Ruleset changes at Apex 2015

[Fireblaster]

Come on Karajan, don't be so silly. Firstly you said best players, and secondly you said "If anyone were to approach the other in that matchup, even with the greatest skill in the world, they would lose." I'm willing to bet against that. Let's replace Isai for the kirby, and see if he can approach that fox. If he can't win, then you're probably right. But also, you're giving too much credit to these players. Kirby would be fine jumping to top plats and approaching downward against fox. That's a sufficiently favorable approach, in my opinion.

Yes I'm so sure you know way more than gerson. You should have gone to Peru and entered that tournament. You would have beaten boomfan for sure since you seem so confident that you know how that matchup is played out better than gerson.

 

[Beesy]

Yes I'm so sure you know way more than gerson. You should have gone to Peru and entered that tournament. You would have beaten boomfan for sure since you seem so confident that you know how that matchup is played out better than gerson.

Did I say I would have beaten boomfan? Did I say I know how that matchup is played better than gerson? No. And I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth Fireblaster.

 

[Studstill]

If you think it's false, then prove to us that it's false, don't just say it. We've shown you time after time again that a fight between two good players on hyrule can result in a stalemate that takes a ridiculous amount of time.

So out with it then. Tell us how he's "exaggerating" or what he's saying is false, as if a 50 minute match on hyrule wasn't enough.

Man it is so annoying how you say "tell us", "prove to us", "we`ve".
Simply put, you`re incredibly dense. I`m sorry. If you can`t see the exaggeration or logical flaw in what Karajan said, then you have no ability to suspend disbelief and the fact that you agree with him is overwhelming your faculties for reasoning and logic.
This is usually permanent and fatal, my deepest regrets. Perhaps there is hope, and in lieu of rewriting, Beesy hit the nail on the head:

Come on Karajan, don't be so silly. Firstly you said best players, and secondly you said "If anyone were to approach the other in that matchup, even with the greatest skill in the world, they would lose." I'm willing to bet against that. Let's replace Isai for the kirby, and see if he can approach that fox. If he can't win, then you're probably right. But also, you're giving too much credit to these players. Kirby would be fine jumping to top plats and approaching downward against fox. That's a sufficiently favorable approach, in my opinion.

(if I could continue, beesy?)
Or take an unfavorable approach, AND BEAT THEM. BY BEING BETTER. AT THE GAME.

 

[Cobrevolution]

please god make it stop

 

[Studstill]

Yes I'm so sure you know way more than gerson. You should have gone to Peru and entered that tournament. You would have beaten boomfan for sure since you seem so confident that you know how that matchup is played out better than gerson.

Nevermind, this is why people think you`re a prick, sorry, it`s not the "we/us" thing.

 

[Cobrevolution]

just once can you make a decent response

 

[Olikus]

How do you guys(allways the same 5 people) have enough stamina to nag on each other 24/7? Do you drink allot of red bull or something?

 

[Cobrevolution]

I'm pretty talented

 

[clubbadubba]

There are of course no certainties as far as a position being completely unapproachable or an approach being totally unstoppable, but there are some that come pretty close on Hyrule. If fox were to attempt to approach kirby 10 times on the left side between equally skilled players, kirby would win somewhere between 7-10 of those. So there is no reason for kirby to ever leave that position. Likwise, there is no reason for fox to ever approach that position. Annndddd stalemate.

Is it possible that a particular fox might be so much more skilled than a particular kirby that he wins the approach 10/10 times? Sure. But when talking about the fairness of a stage its not important to consider how lopsided player matchups interact with the stage.

And matches can't go on forever, its not logistically possible in tournaments. I still prefer someone to MAN UP AND DQ A ***** over a timer, but insisting that matches are allowed to go on forever is unreasonable.

 

[Studstill]

"I still prefer someone to MAN UP AND DQ A ***** "
Exactly. Only option there is. And Clubba, I always appreciate your tone.
Banning Hyrule is not an option for SSB64.

