The EVO-ruleset (continued...)

[Zankoku]

The game came out and everyone thought Marth was incredible. When that passed, everyone though MK was unbeatable. Now, everyone thinks Snake can't be touched.

To be fair, all three of those characters were seen as very good at game launch, and are still seen as very good.

 

[BigRick]

My point in bringing up Snake was that people should be able to understand why EVO has chosen to include items. If you pay attention at tournaments without items and smashballs, it becomes apparent that being campy and patient in your sheild, and spamming the most effective attacks is the winning strategy. It seems quite logical that turning off items would encourage this type of play, and so far it really has. In such a new game, playing with items is just as valid as playing without them, maybe even moreso because the game was made with the intention of being a random crapfest. My view is that Brawl isn't a very good tournament game, so if you strongly disagree then just ignore me and don't start a brawl versus melee argument.

On a side note, the whole items / no-items thing reminds me of the brawl / melee debate. People think it's random and dumb and takes no skill... >__>

I agree with 50BanksYayoGameBuck here

items do make brawl a little bit more dynamic

 

[Banks]

LOL bigrick, 10 points for knowing Unit rosters

 

[SamuraiPanda]

To be fair, all three of those characters were seen as very good at game launch, and are still seen as very good.

Yep, and like I said, they will always be on the higher end of the tier list for the game's lifespan. But they won't be seen as uber/broken/untouchable once people get a handle of the game better. Thats already happened for Marth IMO; people know he's still amazing, but they've changed their minds about him being "God tier" like they thought when the game was first launched.

My point in bringing up Snake was that people should be able to understand why EVO has chosen to include items. If you pay attention at tournaments without items and smashballs, it becomes apparent that being campy and patient in your sheild, and spamming the most effective attacks is the winning strategy. It seems quite logical that turning off items would encourage this type of play, and so far it really has. In such a new game, playing with items is just as valid as playing without them, maybe even moreso because the game was made with the intention of being a random crapfest. My view is that Brawl isn't a very good tournament game, so if you strongly disagree then just ignore me and don't start a brawl versus melee argument.

On a side note, the whole items / no-items thing reminds me of the brawl / melee debate. People think it's random and dumb and takes no skill... >__>

I disagree strongly with everything you've said here. Everything from Brawl being bad to items somehow magically encouraging people to not camp. But in the interest of not derailing the thread any further (its pretty off-topic now), I won't bother debating any of your points.

 

[RDK]

My point in bringing up Snake was that people should be able to understand why EVO has chosen to include items. If you pay attention at tournaments without items and smashballs, it becomes apparent that being campy and patient in your sheild, and spamming the most effective attacks is the winning strategy. It seems quite logical that turning off items would encourage this type of play, and so far it really has. In such a new game, playing with items is just as valid as playing without them, maybe even moreso because the game was made with the intention of being a random crapfest. My view is that Brawl isn't a very good tournament game, so if you strongly disagree then just ignore me and don't start a brawl versus melee argument.

On a side note, the whole items / no-items thing reminds me of the brawl / melee debate. People think it's random and dumb and takes no skill... >__>

Even if items weren't random and were a completely balanced addition to the bame, it still doesn't help the game's overall balance. Snake is just as likely to get a Smash Ball as DK--and even if DK gets one, his FS still sucks. =P

If anything, items would teeter the game into even more imbalance. A Snake, MK, or Marth is even more deadly with items--and like Panda said, items don't automatically discourage camping.

 

[th0rn]

People arguing brawl taking "skill" are just as crazy as the people arguing items taking skill.

It's like Mario Party verse Fusion Frenzy... sure mario party takes more skill than fusion frenzy... but who the **** cares, they're both party games lmaooo

What people should really do is argue for melee to go back... boycotting this brawl tourney for that reason, not because they're turning a game of rock paper scissors and adding more random elements to the game.

