Popular Competitive Philosophies: "It's okay to disagree!"

[-Vocal-]

I read this as "its ok to ignore logic and reason if people ***** and moan enough".

This is a horrid idea. If we are going to ban things for the sake of attendance then you might as well go to the root of the issue and ban defensive play.

Um. I don't think defensive play is going to make anyone not want to attend tournaments or enjoy it less. It's debatable that it can make some matchups less fun (curse you SONIC!), but frustrating combat is different than an absence of combat that frustrates you

But ICs...oh bother, I've really got to think all of this out soon, I'm tired of think of my own contradictions...

 

[Luxor]

Remember, sunshade, Brawl is an economy first and a competitive game second. Money makes the world go round and greed is good. <3 Adam Smith

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I read this as "its ok to ignore logic and reason if people ***** and moan enough".

This is a horrid idea. If we are going to ban things for the sake of attendance then you might as well go to the root of the issue and ban defensive play.

This. You know what this is, in its core? Scrub logic. We are bowing down to scrubs! It is just as bad as banning metaknight's tornado spam in matchups where it completely destroys the opponent. We need to tell these scrubs, "No johns, pick a better character of live with it". Why aren't we?

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

I read this as "its ok to ignore logic and reason if people ***** and moan enough".

This is a horrid idea. If we are going to ban things for the sake of attendance then you might as well go to the root of the issue and ban defensive play.

It all depends, once again, on what the tournament organizers believe to be in the best interest of their tournament. If a TO is running a tournament that has only a limited supply of players to appeal too, then to get a tournament going they must try to build a tournament to bring people in. In the case of a large number of casual players who prefer to use whatever character they can, banning a small thing like DDD's infinite is not that big of a deal.

There is no need to jump to extremes of TOs merely trying to compromise with it's player base.

 

[BSP]

This. You know what this is, in its core? Scrub logic. We are bowing down to scrubs! It is just as bad as banning metaknight's tornado spam in matchups where it completely destroys the opponent. We need to tell these scrubs, "No johns, pick a better character of live with it". Why aren't we?

If I had to ban D3's infinite to get turnout, I would. TOs need to put their players first don't they?

Of course, when those people get to OoState events where it's legal, they might be screwed, but that's their problem, and they shouldn't go if they would have a problem.

 

[vVv Rapture]

If I had to ban D3's infinite to get turnout, I would. TOs need to put their players first don't they?

Of course, when those people get to OoState events where it's legal, they might be screwed, but that's their problem, and they shouldn't go if they would have a problem.

Agreed. No logical reason to build a tournament that doesn't attract the people that you want to go to it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Actually, there is. You're telling them "this is okay". You're telling them that yeah, it's fine to be scrubs. It's the same way I appease my friend by not playing Zangief in SF4 because he can't beat my 360 spam; I shouldn't bow down to his scrubiness because it tells him that "it's all right to never find out how to beat a spammy and bad zangief". Of course, I have no choice because it's his Xbox360, and if all else fails, we just go play Halo 3, a game I don't really like and I actually really suck at.
TOs have the liberty of telling players "this is not okay". There are other players, and if they don't like it... oh well. Explain the situation to them, recommend that they try using characters that suck less, and if all else fails, just ignore them. It's your responsibility as the better, non-scrubby player/TO.

 

[-Vocal-]

Actually, there is. You're telling them "this is okay". You're telling them that yeah, it's fine to be scrubs. It's the same way I appease my friend by not playing Zangief in SF4 because he can't beat my 360 spam; I shouldn't bow down to his scrubiness because it tells him that "it's all right to never find out how to beat a spammy and bad zangief". Of course, I have no choice because it's his Xbox360, and if all else fails, we just go play Halo 3, a game I don't really like and I actually really suck at.
TOs have the liberty of telling players "this is not okay". There are other players, and if they don't like it... oh well. Explain the situation to them, recommend that they try using characters that suck less, and if all else fails, just ignore them. It's your responsibility as the better, non-scrubby player/TO.

So you're in favor of allowing the Infinite Dimensional Cape in tournaments?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Dear god no. There's a few critical differences between DDD's infinite and MK's IDC.

1. DDD's CG can potentially be outplayed. With really godlike reads in some matchups, and indeed it isn't a true infinite until around 100% on anyone other than DK (and bowser, more or less). It is also something you can camp/run away from if you have the lead, and if you lose the lead, you still can outplay it if you're very careful. Once MK gets the lead, it is completely impossible to beat IDC.
2. DDD's infinite affects like 5-6 matchups, only two of which are above low tier (and even those two are still hardly viable).
3. MK's IDC completely eliminates the possibility of gameplay and therefore is one of the few items in the game that is actually stalling. DDD's ICG does this too, but we have a rule against it stalling out the whole match beyond what is needed to score the kill with it (which is reasonable and necessary).

