Smash to the Future on hiatus for the summer!

[Scythe]

says a lot about you if you think someone's stance on wobbling really has anything to do with what kind of person they are

 

[john!]

people's views on whether others' views on whether their views of wobbling say a lot about what kind of person they are say a lot about what kind of person they are say a lot about what kind of person they are





that just happened.

 

[Lanceinthepants]

why is this discussion being held at all?

who cares that much about the wobbling rules? it goes both ways. The data shows banned or not banned ICs place the same in tourneys and in matchups. Besides, everyone that plays ICs is basically relying on abusing their weird game mechanics to compensate for their terrible fundamentals that apply to all characters.

Awesome.

Also, Purdue might be coming to this shindig. Depends on a couple factors.

 

[Quaz]

cool cant wait for this. Need to get myself back in shape (Matt wrecked me at Chris's pretty hard last night =( )

Also I dont mind if wobbling is on or not honestly.. because I feel like ICs already **** me with grabs anyways. Im peach, I should be able to dsmash properly to get em away from me lol.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Purdue might be coming to this shindig. Depends on a couple factors.

... such as whether wobbling is banned or not

 

[PEEF!]

Huh?

I wanted to just talk about how wobbling is completely unlike any other combo in the game in the sense that there are no defensive options once it has begun. Once the combo starts there are no actions for the offender to react to or things the defender could otherwise do to effect it. Because of this, there can be no defensive advances in the metagame surrounding this.

Ah great. Something I have clearly answered already. Bolded parts especially relevant.

Also, proving that wobbling breaks the mold of other combos does not prove it's "banworthyness". There are two burdens to overcome. The burden will be on the banner to first prove that it is relevantly different than any other combo (otherwise your own argument will compel you to ban rest, shine, etc) and ONLY THEN can they try to prove that "what makes it different makes it worthy of being banned".

Example of the first burden not being satisfied: "Wobbling is a low-risk, high-reward, and easy to execute technique that leads to certain death at any percent above 40%".

Shines offstage and combos into them immediately satisfy all of these criteria. Combos into rest are very low risk in many situations and especially against many characters (Peach for example.) People may respond that resting is high risk because you could be punished, but we all know how safe comboing into rest is, and it is only high risk in rare situations. This common anti-wobbling argument also assumes that grabbing is low risk, which is quite debatable considering that preying on grab-happy ICs is so easy, and against good players a missed grab might as well be a broken shield.

Example of the second criteria not being satisfied: "Wobbling cannot be DIed out of, it is infinite, and it is uncounterable once started. This means it should be banned." This is one of the more common anti-wobbling arguments. It fails on all counts. First, this argument fails to show how "I can't DI it" is actually a bannable offense. The fact that it CAN be infinite matters none, because you can mandate that it ends at 300%. Wallah, no longer call it an infinite, but a 300% combo. "But 300% is more than any other combo" <--This is true, but is it relevant? No matter what SOME combo will be the biggest combo of them all. If being the biggest combo is relevant, then it would be rational (and obligatory) to continue banning combos until you banned them all. Lastly, being uncounterable once started means nothing. Getting shined offstage is uncounterable once started. "But you were offstage. You were in a bad position already!" To that I say, "You were in a bad position when you got grabbed. Don't get grabbed."

I will make it EVEN EASIER, and insert your exact example into your burden.

Sveet: You must first show that it is the only move/combo in the game that has no defensive options once it has begun. (Does uthrow>rest have a defensive option at 40% last stock vs a space animal? No DI will save you. You could DI, and hope they mess up, but if they don't you die. The case is the same for wobbling. If they get this perfect money grab, you could try to mash out and hope they mess up, but if they don't you die. I sure hope you will not claim that "that only happens last stock vs spacies, not everyone", because you would then be logically compelled to use your very same argument to ban uthrow>rest in that very situation. Not to mention there is a perfect utilt>rest for every character in the game as well if you wanted to go that route. You will have to tackle this easy-to-think-up rest counterexample in a way that will satisfy this worry in order to move on.

Once you do that, you can then embark on the second burden. If you do manage to show that wobbling is THE ONLY combo that meets your criteria, you must show said criteria to be banworthy. This is the difficult part. You will need to show that this criteria is SO BAD that it deserves to join the elite group of techniques that can never be used. A quick response to what appears to be your criteria: "There can be no defensive metagame advances once the wobble begins." You need to show this is actually true (does the added emphasis in all characters gameplay towards proper spacing, shield pressure, and mashing from grabs not count?) unique (does Jiggs guaranteed uthrow>rest and utilt>rest combos really foster metagame advancement when they are GUARANTEED at certain percentages even with TAS DI and SDI?) and THEN you have to prove that EVERY MOVE AND COMBO in the game MUST feature a metagame advancement or else it should be banned, just saying it isn't enough. That is the toughest part, so go ahead.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Puff grabs fox. Fox holds left. Puff uthrows. Fox moves left and doesn't get rested
ICs grabs fox. Fox spams buttons. Nana ftilts, popo pummels. Fox player puts his controller down.