 

[Wuss]

I did a test of items (to get back to that subject), and I have a theory. I did a test with two marios, both with 3 stock and 0 percent. They stood on opposite ends of FD, in their falling animation (you know, the one where it looks like they will off, but they stay on). banana peels were on medium. In the beginning, peels appeared to be spawning more in the middle than on the outsides (meaning there were more in between the two marios than near the marios, using the arrows as ending points). then, eventually, there were just as many near both marios as there were in the middle (so a 2:1:1 ratio, where the marios both have one, and the middle has 2). Then there seemed to be a shift towards having more on the edges, nearer to the marios. I ended with 30 peels in the middle, 21 on one side, and 26 on the other. I have a theory that as the match goes on, the items spawn nearer and nearer to the characters. This makes sense because if the game is going on for too long, then it's probably not "fun" (as defined by sakurai) so if more items spawn nearer to the characters, then the match will end sooner. Remember this is just a theory. The problem with randomness is that it's impossible to prove it's not random without actually looking at the coding.

 

[Aesir]

People arguing brawl taking "skill" are just as crazy as the people arguing items taking skill.

It's like Mario Party verse Fusion Frenzy... sure mario party takes more skill than fusion frenzy... but who the **** cares, they're both party games lmaooo

What people should really do is argue for melee to go back... boycotting this brawl tourney for that reason, not because they're turning a game of rock paper scissors and adding more random elements to the game.

quoted for the truth?

 

[BigRick]

No. Fusion Frenzy definitely takes more skill than Mario Party.

I'm NOT joking...

 

[Jack Kieser]

People arguing brawl taking "skill" are just as crazy as the people arguing items taking skill.

It's like Mario Party verse Fusion Frenzy... sure mario party takes more skill than fusion frenzy... but who the **** cares, they're both party games lmaooo

What people should really do is argue for melee to go back... boycotting this brawl tourney for that reason, not because they're turning a game of rock paper scissors and adding more random elements to the game.

Quoted for brutish intolerance?

 

[Zankoku]

No. Fusion Frenzy definitely takes more skill than Mario Party.

I'm NOT joking...

I agree. Entirely.

 

[S.P.I.C. TOM]

I am getting sick and tired of the people complaining about brawl. If you don't like the game fine but continuing to say you don't like a game is childish. What's so bad about having to take everyone seriously when you play them. I don't see a problem having to try every match instead of it being a certain amount of people winning these tourneys. I hate melee for the fact is if you want to win you have to be either Fox,falco,sheik,or marth. I know this has nothing to do with this topic so I will stop but as far as EVO's rules are concerned I am not complaining about them and I think their fine. It might need a few tweeks but it's ok for now. Let them try out their rules and we should be more supprtive about it. If you are truly good at a game you can adapt to any situation and overcome any obsticles with no exceptions made for you.


THAT'S WHAT MAKES A PRO PLAYER!!!

 

[Banks]

peach and captain falcon were good in melee too =D

 

[SamuraiPanda]

Ok people, this thread is NOT about Melee vs Brawl. I swear, I should just make a sticky for this argument to stop people from bringing it up everywhere.

Get back on topic.

 

[Nigerian Star Storm]

I am getting sick and tired of the people complaining about brawl. If you don't like the game fine but continuing to say you don't like a game is childish. What's so bad about having to take everyone seriously when you play them. I don't see a problem having to try every match instead of it being a certain amount of people winning these tourneys. I hate melee for the fact is if you want to win you have to be either Fox,falco,sheik,or marth. I know this has nothing to do with this topic so I will stop but as far as EVO's rules are concerned I am not complaining about them and I think their fine. It might need a few tweeks but it's ok for now. Let them try out their rules and we should be more supprtive about it. If you are truly good at a game you can adapt to any situation and overcome any obsticles with no exceptions made for you.


THAT'S WHAT MAKES A PRO PLAYER!!!

*Facedeskpalmanimefall*

 

[BigRick]

peach and captain falcon were good in melee too =D

bleh Peach is still kinda alright... I dont play her anymore cause Im tired of the *****

but seeing what they did to Falcon is really sad... I wont stop playing him though

On topic, I hope that EVO releases vids of that event... I really want to see how it turns out. Also, I'm betting that JWong is taking that ****.

 

[Banks]

I can't wait to hear the commentary.

"OHH **** THAT SNAKE JUST FORWARD TILTED"
"OHH HE BE PLAYIN SMAHT IN THAT SHEILD"

oh nvm, they are putting items on.

