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

[Jack Kieser]

Deadlypudding, I really want to thank you for that post. It's obvious that you took a lot of time and effort to write it, and you really did well in approaching everything in a mature and non-partisan manner. I agree with everything you said, and I hope that others who maybe weren't as open to the idea of discussion will be after reading your post.

I can't stress enough how much we want traditional tournament Smashers to come and discuss with us. Though Yuna and I, for instance, may butt heads every now and then, or though it may seem that Twin and I are having a heated argument, I really do appreciate, respect, and value their opinions as fellow Smashers (in general), and all of us currently working on this project (and there are a lot, trust me) are trying to do something not just for our group, but for the entire community. We really don't want to force anyone to play in a style they don't want, but this is, at the end of the day, a part of a larger community, and everyone's voice should count because of that.

So, thank you again, Deadlypudding. All of us in the 'ISP' project really appreciate it.

 

[Deadlypudding]

Its no problem, and I added one more thing in there right before the recap that I feel adds more clarity to what I was saying.

I really hope your tournaments work out well. You seem to have the right idea by carefully examining every item's risks/rewards. Though we all may disagree, where would any of us be if we didn't right?

 

[heroboy]

Air dodging is just as preventative to the pitfall as it is to you jumping off to knock your opponent away.


Edit:

Ok, I read some more of the topic. I still keep my view on the pitfall. If you're using it as an edgeguard, then it is just as dodge-able if not easier than the player personally jumping out to edgeguard.

If you use it on the ground, it's a fully or nearly charged smash attack.

I can use one of the TC's examples for why the gooey-bomb should be legal as to why this should be illegal. He said that gooey-bombs are not "throw and forget" like the other, ordinary explosives. The pitfall, there's no risk to picking it up and using it.


But to turn back to other things discussed earlier,

Starmen should be banned. And Twin Dreams actually remembers that Moment in his Personal Smash History wrong. I believe he's mixing up two similar events. What actually happened was I was edgeguardging a G&W that flew high, and as he was falling back towards the stage he used fair, while SIMULTANEOUSLY, a starman fell on him from off screen (it bounced over me) and a bomb-omb spawned in between us. So it was really like "I need a Hero!" *G&W attacks me with an explosion of invincibility*

Actually, that example also shows Gooey Bombs should be banned. For this exact same thing is possible in brawl, but that bomb-omb could have been a gooey-bomb. I was over 80%.

I also don't feel that Gooey Bombs attract any strategic value. The TC and a few others have said it does, but have not listed any examples. So let's look at it.

A gooey-bomb spawns that isn't in mid-attack. The opponent throws a it at you. You fail to dodge and it hits. (if it misses then there is no strategic encounter.) Here's what could possibly happen.

1. The players will approach eachother.
2. The players will avoid eachother.
3. One player will chase the other.

1. The purpose of the two players approaching eachother will be to continue to attack and damage. The one with the bomb will hope to swap it onto his opponent as well. The one without will attempt to fight regularly and knock the opponent away until the bomb explodes.

2. The players will avoid eachother. If this happens, then the player with the bomb will just sit and wait, and then dodge the explosion. If the opponent as projectiles, then he may need to dodge some, but air-dodging will probably be used to dodge the explosion in stead.

3. Either the person with the bomb will chase and try to stick, or run away to try and dodge the explosion.

those are the only possibilites. A characters attacks and approaches do not change. Not to mention, that as soon as this is used, all players will learn the time it takes to explode, and everyone will know the timing of the dodge. So it would be completely possible AND probable that two players go through scenario one and the fighting is broken up by a simultaneous spot-dodge.

Oh, and that's on top of the fact it explodes on hit.


To clarify for some: MSB DO NOT explode on contact. They must be placed first. For this reason, I say they are allowed for competitive play.

tl;dr:
Starmen: Can spawn on players for invincibility, no inherent risk.-banned.

Gooey-bomb: Explodes on Attack, little to no strategic value, players will almost always dodge explosion by learning countdown time/signal.- banned.

MSB: Doesn't explode on contact. - Allowed

 

[Twin Dreams]

Deadly Pudding -- You are honestly suggesting that judges will be able to determine the actual results of matches regardless of results? That's ridiculous. A judge should be used for ruling whether something is against rules or not, not deciding who wins matches.




I understand that item spawns are random and blah blah blah. My point is that gooey bombs and star men affect gameplay ON SPAWN. You cannot predict where things will spawn. If beam swords are raining on my opponent the entire match, that doesn't really have that much of an affect. If starmen are, I'm ****ed. Items should not affect game play on spawn. Starmen and Gooey Bombs are the most offensive. There's smaller ones that I don't really care about (Mr. Saturn and Sandbag) only because they'll have to block projectiles on spawn to have an On-Spawn-effect.

 

[Cooper736]

Though thats the biggest crutch of having the randomness in play after all isn't it? It requires more attention and cooperation from others (possibly a referee type person) to decide if the match met its end appropriately.

This is ridiculous, and I honestly cannot believe you posted this is a serious context. The entire point of this thread/program is to determine which items could be allowed for standard tournament play. No, many "competitive smashers" wouldn't participate in any tournament involving items, but to my knowledge, Jack is trying to make a comprehensive list of those items which the more open-minded smashers among us would consider playing under.

