Official 'Item Standard Play' Thread (65k views. Not bad for a side project, huh? :P + Poll in OP)

[feardragon64]

Wow, great job Bobson. That's some good info; much thanks. ^_^ Also, lololol @ Dedede.

Any takers on the spawn hack code? I hope someone is at least doing some research plz?

Might be useful for you to ask that question in the researcher thread. Just saying =]

 

[Jack Kieser]

From the OP (in case you missed it):

It turns out that ISP is getting some big-name use! Houston area TO extraordinaire DugFinn is hosting two ISP tournaments in Q1 this year. The first one is actually coming up pretty quickly: an Austin, TX area 2-day featuring 1v1 AND 2v2 Brawl ISP (the link to which is here). The second tournament featuring ISP... will be WHOBO @ Anime Matsuri! WHOBO will be featuring 1v1 and 2v2 ISP as well, but will be much larger scale. MUCH larger. DugFinn has already pulled in some sponsorship for vanilla Brawl 1v1 (1000$ + player entry pot, wow) and is working on getting ISP 1v1 sponsored, as well. WHOBO looks like it will rock hardcore style, so don't miss it. (Here is a link to the AiB thread with WHOBO's schedule, and here is a link to the AM site. Enjoy.

@fear: I posted in the researcher thread in GBD. We'll see if anything comes from it.

 

[pure_awesome]

That's great news, Jack. It'll be good to see how ISP rules work in a tourney environment, and to test a few of the theories we've been running off of.

That being said, I really think we should reconsider banning the Gooey Bomb. Having something that can have an immediate impact on spawn just doesn't sit right with me. The fact that it takes a preset amount of time to explode, and the explosion can be dodged with decent timing, means the item itself is fairly useless and I doubt will see any action considering it's a counterpick, outside of someone who simply considers himself to be outclassed and wants to hope for a lucky bomb spawn.

I know that it's counterpick status would imply that it's the player's responsibility, but I just don't like that a player can willingly introduce such luck into the equation, against his opponent's wishes.


I've also been playing around with the idea of having normal sets best of 5, and finals sets best of 7, with the match time limit being lowered to 6 minutes. It helps reduce the "random" factor inherent to items, and shouldn't take too much longer since kills happen so much faster in items play. Then again, the fact that it would take longer, even if only by a little bit, can't be ignored.

What do you think?

Also, do you know if these tourney matches will be recorded? It'll be very beneficial to us to have as many of the matches recorded as possible, so we can review the effects of the "borderline" items, like Assist Trophies and Dragoon.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I'm super psyched about the tourneys; I'll definitely be at WHOBO, and I'll see if I can get off of work for the Feb. tourney, too.

I got a message from DF, and she and the NVGA have actually been testing some stuff out, apparently. According to her, ISP matches actually run a lot faster than no-item Brawl. At the Austin tournament, they're planning on increasing the stock to 4 as a test; that would reduce luck influence, too.

As for the gooey bomb, I think it depends on who is turning on the bomb; the winner or the loser. As it stands now, only the loser would have the ability to activate the gooey bomb without the other player's consent (since, if the roles are reversed, the other player could simply use his CP to deactivate the bomb). If we think about the role of CP'ing, it's expressly to give an advantage to the losing player, so if he's willing to take that risk, the lack of his opponent's say in the matter is an advantage afforded by the CP system. As far as strategy goes, the gooey actually does quite a bit: stage pressure, spacing pressure, and you always know when a stuck player is going to air/spot dodge, which helps the follow up game.

I'm really hoping that DF's tourneys will have recorded matches, although I'm pretty sure she always has at least SOME recording going on at all her HOBO's. I'll talk to her and see.

 

[DugFinn]

I'm really hoping that DF's tourneys will have recorded matches, although I'm pretty sure she always has at least SOME recording going on at all her HOBO's. I'll talk to her and see.

The answer to your question is yes. I'll record as many matches as possible, but for sure at least the finals (losers, winners and grand).

