Competitive Brawl Rule Set (NOT OFFICIAL)

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

the damage civen to decide ties rule is also bad IMO. and I play zelda and sheik who would benifit from it. it's inherently bad for charcters who are tanks like DDD, Ike, ROB and Snake. they normally have high damage-take stats whether they win or lose

exactly.

honestly, how could you come up with a ruleset that, not only favors MK, just gives him a MUCH larger advantage?

Take away stages you could beat him on, and give him a rule that is a very huge advantage to lights.

I main g&w, and i still know thats just stupid.

 

[JigglyZelda003]

MKs always gonna have some advantage no matter what rules are implemented anyway, unless he gets the ban tag lol, so we don't even have to consider him.

 

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

But we do tho. We can't just ignore MK. He places in almost every tourney, and usually high.

Just because he's always going to have the advantage doesn't mean we should let it happen willingly. If anything, MK is the biggest part to consider about any list. He needs to be pushed down as much as possible. He needs to be taken as the biggest threat to any players game, which he is, especially at a higher level of play. Which is where this list is going to go straight to, if approved enough.

Although, looking at it through an optimistic's point of view, I fully support those who play as MK (Overswarm) just to make a statement, in hopes to further the want for him to banned. Maybe, these rules giving MK even more of an advantage will work along the same lines.

I'm not going to support this ruleset, and I'm going to urge others not to. But of course, this is a community, and those may do as they please. The ruleset to any tourney isn't decided by the SBR, but the TO.

 

[choknater]

This is the best neutral ruleset I've seen.

People say who it supports MK... um... how?

Any ruleset supports MK because he is the best character. Fools.

 

[Shaya]

Are you naive choknater?

There are stages MK does worse on compared to others. I find no stage not banned on that list anything remotely close to a counter stage.

"Fool"?

 

[SonicX580]

The rules look good but why is Green Hill Zone is banned?
______________________________________________
Never mind what I said earlier I found out why.

 

[PK-ow!]

Also to poster above ^
DDD has to dash as he said. It's no longer an infinite.

Okay, I get what he meant now, but it wasn't clear.

Still, different issue:

Why can't Luigi be chaingrabbed now? This rule makes Luigi, an infinite-susceptible character, immune to Dedede, as he cannot be CGd any other way.

And there's a **** good reason for controller ports.
It's the same reason as tripping.
Sakurai hates us.

Oh haha.

Anyways, I've wrestled with issues about the circularity of most "neutral stage" assignments. They always fed into the terrain that high tiers wanted (independent of making the high tiers where they are, but it doesn't hurt them), and I often wondered if there was something weird going on there. Not a conscious conspiracy, but an unwitting circularity.

Why is "flat" considered neutral? I mean, even apart from autocancels, from where does that principle come? Why is a changing level - even stipulating one with no hazards - not neutral? Where does this come from?

[/questions]

 

[Hylian]

I'm going to make a ruleset now because I hate this one so much.

Getting started soon.

 

[MK26]

I'm going to make a ruleset now because I hate this one so much.

Getting started soon.

Me too.

Is this what Umbreon was trying to do? Show us that we can fight the SBR rule list if we want to?

 

[Hylian]

Me too.

Is this what Umbreon was trying to do? Show us that we can fight the SBR rule list if we want to?

No, it's not.

 

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

I'm going to make a ruleset now because I hate this one so much.

Getting started soon.

i'm looking forward to seeing this. Where you gunna post it?

 

[hyperstation]

As a competitive Ganon main, aside from my obvious dissent that Bowsercide last stock counts for the win while Ganoncide last stock doesn't, I have another observation which encompasses this issue, but isn't limited to just the Boswer/Ganon problem.

Every NYC tourny I've been to in the past few months has had all wii's loaded with the homebrew channel to turn off tripping. I love this. Tripping was put in because Sakurai hates competitive smash, obviously, and the controller port problem is no different. It's just less of an issue for a lot of people because it doesn't affect the whole cast. There should be a mod to make controller ports completely unbiased. That is, controller port 4 would be the exact same as controller port 1. If doing this causes some sort of byproduct problem with the Ganoncide/Bowsercide issue which the community thinks is still unfair, the mod should resolve this issue in a way decided upon by the community.

Perhaps just axe the whole concept by making every suicide KO on the last stock a loss, or conversely make every suicide KO on the last KO a win. I don't care either way, but I do care about consistency.