"WHOA ONE HIT KILL OH SHIIIIIT"

 

[BigRick]

Imagine having this kind of commentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u83LQ5G5kpE
Over this kind of match: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgyySe3s6aI

Everyone, get hype.

 

[Banks]

But wait, people would rather have it be like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxgOkRyG3ho

 

[Yuna]

Yea, they shouldn't have items so people can continue to win tournaments by shielding, walking and tilting with Snake. Anyone who didn't play melee would think playing with no items is the most ******** thing ever. Brawl is a campfest without items, and that is the main reason why a lot of people don't like it. If you disagree that camping and being a defensive douche isn't the best strategy, then you don't know ****. Playing with items would actually fix that, and make this game more of what it is supposed to be. PARTY GAME WOOOOO

Items fix camping. Items also introduce a whole can of worms into the mix, a can we do not like. Especially items like the Golden Hammer and Smash Ball.

What does that have to do with me?

SamuraiPanda (I think) called you COUM earlier, so I assume you're COUM. As such, you're an SRK-member. Yet, you claim no one with half a brain would claim there's evidence for items not being broken when at least 10 people claimed said thing on SRK in that one single thread alone.

Wiz never said anything of the sort, though. He said there was more solid evidence presented to him to support keeping items than to support banning them, which is true (although you are right that the evidence in support of keeping them is really not much at all, given the low level of play on display), but I hardly think he considers that evidence conclusive proof that items don't warrant a ban.

Yet, he's ignoring our evidence, some of it even using the videos he's using as evidence against him. I think SamuraiPanda pointed out at least one match where what we said could happen actually happened but it was dismissed as "Well, the skill level isn't that high" (then why the hell are you guys using those videos to begin with?!).

You can't have it both ways. Either the videos are useless or we can use the videos to prove our points. MrWizard ignoring all of our evidence using the "evidence" he has to allow items is pretty much saying "I have proof items aren't broken, you cannot refute this no matter how hard you try".

To be pedantic, it's impossible to conclusively prove that anything doesn't warrant a ban, as it's always possible that a feature of that thing could be discovered in future which renders it broken. This is why we don't ban based on suppositions and theories, no matter how obvious their factuality may be; it's a slippery slope. If a theory regarding some feature's affect on the game is so obviously true, it shouldn't be hard to present real, gameplay evidence...). Items-on is simply the default format until someone provides a compelling argument for items' unsuitability for tournament play. As yet, though, all Wiz (and I) have seen is abstract theorizing.

It's not supposition or theories. It's not a theory if it has actually happened and is proven to be possible. It's not a theory that in an important match, a Final Smash could spawn at the right time for you to grab it without your opponent being able to do jack and then you'll proceed to win using the FS since the game works in a way that allows for it to happen... easily.

We don't need to actually record a match of it happening to prove it since it's possible. Smash Balls spawn a lot more often than the average item, hence, most matches will feature at least 1-2 Final Smashes. If the people using them are any good, said FS:es will KO. Most matches will thus have 1-2 KO:s based on FS:es. That's bad.

Logic, common sense and experience do not bear consideration in this matter when your premises are based entirely in the abstract. What Wiz is asking for is very simple; concrete evidence (i.e. a substantial quantity of match footage and tournament results) that items are detrimental to the game. If your views are as self-evident as you guys act like they are, providing this should be a breeze, but so far none of you have managed it.

That's because he knows we won't bother conjuring up said evidence since it'd require us to actually host items-on tournaments using the ruleset he proposes (which we hate and even most itemnites hate it). By demanding tournament resulsts based on items, he's ensuring that SWF won't bother producing said results.

Because I'm pretty sure that if we point out tournament results from back in 2001-2003 when items were still in use (in 2003, only somewhat), we'd get a "Brawl isn't Melee!" in our face, hence we need footage and tournament results for Brawl.

My point in bringing up Snake was that people should be able to understand why EVO has chosen to include items. If you pay attention at tournaments without items and smashballs, it becomes apparent that being campy and patient in your sheild, and spamming the most effective attacks is the winning strategy. It seems quite logical that turning off items would encourage this type of play, and so far it really has. In such a new game, playing with items is just as valid as playing without them, maybe even moreso because the game was made with the intention of being a random crapfest. My view is that Brawl isn't a very good tournament game, so if you strongly disagree then just ignore me and don't start a brawl versus melee argument.