Im not trying to make this some theoretical bull****. Wobbling literally is the only combo in the game that, once initiated, requires no reaction from the offender and has no inputs/choices from the defender.


edit- your bolded paragraph confuses me cause you act like i didnt already make a proof for exactly what you asked for... before you ever posted that. You just keep strawmanning (to strawman is to make a "dummy" argument and then disprove it in order to "prove" that their argument is bad) without ever replying to my post for some reason.

 

[PEEF!]

Puff grabs fox. Fox holds left. Puff uthrows. Fox moves left and doesn't get rested
ICs grabs fox. Fox spams buttons. Nana ftilts, popo pummels. Fox player puts his controller down.

Im not trying to make this some theoretical bull****. Wobbling literally is the only combo in the game that, once initiated, requires no reaction from the offender and has no inputs/choices from the defender.


edit- your bolded paragraph confuses me cause you act like i didnt already make a proof for exactly what you asked for... before you ever posted that. You just keep strawmanning (to strawman is to make a "dummy" argument and then disprove it in order to "prove" that their argument is bad) without ever replying to my post for some reason.

Jiggs can still rest fox with good DI, you just have to do it right, and we can just move to utilt rest as well, which can't be DIed at certain percentages.

This is extremely frustrating because I just made a direct guide for how you can answer my concerns but you just arent. I did not strawman anything, I just gave a direct example. I have learned that I'm wasting my time. Either take the challenge and prove that "what makes it different makes it banworthy" or just tell me these words: I'm not going to answer you" so I can stop wasting my effort. You aren't doing your side justice, which is a shame. Your argument is "look dude. Wobbling is the only one where the other guy has no choices." Great. I've said this a million times, you need to prove that that makes it banworthy. You can't just end there.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

"i need to prove that makes it ban worthy" - the whole point of this was to discuss whether that point of view should make it banworthy. The only thing i really have linking this idea to banning wobbling is that its enough of a leap for us to ban stages so i see no reason why we cant ban a technique by the same logic.

If you have a question about original proof or you have a criticism, please state that. I have read every post you've made and the only thing close to refuting it is giving random examples of other things in the game. I have tried to explain how they are not the same, so if you are still having trouble with that let me know and i can try to explain it in another way. For this case I will first say 1) no puff can't rest fox if he full DIs away, puff must either pound or fair/bair 2) utilt also can be DI'd out of, not to mention SDI'd 3) all of these are different than wobbling not just because of escapes but also because it requires reaction from the offender, which means choices from the defender

edit- don't confuse "choices" with "effective choices". For example, marth chaingrabbing fox at 0%, fox has choices but no effective choices. Everything can be grabbed, but marth still must react. Starting around 20% fox gets effective choices too, where marth can be forced to utilt early among other things.

 

[PEEF!]

The only thing i really have linking this idea to banning wobbling is that its enough of a leap for us to ban stages so i see no reason why we cant ban a technique by the same logic.

edit- don't confuse "choices" with "effective choices". For example, marth chaingrabbing fox at 0%, fox has choices but no effective choices. Everything can be grabbed, but marth still must react. Starting around 20% fox gets effective choices too, where marth can be forced to utilt early among other things.

We ban stages because they take away all defensive options?

Effective choices are all that matter. You have the choice to try to...mash out of the wobble once it's been started. It isn't an effective choice if the ICs wobble perfectly, but it is a choice that can capitalize on the tiniest mistake. The same goes for Marth chaingrabbing Fox as you've pointed out.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Sigh. No we ban stages because they are distinctly not similar to the other stages in the game. For example: Rainbow Cruise. Perfectly competitive, simply has a completely different metagame.


edit- wording. Im tired and saying things wrong

 

[Oro?!]

There should be a tournament with a stage list that looks like

Neutrals
RC
Mute City
Brinstar

CP
Neutrals

Pokefloats in there somewhere too.

 

[PEEF!]

Sigh. No we ban stages because they are distinctly not similar to the other stages in the game. For example: Rainbow Cruise. Perfectly competitive, simply has a completely different metagame.


edit- wording. Im tired and saying things wrong

But see every stage is not distinctly similar to the other stages. FD for example is VERY different, but nobody suggests it should be BANNED.

 

[ORLY]

There should be a tournament with a stage list that looks like

Neutrals
RC
Mute City
Brinstar

CP
Neutrals

Pokefloats in there somewhere too.

Hmmmm...

10interestings

 

[Oro?!]

or just say **** it and do a all stages on random stages tourney where you get like 1-2 stage mulligans per set each.

 

[sanchaz]

I think grabbing should be banned.

