap fit in with the others; I can retract it, meaning that there is nothing similar to Green Green's blast zone. Also, are we sure it's ten seconds? After the Picto mess I'm not so sure Anyways, not important.

Moving on, I'm not talking about grounded bombs. If bombs on Green Greens instantly spawned at the top of the stack, without falling there, then I wouldn't have any qualms about the stage. However, this is not the case, and my issue is with falling bombs. You find it easy to say, "Don't hit the blocks," but this is not a very likely outcome, not to mention if I have to avoid hitting the blocks I might miss an opportunity to hit my opponent. Once again, intrusive, but still not my main point. Part of my point is actually in your post; I enlarged it.

I've played plenty of matches on Green Greens where neither player unintentionally detonates a bomb. I've also played matches where players get saved twice by falling blocks. I've played plenty of matches where Yoshi's doesn't save anyone, but I've played matches where multiple saves happen. Arguing over frequency isn't going to get anywhere since we don't have hard numbers to back it up.

You misunderstand me; I'm not talking about how often someone runs into a bomb, I'm speaking about how often the blast zone affects gameplay, which is nearly always as people are constantly fighting in or near that space. That's not the case with the YI ghosts, and that's why the two are different.

Let's say Green Greens worked like this: every time you pass over the block space while not in hitstun, it drops a bomb on you. This is how the stage works - it's programmed to react to your passing over the blocks by dropping a bomb on you. You can still airdodge to be unhurt from the explosion. This places limitations on players, and these limitations are what you're complaining about, right? My point is, it's not the randomness that forces these limitations - they would exist even if the stage weren't random, so it's a separate issue.

Why would such a stage be legal in the first place? An automatic bomb spawning zone? I really don't think that would ever be allowed in competitive play. Anyways, in that example, randomness is no longer a part of the intrusive factor, but it is still there nonetheless. Players will still constantly make their decisions based on that facet of the stage. I think you're whittling down what my issue really is; perhaps I simply have an issue with a facet of the stage being constantly intrusive, and in the case of Green Green's the random factor simply makes that worse. I haven't fully thought out this new line of thought, but if there are problems with it I'm sure you'll point them out to me

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I don't either!!! Without items, it would be a fair match(depending on the player & fighter he's/she's using). With items, you would win without much trouble, that is, if you are better at the game than your opponents, and know how to use items better than your opponents!!!

I was about to call this, and then I realized, "oh wait, he's being sarcastic and telling the **** truth".

 

[T-block]

Yes, the Klap Trap has a cycle that's just a few frames over 10 seconds =P

That's exactly what I mean. We're talking about Green Green's randomness: the nature of it, how it's a bad thing, and to what degree it makes GG bannable. I do see your point about being constantly intrusive, but I think it belongs in another debate. It doesn't really have anything to do with randomness. The comparison to Yoshi's Island only goes as far as comparing randomness and the degree to which is influences matches.

So... I guess we're on the same page now?

 

[-Vocal-]

Yea, I guess so So end result:

Ban?
Norfair: No
Green Greens: Yes, but not because it's random

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Wait what? Why ban green greens then?

 

[-Vocal-]

Wait what? Why ban green greens then?

In very simple terms, ban it for being overly intrusive into gameplay. If you'd like the long explanation, read through the discussion between T Block and I over the past page or so

 

[Master JBone07]

Can somebody explain Dave's Stupid Rule? I went to the website below and didn't understand it.

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Dave's_Stupid_Rule

I want to know how it's use in tournaments.

 

[-Vocal-]

Can somebody explain Dave's Stupid Rule? I went to the website below and didn't understand it.

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Dave's_Stupid_Rule

I want to know how it's use in tournaments.

It's simple. Let's say the first round of a match is played on Smashville. Dave's Stupid Rule says Smashville cannot be used for game two or three of that match (or four or five either, if it's a finals match). It's sometimes changed to say that if someone wins on a stage, he/she cannot choose that stage for any other rounds of that match.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

In very simple terms, ban it for being overly intrusive into gameplay. If you'd like the long explanation, read through the discussion between T Block and I over the past page or so

Yeah, except you're getting way, WAY ahead of yourselves. The next step is not "ban the stage". It's "see if the stage is actually banworthy through high-level tournament testing".

 

[Master JBone07]

Here are Gamespot's Super Smash Bros. Brawl Fight or Flight Tournament Finals Rules:

-Each player gets to choose their own character & stage (no banned stages or counterpicks)

-Four (4) stock for each player

-Items set to Med/All except for the following:

-Smart Bomb
-Bob-omb
-Golden Hammer
- Hammer
-Starman

-In the event of a tie, players go to Sudden Death with the rules above except that each player has only one (1) stock. First player out comes in Third Place, second player out comes in Second Place, and the last one standing is the champion.

Note: This has already happen. This is just for fun.

It's simple. Let's say the first round of a match is played on Smashville. Dave's Stupid Rule says Smashville cannot be used for game two or three of that match (or four or five either, if it's a finals match). It's sometimes changed to say that if someone wins on a stage, he/she cannot choose that stage for any other rounds of that match.