I'm working on getting some money sponsored to the ISP tourneys for WHobo (April). At least $500 for the teams and singles each. I'll post here when I get updates.

As for the Feb. ISP tournament in Austin, I'm using a modified version of the ISP ruleset (if you follow Jack's links above you can see it). It's modified for testing purposes. Mostly to see if 3 out of 4, and 4 out of 5 finals works in the same time frame as a non-ISP Brawl tournaments would. Everything points to yes. As Jack said, if this is so, it will greatly cut down on the "luck" factor many people have (wrongly) attributed to ISP.

Also, I've been testing the Smashball out at several other ISP tournaments, and surprisingly, it's worked out pretty well. Granted the rule is as follows: "Smashball: ON; may only be activated ONCE per player per round" so it makes for some pretty good strategic game play. Like, do you get the smash ball or attack your opponent while they try to get it instead? Or do you get the Smashball anyways, even if you've already gotten it once already in an effort to keep your opponent from getting it, but this means you can't activate it, so you're neutral B is now useless but at least your opponent won't be able to use it, so was that a win or loss for you (Metaknight looses his tornado so for him it would be a HUGE loss, for example); was it a win or loss for your opponent? It's very interesting the strategy that develops around this added rule based on what character is playing versus what character. From what we've been able to see, it tends to drop "top" tier characters a notch and raise "lower" tier characters a bit. So... It's been working as a sort of odd equalizer, I guess you could say. Which is a good thing. It's made FAR more characters playable.

Frankly, if the stock increase (+1 stock to the current standard of 3) pans out, I think the added Smashball rule could work very nicely together.

We'll keep testing the rules and variations out. I'll report here with the Feb. tournament results.

Honestly, I'm glad that ISP is getting recognition. A lot top players that I've talked to secretly like ISP (most didn't either know what it was, that it existed, or didn't know the actual ruleset banned broken items) and actually stated that they would like to play in an ISP tournament. I thought that was interesting to note, considering not many TO sthrow ISP tournaments. Hopefully, WHobo can help shed some light on ISP and make it more well known nationally. If anything, that's my current goal.
^ ~

 

[Jack Kieser]

Woot, recording wins! Hopefully, I'll be able to afford some equipment after these next 2 paychecks, so if you need extra recorders, I'd be happy to bring them.

I'm actually surprised to hear all the stuff about the Smash Ball rule; I didn't expect them to work well at all in 1v1. I think it's especially ironic that they're acting as an equalizer, considering everyone in the first ISP thread kept saying that they'd over-centralize the game around Sonic and the Spacies. DF, would you happen to have any videos already of ISP tournament matches?

And, lol @ people "secretly" liking ISP. I don't know why enjoying items is perceived so negatively.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I can't believe I just discovered this thread. I guess I'm a little late and I haven't read through all of the 36 pages but the idea of using items in competitive Brawl crossed my mind a couple of times. I think it's worth trying to have item Brawls as side events in tournaments to see how it goes. If the items are chosen wisely it may even balance a good part of the game (although I think Brawl is more balanced than people give it credit for). Some items are clearly not broken but add another tactical layer to the game making it deeper and even more fun hopefully. So...I feel like throwing my 0.02 in here:

Bumper ... does it need to be banned? I mean it's a powerful edgeguarding tool but the bunny ears or whatever it's called is also incredibly good for edgeguarding and can lead to guaranteed KOs. Imo bumpers should be allowed as they are a great tactical device, especially in 2vs2. It also helps against stupid tactics like planking and in general adds depths into many situations (edge traps or juggle traps for example) - and it still is high risk. I think with a low spawn rate it could be acceptable.

Bunny ears and metal box need to be allowed for sure. Both are risky and add a new dimension: Link greatly benefits from the ears, possibly making him more viable. the metal box is good for light characters but it's still risky as the high fall speed makes you easier to combo.

Banana Peels should be allowed. I can't see a reason not to allow them and they have combo potential for some characters.