 

[Cobrevolution]

pretty sure clubba agrees hyrule should be banned

 

[Studstill]

How do you guys(allways the same 5 people) have enough stamina to nag on each other 24/7? Do you drink allot of red bull or something?

Have Hyrule legal, no timers, and no blatant abuse and harassment of fellow smashers:
You`ll never see me again.

 

[clubbadubba]

no hyrule should not be legal and no one has said anything in this thread that merits that in any way.

 

[Studstill]

hyrule should be legal and no one has said anything in this thread that merits that it shouldn`t in any way.

 

[MrMarbles]

Two opponents in a competitive match should start the match with no environmental advantages or disadvantages granted to one party or the other.

too bad dreamland does not support this either. CASE CLOSED

 

[Cobrevolution]

you are a child

 

[kys]

Studstill, please stop. You're making yourself look very foolish.

You remind me of a guy in high school who always argued with everyone, and when he was clearly proven wrong he would bust out, "I just think on a higher level than you guys, you don't understand." You're not some savant that has higher brain power than everyone else.

Many of the posters on here are very intelligent people. When they make detailed and logical posts to support arguments, it's incredibly disrespectful to ignore the time and work they put into it.

God, it's frustrating as hell reading your posts. Seriously dude.

 

[Fireblaster]

Did I say I would have beaten boomfan? Did I say I know how that matchup is played better than gerson? No. And I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth Fireblaster.

you're giving too much credit to these players. Kirby would be fine jumping to top plats and approaching downward against fox. That's a sufficiently favorable approach, in my opinion.

You should choose your words more carefully then.

Man it is so annoying how you say "tell us", "prove to us", "we`ve".
Simply put, you`re incredibly dense. I`m sorry. If you can`t see the exaggeration or logical flaw in what Karajan said, then you have no ability to suspend disbelief and the fact that you agree with him is overwhelming your faculties for reasoning and logic.
This is usually permanent and fatal, my deepest regrets.

So instead of trying to back up your point with evidence or proof, you're just gonna write a paragraph that essentially says "you're stupid and don't know what you're talking about". Nice argument.

(if I could continue, beesy?)
Or take an unfavorable approach, AND BEAT THEM. BY BEING BETTER. AT THE GAME.

Player A and player B have very similar levels of fighting potential

Player A = lvl 50 fighting potential
Player B = lvl 55 fighting potential

Fighting on even grounds, Player B beats player A.

Player A gets an advantage by fighting on a specific part of the stage and by doing so he gains 10 levels of fighting potential. Relatively this is equivalent to saying: "Player B gets an advantage by fighting on any other part of the map"

By fighting on grounds that benefit player A, player A beats Player B. Fighting on any other grounds benefits player B as he would beat player A.

It makes sense that player A would only want to fight on the part of the stage that increases his potential and never leave it. It also makes sense that player B wouldn't want to approach player A in the area that benefits player A. This creates a stalemate that is neither player's fault as neither player should be forced to approach the other player at a disadvantage and you cannot arbitrarily say that one player should have more precedence in approaching over the other player.

This is the main logic used to ban hyrule. This is the logic that you should be trying to topple if you want to convince people about hyrule. Show in a clear and concise manner why/how this logic is false or how this doesn't apply to hyrule. Don't just say something meaningless like "THE BETTER PLAYER WILL APPROACH AND WIN" as this completely ignores everything we've said and you mostly end up repeating yourself without getting anywhere in this discussion.

 

[Beesy]

No, I chose my words carefully fireblaster.
Discussing one approach doesn't mean that I:
1. know way more than gerson
2. would have beaten boomfan for sure
3. know how that matchup is played better than gerson
All of which you blamed me for.
Maybe kirby just felt like camping, maybe he wanted to see how long fox would also camp, I don't know why they played the way they did and I NEVER claimed to. I didn't say those things, nor would I.

I don't know why you're so interested in putting me down and putting words into my mouth to make me seem arrogant, but I don't like it. My only intention was to discuss that starting position about kirby and fox, if I came across as argumentative, insulting, or condescending or anything else, that wasn't my intention.

 

[Mr Bushido]

So from my understanding, console can't support stocks + timer GS code without crashing?