So by those guidelines, it is COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS that you would play with ANY item which is so unbalanced that it requires a referee to judge whether it was used properly. In that sense, you just proved Twin Dreams' point completely: if a Gooey Bomb spawns above you in the middle of your attack and kills you, how would a referee judge that? Clearly neither you nor your opponent had nothing to do with the placement of the bomb, so what's a ref going to do - start the match over just because a completely avoidable random event affected the outcome? The same can be said of Starman: an unfair situation influenced by neither player which can affect the outcome of a match.

So instead of having to redo a round because of an unfair yet avoidable random event, as you imply we should, why not just... you know... AVOID IT?

 

[Twin Dreams]

I once again bring up the point that judges should not be able to determine if match outcomes are correct or not. That is allowing the judge to determine who is the winner on his on preconceived notions of "fair" and "unfair". Those are both completely relative terms.

 

[Deadlypudding]

Deadly Pudding -- You are honestly suggesting that judges will be able to determine the actual results of matches regardless of results? That's ridiculous. A judge should be used for ruling whether something is against rules or not, not deciding who wins matches.




I understand that item spawns are random and blah blah blah. My point is that gooey bombs and star men affect gameplay ON SPAWN. You cannot predict where things will spawn. If beam swords are raining on my opponent the entire match, that doesn't really have that much of an affect. If starmen are, I'm ****ed. Items should not affect game play on spawn. Starmen and Gooey Bombs are the most offensive. There's smaller ones that I don't really care about (Mr. Saturn and Sandbag) only because they'll have to block projectiles on spawn to have an On-Spawn-effect.

This is ridiculous, and I honestly cannot believe you posted this is a serious context. The entire point of this thread/program is to determine which items could be allowed for standard tournament play. No, many "competitive smashers" wouldn't participate in any tournament involving items, but to my knowledge, Jack is trying to make a comprehensive list of those items which the more open-minded smashers among us would consider playing under.

So by those guidelines, it is COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS that you would play with ANY item which is so unbalanced that it requires a referee to judge whether it was used properly. In that sense, you just proved Twin Dreams' point completely: if a Gooey Bomb spawns above you in the middle of your attack and kills you, how would a referee judge that? Clearly neither you nor your opponent had nothing to do with the placement of the bomb, so what's a ref going to do - start the match over just because a completely avoidable random event affected the outcome? The same can be said of Starman: an unfair situation influenced by neither player which can affect the outcome of a match.

So instead of having to redo a round because of an unfair yet avoidable random event, as you imply we should, why not just... you know... AVOID IT?

My suggestion merely reflects the thoughts of Jack and his group to keep any item in that would cause an unfair or wrong win. Anyway, you're ignoring the bulk of my post which in no way is centered around the use of a judge or ref. In fact not only have both of you taken the whole post out of context to argue against one silly suggestion, that suggestion isn't even mentioned again in the entire post.

But if it is that important then I submit to you this. Judges aren't necessary in normal smash tournaments because every match will always end fairly and appropriately. However, it may take an outside ruling to decide if a match should be replayed if the tournament includes items with the ability to greatly sway matches. If Jack's group are so set in their ways that they will not take out items like the gooey bomb, motion sensor bomb, and starman then the have to add precautions against such an event in the case that money is on the line. Obviously the thought of judges seems strange, but the careful eye of an outside smasher would allieviate this. Let me also add, that a ref obviously couldn't declare someone a winner or a loser, only if a rematch was needed to properly decide the winner (i.e. player A does Fsmash as player B rolls away and player A hits a randomly spawned gooey bomb to end the match. Both players were on their final stock and player B was down on percent at the matches end. "ref" decicides there should be a rematch since the match was so close.) Its stupid but if clearly broken items are allowed then how else could things run smoothly? And it further proves your point that those items should be ultimately banned anyway so what are you guys complaining about?

Please though, re read through what I posted and you'll find in no way am I trying to push some referee agenda. All I'm trying to do is attempt to remind you all to try and stay civil on the argument at hand. And I'd appreciate if you took the time to actually reply to the post as is rather than assume I'm trying to suggest tournaments use refs. And for the sake of argument I do not agree with using gooey bombs, motion sensor bombs, or starmen in any tournament situation. I agree completely with everyone who says they should be banned. My post was only to point out that in the end the decision lies with Jack's group and if they decide to keep it then thats that.

 

[Twin Dreams]

Let me recap my points:
1. Competitive smash elite should converse openly with Item smash elite, but not expect their status to influence a completely different smash group. The opposite also should hold true.

Whose to say who belongs in which group? I like the game in general. I like playing it in all options. I find that items have a slight shift in mechanics, priority of objectives, and mind games. What you're really saying is that no one should expect to change Jack's opinions, though he claims this to be a community project!!

2. Jack is doing his own item tournaments and if they get big and popular thats cool. However, they are not the standard as of now and probably never will be. As such you are not being told you must play this way. Also at their tournaments, they may not even have much money on the line due to the sheer randomness that items present anyway. If you only want to whine about this item and that, but never make a plan to attend any item tournaments then why should your opinion matter?

He as seeking advice for a standard item list. If this was a topic about a tournament he's hosting, I wouldn't be barging in discussing his rules. However, this is not. This is a discussion for the community to come up with a balanced and fair item list so people can use a standardized list for item tournaments.