This is not why. SRK just likes items. SRK went ahead and created their own ruleset based on what its memberbase thought and the memberbase like items on. Most of the people with a say in the matter don't even play Smash on a such a level that they'd actually start camping using every trick in the book.

That's cool. When you've figured out how to provide an actual case to prove my words lack substance, I'll be waiting

Anyone with a more than rudimentary grasp of the English language can figure this out simply by going through your posts in this thread... or any other thread as of late.

But wait, people would rather have it be like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxgOkRyG3ho

Jiano and OS are two of the campiest players around. They don't even camp well. They just camp for the sake of camp. They almost never even attempt to approach or try to mix it up, they just camp and hope the other person magically misses shielding. Translation: They're not very good.

 

[DAlegendarysamus]

To Go Or Not To Go That Is The Question

Its Either Ppl Go To Evo Or They Dont Lol Thats All. Stop *****ing About The Rules Noone Will Ever Be Satisfied With The Rules Unless Its Thier Own So Just **** Up And Someone Please Close This Thread. Just Go To Evo And Call It A Day. **** I Am Already Set To Go To Evo I Got My Tix And All Lol. Hey If The Tournament Is Wack I Still Have Vegas And Alot Of Other Things To Do There So I Am Going To Be A Winner Regardlessss. Anyways Anyone Want To Do Any Mm's Vs My Sonic Lol.

And Yes Mm's Is Off Topic Cause U Know Why This Dumb As Topic About The Rule Set Needs To Die Cause I Bet U If Nintendo Would Have A Ruleset Of U Have To Play One Handed And Its Like 10gs U Will See The ****ing Place Packed So How Is This Any Different. Like **** Tim Said Just Adapt And Call It A Day. Please Stop Posting Ur ****ing Final Fantasy Stratergy Guides Panda Man And Anyone Else Who Likes To Make ****ing Lord Of The Rings Book Posts.
Stop It We Get The ****ing Point Dont Come To Evo For Brawl Then Come For The *****es And Casinos And Just Laugh And Jiggly At Brawl ****.

 

[vigiliante]

The only real problem with the items are really the Hammers,ray gun,and smash ball if they took those out then I don't see a problem with the rest of their list. It actually doesn't matter to me because I have tried their rules and obviously SWF rules and still think it doesn't make the game horribly broken but it does make the mind games different which I like. I am stuck in the middle and can't make a decision on which side to be on.

 

[Yuna]

The only real problem with the items are really the Hammers,ray gun,and smash ball if they took those out then I don't see a problem with the rest of their list. It actually doesn't matter to me because I have tried their rules and obviously SWF rules and still think it doesn't make the game horribly broken but it does make the mind games different which I like. I am stuck in the middle and can't make a decision on which side to be on.

If they took out those, then I wouldn't be complaining half as much. The hammers (Golden in particular) and Smash Ball (especially the Smash Ball) are the biggest reason why I'm complaining and questioning their sanity at the moment.

They obviously haven't really looked into FS:es if they think they should be tournament legal.

 

[EnigmaticCam]

I agree. Entirely.

Four-player air-hockey is GODLY. I suggest you try it

 

[SamuraiPanda]

Jiano and OS are two of the campiest players around. They don't even camp well. They just camp for the sake of camp. They almost never even attempt to approach or try to mix it up, they just camp and hope the other person magically misses shielding. Translation: They're not very good.

Dude, OS is ridiculous. He is very good. But the match that was linked was OS's favorite strategy against a campy Snake: Outcamping the Snake. I played OS here and there, and he rarely camped against my Snake. Mostly because I play an aggressive Snake against most opponents. Although he still tore me a new one :/

ROB vs Snake isn't very fun.

 

[Yuna]

Dude, OS is ridiculous. He is very good. But the match that was linked was OS's favorite strategy against a campy Snake: Outcamping the Snake. I played OS here and there, and he rarely camped against my Snake. Mostly because I play an aggressive Snake against most opponents. Although he still tore me a new one :/

ROB vs Snake isn't very fun.

