K@0S
Smash Ace
I'm posting this because at the next big tourney TSL4, hosts think that if the time limit is expired, sudden death should be played OR maybe a 1 stock match (I'm talking about Brawl).
I strongly disagree with that rule, and a "debate" started in the french forum between me and several people (including a host, but overall people who almost don't play Brawl), in which I was almost the only one defending that this rule was stupid.
The arguments in favour of that rule were :
- If I loose by 1%, I loose the match, which isn't fair
- If my opponent has a feather-weight character with 80%, and me a heavy character with 90%, I loose which isn't fair.
- You can come back easily with a combo so it's not fair
- If the limit expires it means that someone was stalling so he should be punished
My main argument that this rule put the winner of the match at a disadvantage.
The original rule is that the one who is loosing by % looses the match. With that rule, the one who is winning has a tactical advantage, because his opponent must try to come back, and shouldn't wait him to approach, which is something fundamental in that game.
The 8 minutes limit will almost never expire. But with that rule, you avoid stupid situations. Imagine 2 characters who are greatly advantaged when the opponent approaches (Snake, Wario, ...). With the one stock/sudden death rule, the loser will wait for the winner to approach because he prefers to play a 1 stock 0% match / a sudden death than the current match in which he is loosing.
I don't want to see people camping against me even when they are loosing. If they camp when they are winning, then I should comeback.
IMO the only counter-argument which can be taken into account is that one : "If my opponent has a feather-weight character with 80%, and me a heavy character with 90%, I loose which isn't fair.". But then, should we make a % chart for every match-up ? Impossible, for several reasons. It would be subjective, and in a tournament it would be too hard to implement it, whereas % are objective values.
And it may be a little flaw, but it's almost nothing when you compare it with what would be a match without that rule with certain players.
By the way, what would be the rule in that one-stock match ? (let's be serious and let's not talk about the sudden death)
Time again ? Same problem.
No time (which is even worse imo) ? Then who should approach (neither the winner nor the loser O_o) ?
In the end, the rule used everywhere since the beginning of Brawl doesn't exist for nothing, and I hope that I will find some support here.
I strongly disagree with that rule, and a "debate" started in the french forum between me and several people (including a host, but overall people who almost don't play Brawl), in which I was almost the only one defending that this rule was stupid.
The arguments in favour of that rule were :
- If I loose by 1%, I loose the match, which isn't fair
- If my opponent has a feather-weight character with 80%, and me a heavy character with 90%, I loose which isn't fair.
- You can come back easily with a combo so it's not fair
- If the limit expires it means that someone was stalling so he should be punished
My main argument that this rule put the winner of the match at a disadvantage.
The original rule is that the one who is loosing by % looses the match. With that rule, the one who is winning has a tactical advantage, because his opponent must try to come back, and shouldn't wait him to approach, which is something fundamental in that game.
The 8 minutes limit will almost never expire. But with that rule, you avoid stupid situations. Imagine 2 characters who are greatly advantaged when the opponent approaches (Snake, Wario, ...). With the one stock/sudden death rule, the loser will wait for the winner to approach because he prefers to play a 1 stock 0% match / a sudden death than the current match in which he is loosing.
I don't want to see people camping against me even when they are loosing. If they camp when they are winning, then I should comeback.
IMO the only counter-argument which can be taken into account is that one : "If my opponent has a feather-weight character with 80%, and me a heavy character with 90%, I loose which isn't fair.". But then, should we make a % chart for every match-up ? Impossible, for several reasons. It would be subjective, and in a tournament it would be too hard to implement it, whereas % are objective values.
And it may be a little flaw, but it's almost nothing when you compare it with what would be a match without that rule with certain players.
By the way, what would be the rule in that one-stock match ? (let's be serious and let's not talk about the sudden death)
Time again ? Same problem.
No time (which is even worse imo) ? Then who should approach (neither the winner nor the loser O_o) ?
In the end, the rule used everywhere since the beginning of Brawl doesn't exist for nothing, and I hope that I will find some support here.