3. From an actual competitive standpoint, even the weakest item is broken. This mentality shouldn't be present in this discussion, and though it hasn't quite surfaced, there seems to be a few posts that borrow this philosophy of gameplay.

From experience playing with items in melee and brawl, I can tell you now that most of the items were ignored. The only time I even picked up a sword (in melee) was if I were Ganondorf so I could use it as a projectile.

Also, what exactly is "a competitive standpoint?" A point of view that has two players in conflict, out of which one will be the winner? If that's the case, why CAN'T we use it? Are you applying the "1v1; no items; Fox only; Final Destination" competitive standpoint?

Why can't their be a competitive standpoint in regards to items?

4. Jack is trying to do something in the community for everyone who likes items. He has a decent following and is at least trying to go about it in the most sensible way possible. You can't just ignore the thought he's trying to put in it and write him off. If he says his group had already considered something but wanted to keep it, then thats their say. A lot of non-elite players didn't like wavedashing being legal in Melee tournaments, but thats the way it was anyway.

If he's asking for a standardized item list that will be respected by the community, then he can't just listen to the people around him. Otherwise, why bother? Why not listen to his peers and hold tournaments for them? I mean, they're still arguing about Smash Balls and Dragoons!

 

[Jack Kieser]

Woah, woah, hold on guys. First of all, Twin Dreams, this shouldn't be about having to change my mind. Again, this is, as you said too, supposed to be a community thing; I'm compiling all of this stuff any posting it myself, but in reality it's not just my opinion that made any of these impressions. Sure, I typed them up and posted them, but that doesn't mean that the words are necessarily reflective of only my thoughts.

And, as far as the ref thing goes, if it ever got that bad, we'd just ban the item. I mean, if any item, regardless of what it is, causes this much contention among players, then we probably wouldn't have a choice. The problem comes to what happens when it gets so bad that even minor items cause contention. Someone actually came into the 'ISP' thread and seriously suggested that we have the item spawn rate set to 'None'. He wasn't being facetious; he really thought we should do it.

The whole point, as stated in our main thread, is only to ban the most serious offenders, the items that have broken properties as a majority, not a minority, of their overall properties. The reason for this is so that minor contention in the community or blatant emotion over a loss doesn't cloud our judgment and make us start banning things for little reason. I can guarantee you that, sometime in the future (assuming this all plays out), someone will lose a match because of a backfiring timer or someone getting them with a Pitfall, or a Smoke Ball messing up their recovery, and someone is going to be yelling 'Broken! Broken!' because of it. If we ban an item (any item) because of a singular defect in the face of other benefits, then we have already set a precedent that will be hard to counteract. To be frank, I (personally) want to avoid that, because it allows people to try to inject emotion into the debate, and I think that is wrong (especially when dealing with something that's supposed to be based in logic, or at least logical thought).

EDIT: Oh, and we aren't arguing about Smash Balls in 1v1 at all; that's a 2v2 debate we're having. The Dragoon is still an issue in 1v1, though, and you can check the main thread to see why people are still debating that.

 

[Deadlypudding]

Whose to say who belongs in which group? I like the game in general. I like playing it in all options. I find that items have a slight shift in mechanics, priority of objectives, and mind games. What you're really saying is that no one should expect to change Jack's opinions, though he claims this to be a community project!!




He as seeking advice for a standard item list. If this was a topic about a tournament he's hosting, I wouldn't be barging in discussing his rules. However, this is not. This is a discussion for the community to come up with a balanced and fair item list so people can use a standardized list for item tournaments.



From experience playing with items in melee and brawl, I can tell you now that most of the items were ignored. The only time I even picked up a sword (in melee) was if I were Ganondorf so I could use it as a projectile.

Also, what exactly is "a competitive standpoint?" A point of view that has two players in conflict, out of which one will be the winner? If that's the case, why CAN'T we use it? Are you applying the "1v1; no items; Fox only; Final Destination" competitive standpoint?

Why can't their be a competitive standpoint in regards to items?



If he's asking for a standardized item list that will be respected by the community, then he can't just listen to the people around him. Otherwise, why bother? Why not listen to his peers and hold tournaments for them? I mean, they're still arguing about Smash Balls and Dragoons!

It is a community project, and I never said that I thought Jack would disregard all of the input. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough on this. I don't like to argue and I'm really not going to argue against you because what you say is obviously true, but out of context with what I'm saying. I agree with everything you've said, I just feel as if there is a little more than a thirst for debate coming from some of the posts in this thread. Jack stated on many occaisions that his analysis and analysis of others involved in his project have felt that the particular items recently in discussion are fair. Thats an obvious point of contention amongst everyone in this thread.

The main thing I'm trying to say is just let it go. There's no reason to get to worked up about the situation. Especially since if an item is that broken then all it takes is a few botched finals and the problem will be fixed. We can argue all day why the gooey bomb should be banned (and it should by all means), but that won't change the current ruling on it unless Jack changes his mind. You've explained more than enough reasons to ban the disputed items and there really isn't more that can be said. That is why the situation has to sort itself out.

I told everyone at the begining of my post what I meant by competitive and yes I don't see why it can't apply to items. However, the general ruling of the smash community shys away from items in tournament settings. I know you know this and I know you knew full well what I meant. Thats the kind of bickering I was commenting on in the first place.