Food should only be allowed for teams imo

FS always banned for teams and singles imo

Mines could be allowed imo. I know they're extremely strong but they're very risky and highly situational. I think they're awesome for traps, like dthrows into mines. Snake can basically already do it anyways. Just not as strong. I think you can allow them w/ low spawn rate

Pitfalls are difficult. They look very strong, especially since I sense combo potential. But they are only minorly risky. If they're allowed either in teams only or with an extremely low spawn rate.

...

i haven't even tried this yet but can you modify the spawn rate for individual itmes?

 

[Dark Sonic]

Brawl+, ISP, Normal Brawl, Melee....wow, talk about variety.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Don't forget, people still play SSB64, as well. Add on top of that all the 1v1 and 2v2 metagames for each game... That's a lot of ways to play.

 

[pure_awesome]

Bumper ... does it need to be banned? I mean it's a powerful edgeguarding tool but the bunny ears or whatever it's called is also incredibly good for edgeguarding and can lead to guaranteed KOs. Imo bumpers should be allowed as they are a great tactical device, especially in 2vs2. It also helps against stupid tactics like planking and in general adds depths into many situations (edge traps or juggle traps for example) - and it still is high risk. I think with a low spawn rate it could be acceptable.

I'm fairly sure that a secondary reason to the bumper being banned is the ridiculous knockback that it causes when it's thrown.
Couple that with it's insane edgeguarding abilities, and it's just too darn powerful.

Bunny ears and metal box need to be allowed for sure. Both are risky and add a new dimension: Link greatly benefits from the ears, possibly making him more viable. the metal box is good for light characters but it's still risky as the high fall speed makes you easier to combo.

Bunny Hood is allowed (last I checked), and the reason Metal Box is not allowed is because it has EoS (Effect on Spawn) abilities. That is, a player can activate it without actually wanting to activate it.

Banana Peels should be allowed. I can't see a reason not to allow them and they have combo potential for some characters.

Unless something huge has come up recently (Jack?) the Banana Peel is definitely allowed.

Food should only be allowed for teams imo

It's debated. I mainly like having them on because they open up the full abilities of Smashville and Yoshi's.

FS always banned for teams and singles imo

They're actually not as broken as they appear. Well, except Sonic.

Mines could be allowed imo. I know they're extremely strong but they're very risky and highly situational. I think they're awesome for traps, like dthrows into mines. Snake can basically already do it anyways. Just not as strong. I think you can allow them w/ low spawn rate

Motion-Sensor Bomb is allowed.

Pitfalls are difficult. They look very strong, especially since I sense combo potential. But they are only minorly risky. If they're allowed either in teams only or with an extremely low spawn rate.

Again, they aren't as strong as people make them out to be. It's another "borderline" item, but currently approved by the ISP ruleset.

i haven't even tried this yet but can you modify the spawn rate for individual itmes?

Without hacking? Nope.



@Dug
I really like the "One FS per character" rule, and I'm surprised it hasn't been thought of before. Question: If Metaknight has already used his Final Smash, and gets another Smash Ball, is he simply not allowed to use it at all, or just not allowed to hit his opponent?

Essentially, can he run away and use it on nothing in order to waste the Smash Ball?

@Jack
I don't really blame people for not liking items. We've got just under a decade of thinking that items are for scrubs under our belts, it's kind of hard to just turn that off. I love playing ISP rules, but in the back of my head even I still catch myself thinking "Sure, but it's not really competitive."

 

[Dark Sonic]

@Dug
I really like the "One FS per character" rule, and I'm surprised it hasn't been thought of before. Question: If Metaknight has already used his Final Smash, and gets another Smash Ball, is he simply not allowed to use it at all, or just not allowed to hit his opponent?

Well, that wouldn't really be fair, since some characters have no way of "wasting" the smash ball. Characters who's FSes transform them come to mind (landmasters, Super Sonic, Samus/Zamus, ect.) Metaknight could get the smash ball, waste it, and then have his tornado available to him, with the opponent now not being able to just knock it back out of him, but Falco couldn't. He'd be stuck with the smash ball and be unable to use his lasers (which last time I checked are kind of important for him).