 

[Combo Blaze]

Komo has a flash cart with the timer that works and was used in one of our locals. Gotta remember to bring that to the next tourny m2k comes to.

 

[pidgezero_one]

good ol' K( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)M( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)T( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)N( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)T( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

Maybe kirby just felt like camping, maybe he wanted to see how long fox would also camp, I don't know why they played the way they did and I NEVER claimed to.

you'll know why once you get good at the game. Good news is you don't need to be gerson or boomfan level to know why both people are playing that way using the optimal strategy (see here is a hint)

So from my understanding, console can't support stocks + timer GS code without crashing?

I couldnt get it to work on hyrule with a flashcart

Or take an unfavorable approach, AND BEAT THEM. BY BEING BETTER. AT THE GAME.

Taking an unfavorable approach is stupid. Stupid people don't get better at the game. Or, stupid actions are not effective against smart, competent opponents. ****** strength only goes so far

 

[Beesy]

I hope you'll help me in that effort, karajan. Is DK your main? Maybe you could show me stuff at Apex? I can't play DK at all. I hope I can learn some from everybody.

 

[Cobrevolution]

i think steve only mains DK in japan

maybe he'll keep kirby for america

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

Two opponents in a competitive match should start the match with no environmental advantages or disadvantages granted to one party or the other.

too bad dreamland does not support this either. CASE CLOSED

Of the non-gameshark levels, it best satisfies the criteria, hands down.
And notice how I said at the Start of the match.

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

i think steve only mains DK in japan

maybe he'll keep kirby for america

kirby isnt my best anymore XD

And i did go all DK at a local tournament and beat yunque's puff and falcon
yunque beats me in falcon dittos
My DK played fireblaster's fox on console last month and i might have 4 stocked him

 

[VVilde]

I got ur dreamland right here
My tree trunk is ready to blow a fat load

 

[Studstill]

"Taking an unfavorable approach is stupid. Stupid people don't get better at the game. Or, stupid actions are not effective against smart, competent opponents. ****** strength only goes so far"
Lol, I bow to your logic, and I`ll go flip a coin twice and verify it`s one heads and one tails every couplet.
:D

 

[Studstill]

Studstill likes this post ^
What?!? I have to wait 11 seconds before double posting!
Hitler!

Edited.

 

[MrMarbles]

ca

Of the non-gameshark levels, it best satisfies the criteria, hands down.
And notice how I said at the Start of the match.

cant the same be said for congo and pc? different ports for those maps but there's neutral positions for those maps

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

ca

cant the same be said for congo and pc? different ports for those maps but there's neutral positions for those maps

pc = easily no, the top plat that the players start on is unbalanced, and the moving platform picks one side to go to first

congo gets close, but the rotation of plats favor one side over the other, and the barrel picks a side to go to first

every platform in dreamland is static

 

[Combo Blaze]

Pretty sure this was said in someway or form.

Basically the thing with Hyrule in that situation is that both players are in a position where approaching either puts them at a disadvantage or loses their advantage they had. This situation can also occur in DL (top platform for example) but the difference here is that there's a neutral game (right terminology?) to fight for the position. In DL both players (assuming port 2 - 4) have to fight each other to gain the favorable position. In Hyrule the player on the left can just move over to the left side, the player in the middle can instantly take the top platform or move to the tent, etc.

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

Pretty sure this was said in someway or form.

Basically the thing with Hyrule in that situation is that both players are in a position where approaching either puts them at a disadvantage or loses their advantage they had. This situation can also occur in DL (top platform for example) but the difference here is that there's a neutral game (right terminology?) to fight for the position. In DL both players (assuming port 2 - 4) have to fight each other to gain the favorable position. In Hyrule the player on the left can just move over to the left side, the player in the middle can instantly take the top platform or move to the tent, etc.

you have offended studstill for simplifying such a complex and beautiful game. there are no advantageous positions, only gaps in player skill duh

 

[Beesy]

Blaze, is that atilla from civ?