I'm merely passing judgement on that match and some other match I saw (also vs. Jiano). Maybe I was being too hasty. But they weren't very good in either match. One match was both players literally standing around on opposing ends of Final Destination with Snake spamming Up Smash (with OS barely punishing him at all for it). That's how bad that match was.

So maybe they aren't bad. But they did play pretty badly in those two matches. And it just gives people with little insight into the game fuel for "Look at this camping ****!". I mean, I'm one of the people who think Brawl is too campy. But Jiano and OS just take it to the extreme.

 

[polarity]

SamuraiPanda (I think) called you COUM earlier, so I assume you're COUM. As such, you're an SRK-member. Yet, you claim no one with half a brain would claim there's evidence for items not being broken when at least 10 people claimed said thing on SRK in that one single thread alone.

Again, what does that have to do with me?

Yet, he's ignoring our evidence, some of it even using the videos he's using as evidence against him. I think SamuraiPanda pointed out at least one match where what we said could happen actually happened but it was dismissed as "Well, the skill level isn't that high" (then why the hell are you guys using those videos to begin with?!).

You can't have it both ways. Either the videos are useless or we can use the videos to prove our points. MrWizard ignoring all of our evidence using the "evidence" he has to allow items is pretty much saying "I have proof items aren't broken, you cannot refute this no matter how hard you try".

I haven't actually seen you present any video evidence at all. Regardless, a small number of videos showing that random occurrences do sometimes happen with items on and do sometimes determine the outcome of the match isn't much evidence.

I'm not too convinced that Wiz has really paid much attention to the items-on 'evidence' either. The current bans are pretty much (futile) attempts to compromise between both crowds, not really based on evidence from the items-on players.

It's not supposition or theories. It's not a theory if it has actually happened and is proven to be possible. It's not a theory that in an important match, a Final Smash could spawn at the right time for you to grab it without your opponent being able to do jack and then you'll proceed to win using the FS since the game works in a way that allows for it to happen... easily.

We don't need to actually record a match of it happening to prove it since it's possible. Smash Balls spawn a lot more often than the average item, hence, most matches will feature at least 1-2 Final Smashes. If the people using them are any good, said FS:es will KO. Most matches will thus have 1-2 KO:s based on FS:es. That's bad.

Do you even remember what you're trying to prove? The argument you're supposed to be making is that items have a detrimental affect on the game to the point where they warrant banning, not "there is lots of bad stuff about items". Even if that were 100% objectively true, it's just a premise, not a conclusion. All your 'evidence' is of this kind; theorizing from all the supposedly negative properties of items that the game with items is unsuitable for competitive play, without actually playing it competitively.

This is way I say you're theorizing; for all the negative properties you claim items have, you've been unable to demonstrate how they actually affect the game except with words. Of course, you hold your reasoning to be obvious, yet the fact that a respected designer like Sirlin believes that all the negatives you claim do not necessarily make a bad competitive game clearly demonstrates that it isn't.

That's because he knows we won't bother conjuring up said evidence since it'd require us to actually host items-on tournaments using the ruleset he proposes (which we hate and even most itemnites hate it). By demanding tournament resulsts based on items, he's ensuring that SWF won't bother producing said results.

Because I'm pretty sure that if we point out tournament results from back in 2001-2003 when items were still in use (in 2003, only somewhat), we'd get a "Brawl isn't Melee!" in our face, hence we need footage and tournament results for Brawl.

Haha, so your complaint is essentially "We want to play with items off, but we just want Evo to listen to us based on the fact that we're the biggest competitive scene for Smash; we don't want to actually present any concrete evidence"? And you wonder why Evo is 'snubbing' you?

This is not why. SRK just likes items. SRK went ahead and created their own ruleset based on what its memberbase thought and the memberbase like items on.

If you believe that, there's nothing I can say to convince you, because there's absolutely no evidence that is true. Once again, Evo is not SRK, nor are they particularly interested in kowtowing to the interests of the SRK posters. If they were, Guilty Gear would be in over Brawl this year.