So what you saying is that if I pick Final Destination the first round, no one(including me) can pick Final Destination for rounds 2 & 3 (4 & 5 for finals), right?

Listen up , Smash Bros. Fans, go to this website for every Super Smash Bros. Sign up for free now!!

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

 

[-Vocal-]

Yeah, except you're getting way, WAY ahead of yourselves. The next step is not "ban the stage". It's "see if the stage is actually banworthy through high-level tournament testing".

Perhaps you're right. However, I think something like this would be hard to test. I think the best would be to have two players play a four game test set; the first stage would be BF, the second would be GG, then BF again, then GG again. I nominate BF because it seems to be the closest in layout, and I suggest the format so that we can compare gameplay between the two players on a stage with the bomb threat and a stage without. I don't know who'd actually test this though ^^; I would, if I get a chance, though I'm not experienced on GG so it would probably be better for someone else to.

edit: @Master don't double post, you'll get infracted for it and yes, that's right, though tournament organizers can change the rule to say that someone who has won on a stage cannot choose it although the other player can. Example: Marth and Luigi play on FD and Marth wins. With the altered rule, Marth could not choose FD, but Luigi could if he wanted.

 

[T-block]

For the record, the only point I wanted to make was that GG shouldn't be banned for randomness. Anything past that is another debate.

 

[Master JBone07]

Perhaps you're right. However, I think something like this would be hard to test. I think the best would be to have two players play a four game test set; the first stage would be BF, the second would be GG, then BF again, then GG again. I nominate BF because it seems to be the closest in layout, and I suggest the format so that we can compare gameplay between the two players on a stage with the bomb threat and a stage without. I don't know who'd actually test this though ^^; I would, if I get a chance, though I'm not experienced on GG so it would probably be better for someone else to.

edit: @Master don't double post, you'll get infracted for it and yes, that's right, though tournament organizers can change the rule to say that someone who has won on a stage cannot choose it although the other player can. Example: Marth and Luigi play on FD and Marth wins. With the altered rule, Marth could not choose FD, but Luigi could if he wanted.

OK, I try that , I just have one question, what does GG mean?

 

[-Vocal-]

Good game. It's primary use is as a sportsmanlike saying at the end of a game with someone. It is also used to describe hopeless situations. Example: MK (Metaknight) is really good on Brinstar, and is good in general. Ganondorf is a hard to play character and considered bad, and in reality has a very hard time playing MK on even ordinary stages. Therefore, MK vs. Ganondorf on Brinstar = gg.

 

[T-block]

Or ye know...it means Green Greens =P

 

[-Vocal-]

^lmao oh yea, that too ^_^

 

[Master JBone07]

What is a blind pick & a double blind pick for stages & characters?

 

[Chuee]

Uhh I think double blind is where both players tell someone their character and they pick that character and don't change.
EX: If a DK main sees his opponent pick D3 he might pick MK. In a double blind he wouldn't know who his opponent was choosing when he picked his character so he wouldn't get to switch once he figured out his opponent picked D3.
Not sure on blind though.

 

[TheMike]

GG avoids planking. Once Praxis said that he was playing as Meta Knight, got % lead and grabbed the ledge. Then his opponent ate an apple and had his % below Praxis'. >.<

 

[-Vocal-]

GG avoids planking. Once Praxis said that he was playing as Meta Knight, got % lead and grabbed the ledge. Then his opponent ate an apple and had his % below Praxis'. >.<

Doesn't solve the reason I am against the stage, but it did make me laugh

 

[rPSIvysaur]

What is it about the stage that makes it banable then? You don't like it?

 

[-Vocal-]

No. read the past page or two of the discussion between T Block and I to get a full understanding of why I am against the stage. It's best if you read the discussion from beginning to end, as you will both read all of the problems I have with it as well as, by the end, see the things I've decided are not the anti-competitive aspects.

 

[Mr.-0]

I'm hungry. And I support Green Greens not being banned.

 

[Praxis]

GG avoids planking. Once Praxis said that he was playing as Meta Knight, got % lead and grabbed the ledge. Then his opponent ate an apple and had his % below Praxis'. >.<

Doesn't solve the reason I am against the stage, but it did make me laugh

*grumble* stupid stage *grumble* not letting me plank...UNFAIR.

 

[Jack Kieser]

You know what solves planking?

... ... ...food on low.

 

[Browny]

just hope that mk doesnt have a stock lead

 

[solecalibur]

You know what solves planking?

... ... ...food on low.

I was gonna guess just state ban planking, my only argument is what about the other 99% of matches they doesnt involve planking? and what if I hit A to jab and I grab the food instead and it costs me the match (lol ike's jab kills) ?


Also the reason I was here, When do we (to everyone I guess) think we would need a reform for these rule set?

just hope that mk doesnt have a stock lead

only reason why I hate MK , probly the only lol you have no potential for a come back (maybe his speed also lol)

BUT GET OUT PRO BAN OR ANTI BAN