 

[Combo Blaze]

drawing of him I guess. civ is fun

 

[MrMarbles]

pc = easily no, the top plat that the players start on is unbalanced, and the moving platform picks one side to go to first

congo gets close, but the rotation of plats favor one side over the other, and the barrel picks a side to go to first

every platform in dreamland is static

that seems really nit-picky. the plat moves so slow on pc that by the time it has moved significantly both players have already changed positions on the stage. as for congo the rotation on the plats does not give either player an advantage that's just silly. I could argue that being p4 on dreamland gives u an advantage cuz u can immediately camp under the right plat with the right side being advantageous over the left due to the wind not pushing u off the stage.

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

that seems really nit-picky. the plat moves so slow on pc that by the time it has moved significantly both players have already changed positions on the stage. as for congo the rotation on the plats does not give either player an advantage that's just silly. I could argue that being p4 on dreamland gives u an advantage cuz u can immediately camp under the right plat with the right side being advantageous over the left due to the wind not pushing u off the stage.

20 seconds for the wind to blow is much more than the period of time it takes the plats / barrels to move

 

[thegreginator]

I really don't get the obsession with "symmetry" as the most important determinant of a stage being legal. If we took Hyrule or Saffron or Zebes and reflected them across the y axis such that stage was perfectly symmetrical, that still wouldn't make them a good stage. There are aspects of a stage that make them bad for competitive play that have nothing to do with symmetry and are probably more important. A few that come to mind are excessive size, limiting size, too many platforms encouraging camping, too few platforms limiting approach options, etc. And the most important of all is the presence of stage design in which one opponent has a positional advantage over the other (i.e. a Kirby camping on the left side of Hyrule/the heli landing pad). You could create a stage that is just the left third of Hyrule reflected and it would be perfectly symmetrical but create strong incentives for players to camp the left and right sides and not approach the center stage.

I get the whole argument that the opponents should not have environmental advantages. I also think that Hyrule should be banned and would be fine with a Dreamland only ruleset. But "symmetry" is not the right word to describe the need to limit stage-induced positional advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Shears]

Studstill, have you read my lengthy post from earlier? There has been no addressing of the points I made and I feel the logic I used unquestionably leads to the current ruleset we are looking at. To continue, rules are determined to handle hypothetical outlier cases. For example, murder is illegal because there are outlier cases where people feel the need to murder. Not every person feels the need to murder and chooses not to because the law is there and they submissively abide by it. The law exists because there exists the hypothetical chance that someone does have the urge to murder, so the law is in place to theoretically prevent it. If the law didn't exist, and people got away with murder, as time approaches infinity murder will become commonplace. Like real laws, the laws we establish for playing smash are determined off these hypothetical situations. Banning Hyrule isn't because every single person every single time will camp, but there exists the hypothetical possibility that someone will and so we need to prevent that from happening because these outliers will break the game. If Hyrule is never banned then as time approaches infinity everyone will camp. Now you may argue that camping isn't optimal and the better player will win but again we have to go back to a hypothetical here. The rules aren't about getting the better player to win, they are about creating neutrality, which is getting equal players to tie. A tie is asymptotic in this game, but our rules are defined using the limit as both players skill approaches infinity, which allows us to theoretically suggest a tie. Assuming both players have equal skill, Player A has lvl 50 fighting potential and Player B has lvl 50 fighting potential, theoretically the game should end in a tie because if either play won then there are two possible explanation, either one of the players were not lvl 50 (which is assumed impossible for the hypothetical) or there was an environmental factor uncontrolled by the players that favored one over the other. The only environments that exist in the game is the stage. In order to ensure a tie, we need to make sure the stage is neutral, or doesn't provide any advantage or disadvantage to either player. Hyrule is clearly not neutral because it fails to have symmetry, and as I pointed out in my previous post, asymmetrical things are not neutral. So which stage most likely ensures that two exactly identical players will tie? Dreamland.

*Remember what equal and identical truly mean. For A and B to be exactly identical, then character selection, move selection, positioning, approach, etc. are all the same. Imagine it as one controller being used for two characters with the X-axis inverted for one player and port priority doesn't exist.