 

[Yuna]

Again, what does that have to do with me?

You claimed that no one with half a brain would claim something like this. I'm pointing out that pretty much a vast majority on SRK, including MrWizard, claims it, meaning you just declared them all idiots.

I haven't actually seen you present any video evidence at all. Regardless, a small number of videos showing that random occurrences do sometimes happen with items on and do sometimes determine the outcome of the match isn't much evidence.

SamuraiPanda or AlphaZealot used a video recorded by SRK or one of SRK's testers and pointed out an instance where a clearly unfair item spawn won the match.

And why is it not much evidence? Because you say so?

I'm not too convinced that Wiz has really paid much attention to the items-on 'evidence' either. The current bans are pretty much (futile) attempts to compromise between both crowds, not really based on evidence from the items-on players.

It's more like MrWizard just went with what he thinks and feels is "the best" or quite possibly what he feels is more fun. He's ignoring all evidence against Final Smashes. I'd go to my friend's place and record vids of broken FS:es and their uses if I thought he'd even take a look at the video.

Do you even remember what you're trying to prove? The argument you're supposed to be making is that items have a detrimental affect on the game to the point where they warrant banning, not "there is lots of bad stuff about items". Even if that were 100% objectively true, it's just a premise, not a conclusion. All your 'evidence' is of this kind; theorizing from all the supposedly negative properties of items that the game with items is unsuitable for competitive play, without actually playing it competitively.

I play with items Competitively all the time. I have clocked more time with items on than most people on SRK besides those who only play with items on.

I feel that we have sufficient evidence against items. You don't. We disagree on this. And I also disagree with that everything needs video evidence. Because some of us don't require visual aids for everything.

This is way I say you're theorizing; for all the negative properties you claim items have, you've been unable to demonstrate how they actually affect the game except with words. Of course, you hold your reasoning to be obvious, yet the fact that a respected designer like Sirlin believes that all the negatives you claim do not necessarily make a bad competitive game clearly demonstrates that it isn't.

Sirlin hasn't even read my posts. I doubt Sirlin even knows half the things I know about items. Sirlin can say whatever he wants, he doesn't play Smash Competitively with or without items, as far as I know. Sirlin is no more than a glorified n00b when it comes to Smash. He knows a lot about fighting games in general, but not about Smash in particular.

But since you're so incapable of imagining anything, I'll go to my friend's house and record instances of items doing what I say they do. But wait, then you'll just say "Tournament videos only!". And then I'd be forced to host a tournament and drag computers with recording ability to said tournament.

Haha, so your complaint is essentially "We want to play with items off, but we just want Evo to listen to us based on the fact that we're the biggest competitive scene for Smash; we don't want to actually present any concrete evidence"? And you wonder why Evo is 'snubbing' you?

No, we want EVO to be able to listen to more than just video evidence. Because it'd take months to record enough videos to conclusively prove anything to them. Just a few videos won't suffice because you'd just say "Too little!".

It'd take us months and hours of playing a game we do not want in order to be able to prove that it's broken to people who obviously want to play the game that way. We'd also have to find enough people of at least moderate skill willing to do this for money since you people would just scream "They're not good enough! They would've done X and Y instead if they were any good!" and/or "It's not a real tournament!" (even though MrWizard is using online tournaments with no prize to "prove" his points).

I'm not accusing you specifically, but this could very well be a very annoying tactic from EVO's side. They're demanding video proof because they know it'd take a lot to obtain said video proof and that we most probably won't feel like providing said video proof. That or they are just incapable of grasping how the game works without visual aids, I guess.

If you believe that, there's nothing I can say to convince you, because there's absolutely no evidence that is true. Once again, Evo is not SRK, nor are they particularly interested in kowtowing to the interests of the SRK posters. If they were, Guilty Gear would be in over Brawl this year.

If EVO isn't listening to SRK, I'd like to know what kind of idiots told MrWizard to leave Smash Balls on.

 

[C@sH Mooney]

They wanna make ssbb like street fighter. with broken finishes and deadbody infinites and ****. lol

Wiz doesn't care. He never will. Just don't bother with him.