I'm not going to try and argue about the brokeness of items in general, but I will say that items generally allieviate characters of their inherent weaknesses. Due to the randomness of item spawning a less skilled player can get an item and can lessen or on occasion completely bridge the gap of skill between the two. This is why I generally play without, though I've had my share of item matches and my win-loss ratio is much smaller with items on than without.

As for the different groups, we can't ignore that there is a large split in the entire community here. Sure many of us like the game as is, but there are still two camps of players. Jack obviously didn't like the no-items ruling for most tournaments so he wanted to host his own tournaments for item play. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. You like all aspects of the game, I'm sure everyone does. That still doesn't mean that some people don't prefer one over the other. The whole thing is the oldest debate there can be about Smash, should items be on or off? There's really no winner since people like both. Anyway, did I ever even point you out in the original post I made? I didn't point anyone out except to mention Yuna since I had read that he considered particpating in item tournaments. It was a statement used as an example that anyone who is arguing about item legality but not going to participate in item tournaments shouldn't necessarily have number one priority in what should or should not be legal. Since no one had explicitly stated they weren't going to participate then I didn't say any names. I'm not judging anyone, merely discouraging any who might try arguing without cause. I actually assumed that everyone discussing item legality in this thread was going to participate or set up their own item tournaments anyway. So this point is really moot anyway.

I would play in any tournament regardless of items or not. However, I would be less likely to put money on one that does have items on.

I haven't attacked anyone, and I feel I've done more harm for Jack than good for even bringing the whole thing up. That I apologize for. And if for some reason you feel attacked Twin Dreams then I also apologize to you. I'm not discussing anything further on this subject unless it is about actual item legality. The topic has swayed away enough, and there is no point arguing about this further lest we all look foolish (I know exactly what this sentence will lead to and for the record I feel anyone who uses this in a different context is only looking start some pointless internet bullcrap and shouldn't be taken seriously in the first place).

Again I apologize to Jack, and Twin Dreams for derailing the topic somewhat. I feared that I might provoke strong feelings against my post, and that is what I try the most to dissuade whenever I reply to something.

 

[heroboy]

Woah, woah, hold on guys. First of all, Twin Dreams, this shouldn't be about having to change my mind. Again, this is, as you said too, supposed to be a community thing; I'm compiling all of this stuff any posting it myself, but in reality it's not just my opinion that made any of these impressions. Sure, I typed them up and posted them, but that doesn't mean that the words are necessarily reflective of only my thoughts.

The point is, you were one of the main people defending starmen and gooey-bombs. I've already made my points on that topic, which no one has brought up yet.

The whole point, as stated in our main thread, is only to ban the most serious offenders, the items that have broken properties as a majority, not a minority, of their overall properties. The reason for this is so that minor contention in the community or blatant emotion over a loss doesn't cloud our judgment and make us start banning things for little reason. I can guarantee you that, sometime in the future (assuming this all plays out), someone will lose a match because of a backfiring timer or someone getting them with a Pitfall, or a Smoke Ball messing up their recovery, and someone is going to be yelling 'Broken! Broken!' because of it. If we ban an item (any item) because of a singular defect in the face of other benefits, then we have already set a precedent that will be hard to counteract. To be frank, I (personally) want to avoid that, because it allows people to try to inject emotion into the debate, and I think that is wrong (especially when dealing with something that's supposed to be based in logic, or at least logical thought).

I totally agree, but the people leading discussion in this thread are not those who just made a few sore loses to an item. We (twin dreams and I, at least) are experienced in both item and no item play, and we play competitively. We are not telling you to ban things that we lost to, we're telling you to ban things that we ourselves have used. We are giving logical reasons, if you go back and look, we're arguing " I think this is broken and here's why" not "I think this is broken I lose all the time to it."

The timer, as long as affects one of the two people, it guarantees a stock. I thought we wanted to get rid of any item that greatly swayed play.

Pitfall is just as "Throw and forget" as explosives you said we should ban, and that an item like that as no strategic value.

The Dragoon is still an issue in 1v1, though, and you can check the main thread to see why people are still debating that.

The Dragoon has no risk at all. There's no risk to picking up any single piece, and there's no risk in picking up all three pieces. once collecting all three pieces, you are invincible, and can deliver a OHKO that activates on frame one, which means that the opponent must already be dodging. there's not really a reason to miss, because of the moment you can be hit inbetween dodges.



And Deadlypudding, Jack's group is looking for what the community feels about the matter, I understand that your post was not to incite "angry" posts, but when you say to "let it go", it kinda goes against the point of the topic.

It's a community project, but the starters of the project feel a certain aspect should stay the same, so let it go?

Or do we put what we think, and why, so that we make sure all points are taken into consideration?

I don't think it the posts are sounding to angry, though it's difficult to interpret such things over just text. But all of everyone's posts and arguments will be ripped apart and debated and debunked, to argue what whoever's posting believes. You haven't attacked anyone, but I don't think anyone really got offended.

 

[UltraDavidSRK]

Well I'm outta this community, hopefully for good. You seem cool Jack, but most of the rest of you guys seem doggedly close minded, it's like you'll just come up with stuff to support how you feel, regardless of facts. I don't really feel like rebutting much on my way out, but here's a quick example I don't have to scroll far to find:

The Dragoon has no risk at all. There's no risk to picking up any single piece, and there's no risk in picking up all three pieces. once collecting all three pieces, you are invincible, and can deliver a OHKO that activates on frame one, which means that the opponent must already be dodging. there's not really a reason to miss, because of the moment you can be hit inbetween dodges.