 

[Nic64]

treating bowser and ganondorf's suicides differently is stupid, I know almost no one plays ganon competitively so it's sort of like "lol who will care", but seriously, at least try to pretend that the rules aren't blatantly favoring one character over another.

also regarding norfair/pikachu, I think going edge to edge is pretty much covered as stalling, no? you can say it's subjective but I don't see how anyone isn't calling that as stalling unless they were going to be incredibly lax about that to begin with. I could see banning the stage for the random factors, even though I don't think they're a big deal, but the pikachu stalling thing is just silly.

 

[CaliburChamp]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=205251
I made this ruleset about a month ago. It's pretty much the opposite of this list, but has plenty of diversity and strategy.

 

[MBlaze]

Wait, this is official? Chea!

 

[Asdioh]

I would think I wouldn't have to spell it out, but your enjoyment of lucky star clearly indicates that you're not the most rational of people. Stop blaming a game designer for creating the game he wanted people to play. Bad design choices? A ****ing plenty because sakurai is no God (though he will forever be my hero for kirby:ss, despite its many flaws). So instead of being a whiny **** about some *** game designer on the internet for not making his game that was clearly intended for fun play with friends based on level design, item design etc. maybe do something productive like pick up a game that might allow you to apply things like tech skill, combos and all the other things people seem to want in brawl that exist in other, more viable fighters?

hey, watch it.


Don't lump him with other Lucky Star fans.

You can thank the Toon Link boards for getting me started on Lucky Star D:

I wasn't necessarily one of the people that your post was directed at, but the way your post seemed to be flaming them with little support kind of irritated me.

I'm flaming the tnga mentality that competitive smsah players deserve to have a game designed just for them. that sense of inflated entitlement is totally ridiculous and oozes off many posters here, including the one I called out.

I think the problem is not that the game wasn't "designed just for them."

I think the reason competitive smashers complain about Brawl and Sakurai...

is that he blatantly designed the game against them. He could have made a game that's both fun for casual AND competitive play (see: Melee and Smash 64), but instead he biased it in favor of "fun" as much as he could.

I don't know about you, but the competition is the only fun that's left in Brawl for me, I got bored of the "whee let's just have fun" aspect of the game some time ago, though it is still fun to pull out every so often.

The competitive players are doing what they can to maintain a fair competitive scene, though.

its not just this ruleset. it's mk ban debate, dedede infinite ban debate, it's wobbling from all the way back in melee.. Time and time again the smash community has shown it will ban **** before it even has a chance to break things. What more proof do I need?

You may be exaggerating, but you may be right. There are a lot of "small" flaws in this game that can ruin/hinder the competitive experience.

I hope you would agree that seeing a Dedede infinite grab a Donkey Kong for 2-3 stocks in a game and easily win would be kind of boring and bull****ty.

"Don't get grabbed" is barely a viable argument here, since it's almost bound to happen eventually. It's like saying "don't get hit" against MK.

With that said, I play Kirby, and nobody can infinite him, so I don't know a whole lot about getting screwed over hardcore in this game. I don't even mind Meta Knight...that much.

finally, a stage list that doesnt make the game about "who can be the most gay on this stage?"

Coming from a Marth >=O

(just kidding...kind of)

makes cry

A very big disadvantage=/=gamebreaking.

I edited out the rest of your post, because I wanted to say that this is a good point :O

I'm going to make a ruleset now because I hate this one so much.

Getting started soon.

Me too.

Me t- wait no, too lazy.

 

[Deleted member]

CPs aren't SUPPOSED to be fair and balanced as long as they aren't gamebreaking.

That's the exact premise I made my CP list on. Good job arriving at the same conclusion independently.

Ideally, the goal of this list was to provide the community with an ultra-conservative rule set for those in the community that believe that skill should be the defining factor in a tournament set. This rule set does not address what is the most fun or entertaining, it simply eliminates all exploitable factors other than skill solely for tournament purposes. This rule set eliminates all stalling, infinites, and stage abuse while maintaining an otherwise relatively balanced locus of guidelines for competition. There is nothing particularly extraordinary about this rule list from the official one except that it has abusable stages and tactics banned. This should ultimately lead to more quality tournaments.

Likewise, I FULLY ENDORSE Hylian making his own rule set, as he will cover an entirely different philosophy for this game. Tons of people love this rule set, and some hate it. That's cool. Some will love Hylian's set, some will hate it, that's cool too. If you want to determine the better of two players accurately for a tournament setting, you will use this list. Outside of a competitive setting, this list has no merit whatsoever. In a competitive setting, I can't think of any way to improve it.