Don't make that comparison.

 

[-Vocal-]

Dear god no. There's a few critical differences between DDD's infinite and MK's IDC.

1. DDD's CG can potentially be outplayed. With really godlike reads in some matchups, and indeed it isn't a true infinite until around 100% on anyone other than DK (and bowser, more or less). It is also something you can camp/run away from if you have the lead, and if you lose the lead, you still can outplay it if you're very careful. Once MK gets the lead, it is completely impossible to beat IDC.
2. DDD's infinite affects like 5-6 matchups, only two of which are above low tier (and even those two are still hardly viable).
3. MK's IDC completely eliminates the possibility of gameplay and therefore is one of the few items in the game that is actually stalling. DDD's ICG does this too, but we have a rule against it stalling out the whole match beyond what is needed to score the kill with it (which is reasonable and necessary).

Don't make that comparison.

Interesting. So the breadth of the affect is a consideration in whether something is ban worthy or not...that sounds subjective to me.

However, you do have a notable point with the IDC - am I remembering incorrectly, or is it still possible to hit Metaknight while he is invisible? If so then you could say that godlike reads would allow you to overcome his invisibility, not to mention the camera adjustment gives you an indication of where he presently is.

I'm in no way saying that IDC should be allowed, I'm simply exploring here.

Also, I forget after reading so much - what's your position on planking?

 

[redrighthand]

Brawl:

I have no attachment to the 'essence' of the game, what the game was originally. I play competitive orientated brawl because that is what I enjoy. However, I also love playing 1v1, 2v2 or FFA's as a Random character on a Random stage with items on.

What I feel like doing really depends on the mood I am in. But ultimately I play brawl competitively more often than not because I enjoy it.

I think saying that brawl was not meant to be played competitively is a backward view. Everything evolves and develops; communities form. This smashboards community caters for all types of smashers, those that are competitively oriented and those that like challenging themselves in 1P modes, and so forth.

I suppose this makes me a constructivist to some extent. I play competitive brawl for what it is. A 2D fighting game that relies on player skill that is played on a variety of different stages (some with random aspects) with a wide array of different characters.

I think that an amount of randomness and unpredictability of stages and characters is healthy for the community; it makes us more adaptable and hopefully better players.

 

[sunshade]

IDC is stalling by BBR definition. It is impossible and arbitrary to determine if someone was using it to stall or recover or gain a more advantaged position so we ban it for the sake of enforceability and to avoid confusion.

 

[-Vocal-]

Brawl:

I have no attachment to the 'essence' of the game, what the game was originally. I play competitive orientated brawl because that is what I enjoy. However, I also love playing 1v1, 2v2 or FFA's as a Random character on a Random stage with items on.

What I feel like doing really depends on the mood I am in. But ultimately I play brawl competitively more often than not because I enjoy it.

I think saying that brawl was not meant to be played competitively is a backward view. Everything evolves and develops' communities form. This smashboards community caters for all types of smashers, those that are competitively oriented and those that like challenging themselves in 1P modes, and so forth.

I suppose this makes me a constructivist to some extent. I play competitive brawl for what it is. A 2D fighting game that relies on player skill that is played on a variety of different stages (some with random aspects) with a wide array of different characters.

I think that an amount of randomness and unpredictability of stages and characters is healthy for the community; it makes us more adaptable and hopefully better players.

I see you are new here; good to see a new addition to the thread Since you're new, I'd like to present something to you to think about.

You say you play competitive Brawl for what it is.

What is competitive Brawl, and how was it created?

@Sunshade: You're right about IDC stalling. Makes it much less of an appropriate example. I shall think more on the matter.

 

[redrighthand]

Ah true Vocal, you sly dog

I didn't play Melee or Bros by any means competitively so this is a semi-assumption; but the brawl competitive scene is most likely and Evolution of the Melee competitive scene which in turn was an update of the Bros scene. With new games came new characters and parameters, but a certain amount of community mentality would carry over. This chain of change would fall all the way back to SSB where a competitive scene most likely developed for further enjoyment of the game. Possibly on an originalist mentality.

 

[-Vocal-]

Ah true Vocal, you sly dog

I didn't play Melee or Bros by any means competitively so this is a semi-assumption; but the brawl competitive scene is most likely and Evolution of the Melee competitive scene which in turn was an update of the Bros scene. With new games came new characters and parameters, but a certain amount of community mentality would carry over. This chain of change would fall all the way back to SSB where a competitive scene most likely developed for further enjoyment of the game. Possibly on an originalist mentality.

So how did all of our rules come into being?

 

[Spelt]

Flying pandas playing pinochle.

 

[-Vocal-]

Flying pandas playing pinochle.

>.>

Who told you.

 

[Spelt]

Google. I didn't know how to properly spell pinochle so i just random searched different spellings until i found actual results for the card game.