 

[Jack Kieser]

Well, that wouldn't really be fair, since some characters have no way of "wasting" the smash ball. Characters who's FSes transform them come to mind (landmasters, Super Sonic, Samus/Zamus, ect.) Metaknight could get the smash ball, waste it, and then have his tornado available to him, with the opponent now not being able to just knock it back out of him, but Falco couldn't. He'd be stuck with the smash ball and be unable to use his lasers (which last time I checked are kind of important for him).

When I talked to DF, the way she explained it to me was that if you've already used your FS, you have a choice to make. You can let your opponent get the Smash Ball and trust in your abilities to dodge it... or you can ****-block and get the Smash Ball yourself so that he can't use it. The thing is... you can only activate the FS once per match, regardless of whether it hits or not. Only one Landmaster. Only one Crystal Flash. Only one activation, period, hit or not, every character, no "wasting" allowed. If a Falco uses his Landmaster and then gets the Smash Ball, he IS locked out of his lasers. He cannot use his neutral B AT ALL while possessing the Smash Ball; if he does, it will activate and count as a DQ (I would assume).

So, don't rely on your Neutral-B too much if you like your FS. That's part of why the Landmasters aren't very good under DF's rules; because they can lock you out of your only projectile.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^No, I was saying that his suggestion "well, can they get the smashball and just waste it even if they've already used their FS once before" would be unfair, not that the concept as a whole was flawed.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Oh, I see. Misunderstood you a little. Oh well, at least we got a more in-depth explanation in the thread anyway.

 

[Psychoace]

Also, I've been testing the Smashball out at several other ISP tournaments, and surprisingly, it's worked out pretty well. Granted the rule is as follows: "Smashball: ON; may only be activated ONCE per player per round" so it makes for some pretty good strategic game play. Like, do you get the smash ball or attack your opponent while they try to get it instead? Or do you get the Smashball anyways, even if you've already gotten it once already in an effort to keep your opponent from getting it, but this means you can't activate it, so you're neutral B is now useless but at least your opponent won't be able to use it, so was that a win or loss for you (Metaknight looses his tornado so for him it would be a HUGE loss, for example); was it a win or loss for your opponent? It's very interesting the strategy that develops around this added rule based on what character is playing versus what character. From what we've been able to see, it tends to drop "top" tier characters a notch and raise "lower" tier characters a bit. So... It's been working as a sort of odd equalizer, I guess you could say. Which is a good thing. It's made FAR more characters playable.

Frankly, if the stock increase (+1 stock to the current standard of 3) pans out, I think the added Smashball rule could work very nicely together.

Well wouldn't losing the ability for b attacks also lessen your defense while increasing the others offense in a way? metaknight has the smashball but can't use some defensive moves like tornado to defend it from getting knocked out, while say a falco still has lazers to pressure mk into losing it.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Exactly. So, either use the Smash Ball at the end of your match, or don't over-rely on your Neutral B. Don't forget, something like that would most likely affect character viability; that would obviously affect Meta or Falco more than Squirtle or Link.

 

[DugFinn]

Pretty much, the "one FS activation per player per round" uses the risk/reward system to the max.

Getting the SB is a risk in itself.
1. You can try to go after it, while leaving yourself open to attacks from your opponent (this by FAR is the biggest outcome that we've seen when the SB comes out.) Scrubs ALWAYS go after the SB while the pro ends up racking like 50+ damage on the noob, then smacks him out of the way and takes the FS for himself. Each character requires a certain about of damage they must do to the SB before it breaks. Learning how to gauge your own or your opponent's hits on the SB is critical to playing like this. Characters like Ike can take the ball in one fell swoop, while characters like Meta take forever to get it.
2. You can let your opponent go after the SB and **** their a$$ while they play FS volley ball. We've seen most of the pros do this and then just easily dodge the FS afterwards. Or time it just right, and smack the opponent out of the way at the last second and claim the SB for themselves. Of course, there is always the risk of the opponent actually getting the FS and using it.