I have been PMed information about the Ness/Lucas grab release, and DDD's infinite. Can some very informed posters tell me more about ICs, Wario, and Bowser? Thanks guys.

There seems to be little consistent logic in banning stages.

Aside from Rainbow Cruise, which I'm still undecided on, everything on the ban list has a legitimate reason for being banned. There are no stages unaccounted for.

 

[CaliburChamp]

That's the exact premise I made my CP list on. Good job arriving at the same conclusion independently.

Ideally, the goal of this list was to provide the community with an ultra-conservative rule set for those in the community that believe that skill should be the defining factor in a tournament set. This rule set does not address what is the most fun or entertaining, it simply eliminates all exploitable factors other than skill solely for tournament purposes. This rule set eliminates all stalling, infinites, and stage abuse while maintaining an otherwise relatively balanced locus of guidelines for competition. There is nothing particularly extraordinary about this rule list from the official one except that it has abusable stages and tactics banned. This should ultimately lead to more quality tournaments.

Likewise, I FULLY ENDORSE Hylian making his own rule set, as he will cover an entirely different philosophy for this game. Tons of people love this rule set, and some hate it. That's cool. Some will love Hylian's set, some will hate it, that's cool too. If you want to determine the better of two players accurately for a tournament setting, you will use this list. Outside of a competitive setting, this list has no merit whatsoever. In a competitive setting, I can't think of any way to improve it.

I have been PMed information about the Ness/Lucas grab release, and DDD's infinite. Can some very informed posters tell me more about ICs, Wario, and Bowser? Thanks guys.



Aside from Rainbow Cruise, which I'm still undecided on, everything on the ban list has a legitimate reason for being banned. There are no stages unaccounted for.

There is no such thing as neutral stages. One character is always going to have the advantage against the other character, even on these so called neutral stages. Things like open space, like FD mean's characters with projectiles will be able to spam more effectively, Platform stages like BF and Lylat means that characters with extended hitboxes will have the advantage here. NEUTRAL STAGES DONT EXIST! Every stage is a counter stage.

 

[JesiahTEG]

There is no such thing as neutral stages. One character is always going to have the advantage against the other character, even on these so called neutral stages. Things like open space, like FD mean's characters with projectiles will be able to spam more effectively, Platform stages like BF and Lylat means that characters with extended hitboxes will have the advantage here. NEUTRAL STAGES DONT EXIST!

Neutral is a term used by the Smash community to define the stages that are able to be selected randomly in the first match of a tournament set. If you don't know this and post in all CAPS to prove a point that is irrelevant, then you shouldn't be posting at all. Now, let me ask...

Do you know what a neutral is?

 

[sandwhale]

this list should be the competitve scene standard with just a few minor debatable aspects

 

[CaliburChamp]

Neutral is a term used by the Smash community to define the stages that are able to be selected randomly in the first match of a tournament set. If you don't know this and post in all CAPS to prove a point that is irrelevant, then you shouldn't be posting at all. Now, let me ask...

Do you know what a neutral is?

In my opinion, selected stage bans are a better idea. Strike two stages out in the beginning of the round. Having these starter/neutral stages doensn't make this fair against some characters. Every stage is a counter stage.

 

[JesiahTEG]

I respect your opinion/idea, but even if every stage is a "counter" stage, the differences for the most part are so slight it doesn't matter that much.

 

[pockyD]

If the "neutral" stages are really deemed strictly more "fair" than the other stages (quite a stretch IMO, but it seems to be what you're suggesting), then in the search for a "fair" ruleset, the "neutral"s should be the only stages used, period.

 

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

Neutral is a term used by the Smash community to define the stages that are able to be selected randomly in the first match of a tournament set. If you don't know this and post in all CAPS to prove a point that is irrelevant, then you shouldn't be posting at all. Now, let me ask...

Do you know what a neutral is?

so what meaning the term "neutral" even have to do with a stage?
A neutral should mean neutrality amongst all characters (or at least a good majority,) not just the first stage in a set

In my opinion, selected stage bans are a better idea. Strike two stages out in the beginning of the round. Having these starter/neutral stages doensn't make this fair against some characters. Every stage is a counter stage.

unfortunately, what calibur says is half true. Even tho the neutral stages are good, tey are by no means completely even. Take for example, diddy kong. You take him away from fd or sv, he's almost helpless. BF =/= FD.