Really, huh, no risk? And no reason to miss, eh? I feel very confident that you haven't really tried the dragoon out in a serious context. Collecting the pieces has risk, there's a real battle over collecting them, and then once you get the gun going there are still some real mind games to play, and then you're still a little more likely to miss than to hit because the running player has tools to bait you into shooting while all you have are your reactions and predictions.

This is the kind of thing you'd find out if you gave dragoon some serious chances, and it's often the same with other items you might think are too strong (for example, ways around virtually all final smashes have been found; there's even a way to escape all damage against Olimar's FS and a consistent way to take less than 25% without getting launched). But Jack aside, and Twin Dreams' statement that he's played with items aside (cause it really doesn't seem like you've done it competitively), none of you guys are trying stuff out. And when you don't try stuff out, lots of things can look broken. Like, know what the main effect of a starman is? It's just a delay of game, and maybe the guy who grabs the starman will hit you once or twice while you're running away. Not a huge deal. There's an argument against it (personally, I don't like immediate-effect items like starman, curry, and timer), but that it's broken is not it.

And I vanish back into the Shoryuken whence I came, previously-held beliefs about the majority of the Smashboards scene well intact.

 

[Deadlypudding]

To heroboy:

Its not really to say that you should let go, but 2-3 pages about the legality of gooey bomb seemed kind of ludicrous since everytime Jack said he was keeping it. The argument reached its limits of discussion before the second page of it. Yet the debate continued, you could almost be fooled into thinking both sides simply copy and pasted their previous posts. I think a disagreement should be let go when it reaches it limits and neither side is going to budge. It reaches a point to where past that, personal attacks begin to fill the space that intelligent conversation can no longer fill.

I suppose it comes down to that I'm suggesting we all try to realize the point when a discussion is at its limits. And if nothing is changed then I suggest to just move on to the next item.

Lets also not forget that its also left in the hands of any tournament directors to ban/allow whatever items they prefer as well. A community standard ultimately seems like a list of suggestions more than a rigid unbending ruleset. Obviously no Smash tournament has to allow/ban items, they can allow/ban whatever stages, even ban characters for some backwards reason. The real gift that a community standard gives is a collection of ideas from the tournament for what is allowed/banned with specific reasons behind both rulings. Jack has already justified his reason for the gooey bomb though some may not agree. For all we know his peers and him may never feel it deserves a ban status. Thats understandable, but as I said and even Jack has said, it is at the discretion of the tournament director whether or not to ban said item.

I didn't really want to discuss this issue further, but heroboy seemed kind in his reply so I wanted to further ellaborate so it becomes more clear what I'm saying. And I'm actually very glad that this side-discussion has been handled as civily as it has. It furthers my belief that this community is certainly one of the more civil and understanding communities despite the apparant schism of views on items and advanced play. Thank you heroboy, Twin Dreams, and Jack for making me feel welcome in this discussion.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I'd like to go ahead and say something at this point. This applies to all of the decisions and discussions that are ongoing in both this thread and the main thread in Tournament Disc. I think Deadlypudding has it right when he says that, ultimately, actual tournaments are going to make the final, final ruling in this. Both sides (thus far) have their reasons and their logic, and each set of points is sound in their own rights, so in theory the debate could just be stalemated forever; we will have our list (which may, and probably will, change thanks to the discussions here on SWF), but the list will remain a work-in-progress experiment until actual tournaments decide the ultimate outcome of this.

I say this because some may feel that just because we aren't changing our minds on rulings and such we must not be listening, and I want it to be clear that this isn't the case. Ultimately, an action has to be taken, though; that won't always jive with everyone involved here. I'm confident, though, that (though it may not be for some time) we can figure this all out, and holding actual tournaments will be the deciding factor in that. We can argue logic here all we want, but the outcome of tournaments will be what finalizes all of this.

So, again, I want to thank everyone on behalf of the entire project for continuing to discuss this and for showing support through that discussion.

 

[heroboy]

To ultra:

It doesn't matter that there's a big battle over an item. Do you know why there's a big battle over the dragoon pieces? Because they're broken. In a 1v1 match, there's no "big battle" over the pieces. Both of you will run to them, pick it up, and the fight will continue on as normal. Maybe you're the one who hasn't thought about it competitively. Even so, how players fight do not count towards anything, because the characters can have "big battles" over any item. The only difference is there's a higher chance to drop the Dragoon. I still see no risk in picking it up. I still see no risk in picking all three up. It may be difficult to hit like you say, but even still, there's no risk. If I hit, there's no penalty, if I miss, there's no penalty.

And I do try stuff out, before the game was out in the US, I was researching FSes because as of now I'm still slightly leaning to letting them into tournaments. I already knew almost all of them are moderately easy to dodge, others extremely easy. I'm not totally convinced they should be out of tournament play yet.

 

[Yuna]

Well I'm outta this community, hopefully for good. You seem cool Jack, but most of the rest of you guys seem doggedly close minded, it's like you'll just come up with stuff to support how you feel, regardless of facts.

What facts? Our findings are based on facts. Yours are based on opinion. Don't be a pot.