Using the FS is a risk as well.
1. Characters like Metaknight and Marth have to be in place before they can use the FS, so it still gives the opponent a chance to knock it out (but they risk placing themselves in the position to have the FS be used on them first). When this happens, we've seen some of the fiercest playing EVER to knock that freakin' ball out (and it happens all too often). Remember, each character only gets ONE shot at using the Final Smash - so they CAN'T waste it without being SURE that it's going to hit. It's better to have the SB knocked out of you (so you can get it again later and use it correctly) than to waste it and NOT be able to activate it again. We often see the pros "bait" the scrubs into using the FS to get them to waste it. The amount of sheer MINDGAMES that we've seen done with this is INSANE.

Getting the SB to keep your opponent from using it has super high risks but can also have high rewards
1. You can get the SB (even if you've already activated it) but not be able to activate it again (so you'll be stuck in Super Saiyan mode, but not be able to use the Spirit Bomb). This will keep your opponent from being able to use it, but they'll probably kick the crap out of you in the mean time, because you won't have your neutral B. In all honesty, from what I've seen, this can go both ways. Characters that rely on their neutral B get shafted hard, while characters that don't rely on their neutral B can actually decently get away with this strategy for awhile.
2. Of course, having the SB and accidentally activating it results in your forfeit of that round, so that's a huge risk (for only the neutral B trigger happy players anyways). An accidental activation usually only happens to two people: noobs who say "Oops, I didn't mean to! My finger slipped" or pros who say "Crap! I forgot I had it! I was gonna use the tornado, d@mned it!"

Aaand there's lots of other stuff that goes with it, but as you can see, having the SB on with the stipulation of "only one activation per player per round" fits the risk/reward system very well. And from testing it in tournaments, it's worked out very well (rather surprisingly well actually).

I'll take footage at the Feb Austin ISP tourney and post it here.

 

[Jack Kieser]

...and with that, DF wins the thread and the internets for masterful use of a DBZ analogy. Man, I can't wait for the Austin tournament; I want to see this stuff in ACTION. It sounds like great entertainment.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Wait...

You guys stole my idea.


I thought that's what they meant the final smash was gonna be (1 use only) prior to the release of the game, and under those conditions, the randomness issue wouldn't be an issue.


Balance is still a factor however, though it's pretty amusing, the more powerful the FS the more important the neutral B seems to be.

Falcon, Fox, and Wolf (God tier FSs) all require it.

Granted, Sonic is the exception, but it's not enough to cover all his weaknesses, especially with it being 1 time only.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Wait, I'm assuming you mean Falco, Fox, and Wolf. Falcon's is God tier, but only because it's the only FS that gets its own cutscene. Interesting to note, when you pick up the Smash Ball, you have about 3-5 frames (IIRC) in which you can use your Neutral B without activating your FS.

 

[DugFinn]

Just found out something epic from Inui... It seems he and M2K are going to play in the ISP tourney at Whobo (April 10th-12th). That's um... Well, you currently can't have a bigger name playing an ISP tourney. Should be good.

 

[Jack Kieser]

What... WHAT? Seriously? ...That's awesome. I'm very surprised; I wouldn't think they'd be open to trying items play, considering how orthodox of players they seem to be. Wow. Epic.

 

[DugFinn]

What... WHAT? Seriously? ...That's awesome. I'm very surprised; I wouldn't think they'd be open to trying items play, considering how orthodox of players they seem to be. Wow. Epic.

I told you, it seems a lot of them are "secretly" into it, heh... http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=216278&page=3

 

[pure_awesome]

I'm extremely interested in seeing M2K's Metaknight play under ISP rules.

You know who else I really want to go? Malcolm. Any good Sonic, really, but he's the first that comes to mind. The way that the Smashball is going to be used, I good Sonic could potentially tear up the joint. He's got, by far, the most broken Final Smash, he's crazy fast and will have no problem controlling any Smash Balls that spawn, and losing his Neutral B for an extended period of time won't have a drastic effect on his game.