Like you can't do anything for a couple seconds. You basically stop playing the game. That's stupid.

Well you can wiggle out, but that's dumb.

:trollface:

yeah, and samus shouldn't up b out of sheild,

orly: you should like get a moderator.

 

[ORLY]

Lol this is the most activity the thread has had yet!

Personally, I don't mind if people wanna chat about it since I doubt anyone will base their attendance on what was discussed in the thread, but I can see why other people wouldn't like reading it for the bajillienth time.

Take it to Melee Discussion, boys!

RE: Oro: this Saturday will be having such an event. All stages, all random, no bans**. DO OR DIE.

** - this hasn't been completely evaluated yet. Although I like two mulligans instead of bans per set!

 

[Oro?!]

I am gonna be there, but I have no $$$ to enter... beginning of school terms suck...

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

barns just add $50 to your student loans and that covers your smash entry fee for a year.

 

[SuperMatt]

without reading the sveet/PEEF debate i have to say i agree with sveet

from my experience with wobbling it seems like it makes bad ICs better but makes no improvement to good IC's game

which makes PEEF's wanting it on make sense

 

[Oro?!]

Matt, bess post eva.

Nvm Joe, I was taking into account that books were gonna body me, but I only need one book thats like 30$.

 

[PEEF!]

without reading the sveet/PEEF debate i have to say i agree with sveet

from my experience with wobbling it seems like it makes bad ICs better but makes no improvement to good IC's game

which makes PEEF's wanting it on make sense

Fallacy. Consider the argument alone. It's like saying that anyone who believes in a given philosophy can't be trusted because after all, they believe in the philosophy so them arguing for it "makes sense" YEAH NO **** IT MAKES SENSE -__-

But if you are going to do it, you should note 2 things. The first is that I haven't wobbled at my last 5 tournaments, and I have already publicly claimed that I will no longer do it anymore, kindof as a promise to supporters/livestream fans because of AWESOME CRAZY IC GRAB GAME...IS THIS NOT WHY YOURE HERE? ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!

Anyway you also should note that last time I played Sveet (it was in pools just over a year ago) I wobbled him at least half of the stocks and won. Not accusing him of arguing for the wrong reason, I don't think he is, but neither am I and you should apply your fallacies equally.

 

[Oro?!]

Please answer the following questions with just yes or no.

Is it easier to take stocks with wobbling than without?

Aren't higher level IC players more consistent in getting combos/other chaingrabs to lead to death, making wobbling less of a factor?

 

[Dart!]

the problem with asking for a yes or no answer is the 10 character minimum limit. therefore warranting peefs obsession with being verbose about his stance.
Can't wait to see chicago again. also how are we getting to the big house in october?

 

[Dekuschrub]

so... about not disappearing for months at a time and playing smash with me once in a while because you live < 30 mins away...

hhahaa whats even funnier is that I work at Wash U in fact im there right now LOL

 

[HoChiMinhTrail]

weird game mechanics to compensate for their terrible fundamentals that apply to all characters.

iron man mm, your lies annoy me

 

[john!]

ppl hatin on the climbers because they can't play them themselves

i think i might iron man him too, that statement reeks of ******ry

no top tiers allowed tho

Spoiler

because i at least want to stand a chance

 

[Dekuschrub]

lollll

looks like i touched a nerve. luckily im the king of ironmans

20 dollars

actually i would probly lose if i coudln't use top tiers LOL

 

[Dart!]

you've got marth...well you probably would lose then hahaha

 

[Dekuschrub]

damnnn haterrrssssss

 

[ORLY]

a non top tier iron man? i wanna get in on this action

heck yeahhhhhhh

 

[Dart!]

So it looks like i'll be here this weekend. didn't realize it was the 7th already...

 

[Oro?!]

Anyone have a good name for a Marth/Falcon combo video?

 

[john!]

two and a half men

Spoiler

because falcon is twice as manly as the average man GET IT???

 

[PEEF!]

two and a half men

Spoiler

because falcon is twice as manly as the average man GET IT???

thats actually quality

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Anyway you also should note that last time I played Sveet (it was in pools just over a year ago) I wobbled him at least half of the stocks and won. Not accusing him of arguing for the wrong reason, I don't think he is, but neither am I and you should apply your fallacies equally.

Lol i havent played you in tourney since cary's house; wasnt that 2 years ago?

edit- on topic, i might be here this weekend.

 

[ORLY]

anyone have a good name for a marth/falcon combo video?

502 bad gateway

 

[Scythe]

502 bad gateway

lol raaaaage

 

[Oro?!]

two and a half men

Spoiler

because falcon is twice as manly as the average man GET IT???

So Marth is half a man?

 

[Scythe]

So Marth is half a man?

exactly, it would be a pretty good name but John came up with it so you prolly shouldn't use it.