I don't really feel like rebutting much on my way out, but here's a quick example I don't have to scroll far to find:
Really, huh, no risk? And no reason to miss, eh? I feel very confident that you haven't really tried the dragoon out in a serious context. Collecting the pieces has risk, there's a real battle over collecting them, and then once you get the gun going there are still some real mind games to play, and then you're still a little more likely to miss than to hit because the running player has tools to bait you into shooting while all you have are your reactions and predictions.

There is no risk in collecting them as you can now collect them while doing aerials and dashattacks. If that's your definition of a risk, then every single item has a risk carried with it because for most of them, you have to actually pick them up before using them. That's not how we calculate risk.

Also, once one Dragoon part has spawned, a majority of the time (I don't know the ratio but it's a vast majority), no other items will spawn 'til a complete Dragoon has been built. That's right, once one piece has spawned, they will keep spawning 'til one complete Dragoon has been built. That means that sometime soon, someone will most probably lose a stock to it. In certain cases, a few other items might spawn inbetween parts as well, but that's unusual.

Stuff

Logical thinking does not seem to be your strong suit.

And I vanish back into the Shoryuken whence I came, previously-held beliefs about the majority of the Smashboards scene well intact.

Shoryuken? The community which is having problems deciding whether or not to ban Spear Pillow and allowing pretty much all items on in tournaments (last time I checked)? Yeah, good luck with that.

Jack: Stop saying "We have to try it out in tournaments first". That's allowing things that are obviously broken a chance to decide important matches. What's to stop something really broken and that's fairly obviously so from deciding the Final set of a tournament, thus literally deciding the tournament winner? Or just a Top10 placing? That's bad enough!

Things that can be determined already now to be broken should be banned, period. Don't give it a chance to screw someone over at a tournament first.

 

[Twin Dreams]

Yes. I mean, if the goal is to kill the opponent, and he picks up the dragoon, are you suggesting that the risk is my opponent is going to get attacked MORE?



Are you playing FFAs or something?



Edit:



Also, with it's 1 frame activation, anytime the opponent does anything that has lag, free kill!!!

This includes dodging, rolling, air dodging, attacking, shielding, dashing, and pretty much anytime you do anything.


Dragoon (Risk/Reward):

1. What is bad about picking up a dragoon? (Nothing)
2. What is bad about activating the dragoon?(Nothing)
3. What is bad about hitting with the dragoon?(Nothing)
4. What is bad about missing with the dragoon?(Nothing)


What is the risk, then, of using a dragoon?


Dragoon (Counter):

1. How do you counter someone picking up a dragoon piece? (knocking it out)
2. How do you counter the use of a dragoon? (Can't)



Dragoon (Affect on gameplay):

1. OHKO on opponent, if hit.
2. Stops all items from spawning. (Except containers.)




Dragoon (too good?):

1. One Frame Activation (Your opponent must be invincible for you to miss. Which means he cannot avoid, you can only mess up.)

2. The Cross-Hairs are zeroed in on opponent on activation.

3. Camera is zoomed in on opponent.

4. Cross Hairs move FASTER than your opponent.



Meaning:

Once one piece of the dragoon spawns, all other items stop spawning. The only way to retrieve a piece picked up by your opponent is to knock it out of him. However, some characters are better at holding on to item pieces and other characters are not good at knocking items off characters!!!


Upon activation, the opponent gets a chance to OHKO with a large hitbox that activates on one frame. Your hitbox starts on the opponent, he cannot outrun you, and if he does anything that causes lag (many things) you can kill him.


The only mind game is predicting when your opponent will activate the item. If you're wrong ONCE, you lose a stock.

 

[Cooper736]

It doesn't matter that there's a big battle over an item. Do you know why there's a big battle over the dragoon pieces? Because they're broken. In a 1v1 match, there's no "big battle" over the pieces. Both of you will run to them, pick it up, and the fight will continue on as normal.

Thank you for posting exactly what I was thinking as I read his post. If two players are fighting normally, and a Dragoon piece spawns in front of one and he picks it up, it's highly unlikely that any pro will drastically change his playstyle simply to knock a single piece out. Playing that aggressively has inherent risks, and the holder will most likely know how to space and counter an aggressive opponent. ultra, you also don't take into account how stupid it is for certain characters to play in such a style (anyone with a good projectile and the ability to camp). The only instance in which holding onto a Dragoon piece would be an invitation to get attacked more is in an FFA, which is not goign to happen in the upper levels of a tournament, which is what we're discussing. Twin Dreams has summed up the flaws of Dragoon legality in his post, so i'm not going to repeat it, but just leave you with the fact that you're wrong.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

The items that I tend to have active are the Super Mushroom and Poison Mushroom. Spices up matches quite a bit.

 

[Yuna]

The items that I tend to have active are the Super Mushroom and Poison Mushroom. Spices up matches quite a bit.

These would fall into the over-powered department.

While under the influence of a Super Mushroom, you take less knockback (and since there's less hitstun now, you'll be able to counterattack virtually any attack) while also dealing out more damage and knockback.

The reverse is true for the Poison Mushroom. In other words, eating one can have you either die at 30% from a strong Smash or killing someone at 30% from a strong smash. Yes, there's a risk in eating one of them but there's also the instances where you cannot prevent it, as in you're lagging from something when a mushroom appears or shielding (IIRC, the mushrooms actually "go through shields", i.e., blocking will still have you eat them).