ISP Sonic is much better than Brawl Sonic, and I want to see how much.


Jack, since we all seem pretty much agreed that the one-time use rule for the Smashball is a great idea, how about we make it official and stick it in the OP? That way, anyone who sees "ISP tourney at WHOBO!" and comes to check the rules here won't have any nasty surprises, and will instead get the complete ruleset that's going to be used. We can always re-visit it after the tourney to reconsider how it went. (Of course, we're going to need to do that anyway on several items.)

Man, this is awesome. I'm so pumped. I need to get my passport sorted out...

 

[DugFinn]

I'm extremely interested in seeing M2K's Metaknight play under ISP rules.

You know who else I really want to go? Malcolm. Any good Sonic, really, but he's the first that comes to mind.
ISP Sonic is much better than Brawl Sonic, and I want to see how much.

Mr. 3000 is going to be in the ISP tourney too. He's considered one of the best Sonics. You're right. This should be interesting.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Sweet! Mr. 3000; I haven't really talked to him since the original ISP tournament test we had back in... May '08 (IIRC). Yeah, he tears up the joint.

DF, do you yet know the entire ruleset you're planning on using at WHOBO, or just the one you're going to test in Austin? I'm thinking I can post alongside what we have now derivative rulesets that are actually used in tournaments for contrast; that way, we can see what works in a real world setting and talk about the contrasts between all possible rulesets in the threads.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

Interesting fact: Meta Knight's Tornado will stop and outprioritize every single one of the shots fired from the Cracker Launcher. Including the last shot

D:

(Sorry that's probably already known)
I wish this ISP tourney the best of luck. There'll be vids right?

 

[DugFinn]

Sweet! Mr. 3000; I haven't really talked to him since the original ISP tournament test we had back in... May '08 (IIRC). Yeah, he tears up the joint.

DF, do you yet know the entire ruleset you're planning on using at WHOBO, or just the one you're going to test in Austin? I'm thinking I can post alongside what we have now derivative rulesets that are actually used in tournaments for contrast; that way, we can see what works in a real world setting and talk about the contrasts between all possible rulesets in the threads.

I know a good general idea of what the ruleset of WHOBO will be, but there are a few things I might change. 1. Stages (some might get switched around), 2. Counter-picking (changing some of the items to and from the counter picks to neutral) 3. Stock (either 3 or 4 stock - probably 4 this is tested in Feb.'s tourney), 4. I've tested the SB at other tourneys and it's worked so far - Feb.'s tourney will seal the deal, but it's probably going to be used (pretty much a 95% chance that it will be used at WHOBO).

I've got a draft of the WHOBO ISP rules, but I'm waiting until Feb.'s tourney to make the final decisions. It'll pretty much look like the rule set for the Feb. tourney, except counter-picking items will be back on and the stages and items might change just a little.

The biggest issue I've had with ISP rules is the whole "counter-picking" of an item. I think though, it's not an issue with the rule itself, just that people don't understand how to do it. Perhaps it should be simplified somehow or just better explained? I'm sure as ISP gets more popular players will learn it eventually and not be so confaondegatulated (<-- not a real word, but it "sounds" like how players "look" when they try to "understand" the counter-pick system).

 

[pure_awesome]

Dug, do you mean the part where the Loser switches one, then the Winner, and then the Loser switches again?

That's really cool that 3000 is going. He's definitely the upper-echelon of player that I was thinking of.


I've got my fingers crossed for Golden Hammer being counterpick. I really like that item, and the whole "extremely high risk / extremely high reward" setup it's got going on. Plus, you can do a whole lot of cool **** with it.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I had the same problems with item counterpicks when we first introduced the system; most people just don't understand that it's basically item slob picks. That and the concept is new (for items, at least); most players aren't used to having a malleable item list (it's usually all or nothing), so once it's explained in detail, at least in my experience, it works a lot more smoothly. A good idea might be a demonstration before the tournament, maybe right before pool assignments or something.