 

[GI Josh]

I like this MUCH better

 

[Deleted member]

This list has been out for approaching 1 day. About half of the posts in this topic have been "I really like this rule set". I will continue to update this rule set as is needed, but aside from the few flaws I have yet to fix, this has been a total success.

edit: Calibur Champ, you're definitely onto something. I'll be doing research and trying to improve on some of your ideas as I get more information about them.

 

[Dark Hart]

I agree with everything, except for this...

- Any suicide KOs on the final stock resulting in sudden death will result in a loss for the user of this tactic. If it would be a suicide KO and the match screen shows a decisive winner, go with that instead. A Bowsercide final KO results in a win for the Bowser player.

That really doesn't seem fair. Either make all suicide KOs legal, or ban Bowser's as well.

 

[Deleted member]

I agree with everything, except for this...
That really doesn't seem fair. Either make all suicide KOs legal, or ban Bowser's as well.

I want to fix that as well. All of the changes I wish to make are relatively minor ones. Namely the suicides, other infinites I don't know, things of that nature. Maybe putting rainbow cruise as counterpick.

I will revise this list further, it's not a final product by any means.

 

[ADHD]

i'm curious as to why lylat is a cp, i'm very happy about that and I don't have to worry about rainbow cruise/japes. This is nice, now i can just ban lylat or brinstar without having to worry.

 

[Dark Hart]

Cool, just giving my input.

 

[DUB]

Yeah, why are some stages banned? What makes Norfair a banned stage?

 

[ADHD]

norfair japes and RC should be banned, they put characters at an EXTREME advantage over others and it makes metaknight very have a ton of options and for him to have an even better shot at winning

 

[AlphaZealot]

Aside from Rainbow Cruise, which I'm still undecided on, everything on the ban list has a legitimate reason for being banned. There are no stages unaccounted for.

Explain why Orpheon isn't banned? I mean, there aren't even grabbable ledges on one half of the stage.

Also explain why Brinstar isn't banned. Lava comes out and requires you to avoid it, meaning you have to be aware of your surrounding instead of just your opponent.

Also, does this ruleset base most of its logic around MK being in the game or not being?

 

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

norfair japes and RC should be banned, they put characters at an EXTREME advantage over others and it makes metaknight very have a ton of options and for him to have an even better shot at winning

banning stages pretty much down to neutrals makes it easier for MK to win, do you not play MKs?

 

[pockyD]

if mk is winning, that doesn't preclude it from being a "fair" stage, since mk is far more often than not the better character

"fair" doesn't put the two opponents on equal footing; "fair" aims to eliminate the impact that the stage has on the matchup

 

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

if mk is winning, that doesn't preclude it from being a "fair" stage, since mk is far more often than not the better character

"fair" doesn't put the two opponents on equal footing; "fair" aims to eliminate the impact that the stage has on the matchup

it seems like people want to eliminate the stage part of the game entirely. Why take away from the game?

 

[Deleted member]

Explain why Orpheon isn't banned? I mean, there aren't even grabbable ledges on one half of the stage.

Also explain why Brinstar isn't banned. Lava comes out and requires you to avoid it, meaning you have to be aware of your surrounding instead of just your opponent.

Also, does this ruleset base most of its logic around MK being in the game or not being?

Frigate Orpheon and Brinstar offer characters advantages and disadvantages over others while not exploiting any mechanics that make the game unplayable or close to unplayable.

This rule set does not take MK into consideration in any way.

 

[Sesshomuronay]

I disagree with how bowserside is the only one thats a guaranteed win for(Gannonside should be too). But I agree with most of the other stuff you said.

 

[ftl]

I disagree with how bowserside is the only one thats a guaranteed win for(Gannonside should be too). But I agree with most of the other stuff you said.

The bowsercide is done such because it is controlled by both players (dependent on percentage), if I remember correctly? And it's also port-dependent... I don't know if Ganon's is.

There was an explanation of it somewhere in the original SBR ruleset.

 

[Grunt]

the only reason Ganon side isn't a win for ganon is because even in higher controller port (1) it's a sudden death. Lower ports makes it a loss.
Bowser however wins if he's in a higher port, but not if he's lower so sometimes he wins, sometimes he doesn't. Ganon, never wins.