 

[RolandBeoulve]

Save Replay, Hey tourney judge I just got killed by a 1/god knows how many chance item spawn. Judges determining things would definitely be awkward but if certain tourney runners want some way to prevent extremely random kick in the butt by fate all the more power to them. Someone mentioned that any item can be overpowered but item-tournament goers forgo that risk of their own volition.

Soccerball would be a nice addition, a player lacking skill can't just rush this item and score a K.O. . It's properties really need to be explored because this could add a modicum of depth to a match. I've not tested it but say one player smash it at a 45 degree angle upwards, is it possible to smash it down? Misjudging the distance is certain death with this, however it can be easily avoided due to its slow-moving( other then a solid it to send it flaming) and the inability to pick it up.

Unira seems pretty balanced to me, I love knocking it across the stage and the spines bumping someone causing a wee bit of upset in the flow of battle.

Mr. Saturn is nowhere near broken, someone is coming at you with one why would you shield? You can dodge, or just take the hit and hey look know I have a Mr. Saturn. I may be mistaken and please correct me if I'm wrong but Mr. Saturn causes very little knockback/damage, right?


I'm not claiming to be an expert on item play or competitive play just wanted to add a little bit of non-gooey bomb discussion. That poor thing has a complex by now, and the horse is dead let someone revive it with fresh insight before we have at it anymore. Pretty good debate none-the-less, it's nice seeing such a lack of flames.

 

[Twin Dreams]

Save Replay, Hey tourney judge I just got killed by a 1/god knows how many chance item spawn. Judges determining things would definitely be awkward but if certain tourney runners want some way to prevent extremely random kick in the butt by fate all the more power to them. Someone mentioned that any item can be overpowered but item-tournament goers forgo that risk of their own volition.

So, you're playing 3-minute time matches? Also, this will once again fall on the judge's preconceived notions of "fair" and "unfair". Why do this when we can BAN THINGS THAT AFFECT THE FIELD ON SPAWN?

Soccerball would be a nice addition, a player lacking skill can't just rush this item and score a K.O. . It's properties really need to be explored because this could add a modicum of depth to a match. I've not tested it but say one player smash it at a 45 degree angle upwards, is it possible to smash it down? Misjudging the distance is certain death with this, however it can be easily avoided due to its slow-moving( other then a solid it to send it flaming) and the inability to pick it up.

I have not studied the Soccerball. It's powerful. As long as the trajectory isn't random, I say it's fine.

Unira seems pretty balanced to me, I love knocking it across the stage and the spines bumping someone causing a wee bit of upset in the flow of battle.

Mr. Saturn is nowhere near broken, someone is coming at you with one why would you shield? You can dodge, or just take the hit and hey look know I have a Mr. Saturn. I may be mistaken and please correct me if I'm wrong but Mr. Saturn causes very little knockback/damage, right?

Why would I shield?

Charizard + Saturn.

Shield the Saturn or eat the Rocksmash!

I'm not claiming to be an expert on item play or competitive play just wanted to add a little bit of non-gooey bomb discussion. That poor thing has a complex by now, and the horse is dead let someone revive it with fresh insight before we have at it anymore. Pretty good debate none-the-less, it's nice seeing such a lack of flames.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Man, the Soccer Ball is an interesting one. To answer Twin's pseudo-question, no, the trajectory isn't random; it has to do with your position in relation to the ball and the specific attack you use, and in my experience it seems to always travel the trajectory that an enemy would have traveled had the attack connected with another character. The power is beastly, though. You really have to be careful with it on the field, especially if two people are both going for the shot at the same time; then, its essentially a crap-shoot as to who will get hit.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

Always forget about that **** 3-minute time limit>.< I would personally hate to lose in such a way but if some people want to take the risk let them. I agree with both of you I'm conflicted, you could host 100,000 match's and never see that happen or it could happen every single match. As I said that horse is dead, let it be until someone can offer something new.

So Mr. Saturn is like any item when thrown? except for the fact that shielding it can break a used shield. It can be powerful, but only situationally much like any other item. Items spawn in random places so one person could be horribly favored the entire match. If your willing to play with Items you have to accept that from step one.

I'll be testing out the Soccerball this weekend and add in what I can if it isn't already here when I get back. Whats the point of the last quote?

 

[munkus beaver]

The soccerball would have to be banned, it's like a reverse bomb. I've had it spawn as a Pit player was doing his forward smash, resulting in the soccer ball killing me at an absurdly low %.

Mushrooms carry an inherent disadvantage for a lot of characters too, keep in mind. Many times I've been shut down while enlarged because I was a much, much larger target to hit, plus transforming from large to normal causes the player to be stunned, even if you are mid recovery.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

Random spawns are inherent to Item play, the Soccerball is pretty awesome in terms of usage but does not assure one person an automatic victory on spawning closer to them. It does put one person on the defensive but it needs a good deal of testing which gives me something to do this weekend.

 

[munkus beaver]

I'm just letting you know that it has just as much match changing potential as an exploding capsule.

There was no strategy, no risk/reward inherent in the act. The guy did a forward smash with pit, the item happened to spawn as he did so, and I was killed purely because of this. It's just not conducive to fair play.

 

[Nessticle3]

I have a question about the point of items. Is it to add depth and strategy, or to make the fighting more fun and interesting?