 

[DugFinn]

I had the same problems with item counterpicks when we first introduced the system; most people just don't understand that it's basically item slob picks. That and the concept is new (for items, at least); most players aren't used to having a malleable item list (it's usually all or nothing), so once it's explained in detail, at least in my experience, it works a lot more smoothly. A good idea might be a demonstration before the tournament, maybe right before pool assignments or something.

Good idea. A demonstration will do it for sure. It can be done on the projector and on the PA system so that everyone and their mother can see and hear it. Good thinking.

And yes, pure_awesome, that's what I meant. By the way, your name is pure awesome.
^ ~

 

[Jack Kieser]

I'm guessing from the player tags in pure_awesome's linked youtube vid that pure was playing the part of hammer-defender. Not that I'd ever use a hammer anyway (too gimpable), but ****, I'd certainly never take one up with you on the field. Nice PS->Dolphin Slash/Rest, very classy.

 

[cman]

Why is the Smart Bomb banned? You can DI out of it very quickly and only take 5-10ish damage if you are quick and paying attention. The write up says it is does too much damage to easily as the only reason for banning it. Is there anything else?

 

[bobson]

Why is the Smart Bomb banned? You can DI out of it very quickly and only take 5-10ish damage if you are quick and paying attention. The write up says it is does too much damage to easily as the only reason for banning it. Is there anything else?

I think the primary reason outside of that is that it can spawn in the middle of any attack and disrupt play, which is why containers were banned. It's also very easy to land, to the point where you can almost throw it without looking at the screen and still have a good chance of hitting the opponent.

Edit: On a different note, you can't shorthop when you have a screw attack badge equipped. This is a fairly relevant risk for characters who abuse aerials that autocancel with a shorthop.

 

[cman]

I think the primary reason outside of that is that it can spawn in the middle of any attack and disrupt play, which is why containers were banned. It's also very easy to land, to the point where you can almost throw it without looking at the screen and still have a good chance of hitting the opponent.

Edit: On a different note, you can't shorthop when you have a screw attack badge equipped. This is a fairly relevant risk for characters who abuse aerials that autocancel with a shorthop.

I thought it couldn't explode until thrown, but even if it does, it doesn't do any significant harm if both players DI out of it. As for the easy to use part, even if you do hit them, a reward of 5-10 damage isn't that great, unless they weren't paying attention or are bad, so the risk (hit yourself)/ease of use/reward (small amount of damage against a good player) ratio should still be fine. I can't see any reason why it isn't at least a counter pick.

 

[Brother J]

Um... I can't find the item spawn rate for 1 v 1

 

[pure_awesome]

Spawn Rate is set to "Low" for 1v1 play.

Smart Bomb is banned mainly because it's a brainless item. You just grab it and chuck it in the general direction of your opponent for a little bit of free damage. No thought required, and the damage is pretty much guaranteed. Even if you airdodge it, it might just decide it wants to blow up in midair anyway. There's also the issue that it can spawn in the middle of an attack and explode without either playing intending to use it in that way. So yeah, random, massive, long-lasting explosions? No thanks.


And thanks, Jack. You can do some pretty interesting stuff with the Hammers, since the person wielding it can't tech or airdodge anymore. I'm sure there's fifty biliion jab lock combos I don't know about that work with the Hammers. If they get any worse, nobody's going to touch the dang things when they're on the field.

 

[DugFinn]

The spawn rate I've been using in my test tournaments has been set to "Medium". It's worked out better than "Low".
The stickers keep screwing with the spawns, so in one match we had only four items appear in SEVEN full minutes (one of the items was like the Franklin badge so it was like, meh). It was like... Is this even an item match?
Yeah. I can go ahead and tell you, WHOBO is going to be set to "medium". For both 1v1 and 2v2.

 

[pure_awesome]

Honestly? I'm happy with that. And for the exact same reason.

I'm tired of getting stickers.

I also much prefer having more than one item on stage at a time. Low always seems to end up like that.

 

[metaXzero]

Unlike that M2K vs. Ally fiasco, I hope we have vids of him come.........April was it?