Ever since Smash64 I've played with a select few items on low so I really like this whole idea. The reason we played it this way is because it just made the fights more interesting, and sometimes hilarious. That one example of G&W falling on a star and then nailing a bomb to blow everyone up is a great example of why I love this game.

My point is, shouldn't the 'fun' factor of the item weigh into your calculations? The goey bomb is great fun. A frantic chase around the level, anticipating air dodges, and eventually a relatively tame explosion.

I completely understand the risk of this spawning in the middle of an attack at a key moment, but since the game has been out I've almost always played with the gooey bomb on and I could count the amount of times it's happened on one hand. I just think it's worth this risk when looking at the whole sytle of play Jack is attempting with this endevor.

Gooey bomb is perfect item to add in to counter some of the 'stale play' that has emerged in brawl. Overall, 2 thumbs up on sticking to your guns with the gooey bomb.


I highly disagree about the starman being acceptable, but I'll save that for when the discussion moves in that direction.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

Being killed for having really bad luck sucks, I concede that point. However the the chance of it happening is so ridiculously low it's strengths outweigh that possibility. I get in a car almost everyday knowing there's a chance I could die, and in many situations I would have no control over the situation. I've witnessed more car accidents then you have seen people die to random bomb spawn in the midst of a flurry of blows. Should I stay inside?

 

[munkus beaver]

You do realize that the reason why items were inevitably banned in melee was because an exploding capsule could spawn as a person did a forward smash?

I honestly don't see the difference between the soccer ball and the deku nut or the exploding crates/capsules.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

I realize this, but the Soccerball minimizes this threat to the point its almost negligible. Honestly I do believe its entirely to easy to get a license to drive cars are death machines. I'm just lending my opinion of years of plays with friends and a few small local tourney's. However I have to stand by my accident analogy.

 

[PKSkyler]

Some of the items you say are borderline or approved I still wont use in item play, but still great work.If I ever host a tournament ill probably have a few items on low.

 

[Twin Dreams]

My suggestion is to ban anything that affects the field of play on spawn. I'm so adamant about the gooey bomb because it's the biggest offender. However, no one should be rewarded/penalized for something that can happen with no strategic input from the players.



If I see an item spawn near my opponent, I can take evasive measures.

If an item spawns in my attack, I cannot take evasive actions.


(This includes Gooey Bombs, Mr. Saturns, Sand Bags, etc.)

 

[heroboy]

Hmm....

After considering the account of a soccer ball killing someone in that way, I too say it should be banned. A poorly time F-smash that could have lost the game, is turned into a death-projectile that wins the game, out of zero skill input from either player.

I believe poison and super mushrooms and lightning should be banned because it interrupts your characters animations. There have been times when I've been about to land an F-smash, then a mushroom rolls into me and cancels my attack.

Also, the risk to picking up the lightning is that it may backfire. Sure. The problem is you only have to touch it. Earlier today, my brother and I were playing, and a lightning spawned on top of him. He was minimized. He didn't even get to decide if he wanted to take the risk or not. For this reason, I say lightning should be banned.


tl;dr: super/poison mushroom - banned.
Lightning -banned.
Soccer Ball - banned.

 

[TaurToph]

Is this topic official now?

 

[RolandBeoulve]

It's a tournament to tournament basis. If I were running a tournament I would exclude it, but would not avoid tournaments that had it in play. I see both sides of the argument, you both have your points however majority opinion is what matters, kind of like the U.S. 50-100 years ago.

 

[Twin Dreams]

No. We do not want a "tournament-to-tournament" basis. This is to make a standardized item list to be used by the community. If we openly allow deviation, why make a standardized item list?

 

[Jack Kieser]

Well, we can support a standard until we're blue in the face, but ultimately the people hosting tournaments will have the most influence; I mean, it's not like we can say that if you aren't going to adhere to our standard, you can't host a tournament at all. That's why I say that we make our standard (whatever that ends up being), but it's up to the tournament organizers to make all final calls. Just to make it clear, I'm agreeing with you, Twin Dreams, but I'm also accepting the fact that people will do what they want anyway.

And I just thought of something that I want to run by the people here. I'm going to be hosting a tournament here in Mesquite in May, and while I was trying to decide the list we'd use, I thought of a (possible) idea for running item tournaments. How about we have a clause that, at some point before the set starts, each player can choose one item to disable for that set. That way, we can include some of the controversial items that are riding the fence and have good points on both sides; the players in the set can just disable an item if they don't want to deal with it. I think it can be an acceptable compromise.

 

[RolandBeoulve]

For "official" tournaments, good luck enforcing ANYTHING to be universal across the board. At a high end tourney with a good deal of money on the line Official widely agreed sets of rules should be enforced, however If I or a local game store host something for say 50$ they can enforce whatever rules they want. As I said I agree if I were playing for anything in the thousands, bombs no thanks.... But I'm not going to throw a p*ss fit over s*** luck and losing out on 100 bucks.



Edit: Well Jack put it better then me, and I like the idea of players opting out on certain items.

 

[Twin Dreams]

It appears I misunderstood. I thought you meant that we would encourage "alternate item lists." This is not a good thing. We need a "Banned List" and a "Legal List." However, you bring up a good point Jack. To allow Counter Picking items. that'd be interesting.