Personally, I would rather see the hillarious tourney vids, rather than see the actual good tourney rule set vids. lmao.

 

[SynikaL]

Next time some idiot wants to claim my vocabulary is superfluous without providing a compelling "why", I'm simply tossing you on my ignore list -- just to save us both some time. You all sound worse than the "Melee 2.0!" scrubs that popped up around here prior to the game's release, as the hypocritical accusation is even more weightless than that silly mantra was. I'd like to follow this thread without the petty, undeserving cheap shots.

Better yet, put me on your ignore lists. That way, any one of you that finds navigating a Dictionary webpage a problem, won't have to deal with me. We all win.

*edit*

And Wes is the man, and stuff. Don't like items? Don't go to Evo.


-Kimo

 

[Rebel581]

Next time some idiot wants to claim my vocabulary is superfluous without providing a compelling "why", I'm simply tossing you on my very large ignore list. You all sound worse than the "Brawl 2.0!" scrubs that popped up around here prior to the game's release, as the hypocritical accusation is even more as weightless.


-Kimo

Your vocabulary is superfluous. I won't provide a compelling why. Brawl 2.0! 0_o what does that even mean? Brawl 2.0? Aren't we on Brawl 1.0?

Oh, I didn't know this site had an ignore list. I always found ignore lists stupid. Should we make this ignoring mutual? Or are you going not be childish about this?

 

[SynikaL]

Thanks for the heads up on the mistake.

If you're being serious, yes it can be mutual.

"Childish" isn't wanting to see a focused discussion without petty exchanges. "Childish" is telling someone that they cannot use a four syllable/unfamiliar word, or that their employment is faulty/weightless without giving compelling reason. I seriously feel like I'm in middleschool.


-Kimo

 

[Sliq]

I'm merely passing judgement on that match and some other match I saw (also vs. Jiano). Maybe I was being too hasty. But they weren't very good in either match. One match was both players literally standing around on opposing ends of Final Destination with Snake spamming Up Smash (with OS barely punishing him at all for it). That's how bad that match was.

So maybe they aren't bad. But they did play pretty badly in those two matches. And it just gives people with little insight into the game fuel for "Look at this camping ****!". I mean, I'm one of the people who think Brawl is too campy. But Jiano and OS just take it to the extreme.

Camping isn't good. People just think it is.

 

[polarity]

Yuna, I can't understand how you can continue to be this ****ing dense. Tournament evidence is the only viable evidence in determining bans, and your pathetic attempts to portray my refusal to accept any other evidence as indicative of a lack of intelligence aren't going to change that.

I assure you, if the traditional fighting game scene made pre-emptive bans based on apparently logical theories of how certain features would affect the game, we'd have a hell of a lot of stuff banned that turned out to be relatively benign. The strange thing is that you guys seem aware of this with regard to every feature of the game except items; with some local exceptions, you seem to have generally taken a very liberal attitude to what is allowed in the game. But when it comes to items, the unsubstantiated theories of their affect on the game come out in full force.

The only acceptable way to determine that a game feature warrants removal is to allow it to turn a tournament (or perhaps even two or three) into a joke. Harsh, but worth it to avoid unnecessarily neutering the game.

You're right that there's absolutely no chance of anti-items players organizing tournaments with items on to demonstrate they're broken, but so what? That's your prerogative, and your problem. Tough ****, so to speak. Evo will conduct the tests that you refuse to.

 

[Zankoku]

I thought there already was an items-on Brawl tournament. KotC, wasn't it?

 

[moogle]

Imagine if there was a soccer tournament, with an open invitation to all the best teams around. The fame and prizes this tournament offers are enough to attract any and every good team. But the teams learn of one caveat: all tournament games are played on muddy fields. It's the type of mud that the soccer ball will still travel well on, but players are much more likely to fall (in dramatic fashion), and over the course of the game, the field will become torn up and difficult to maneuver around. This variation on soccer would be more likely to attract a greater percentage of non-soccer fans, and it would provide many moments we wouldn't see in a regular soccer game.

When the players hear of this rule, a large percentage are displeased. Some players think that playing on a muddy field could be fun, but it's not something where they'd be willing to put money on the line. Some think this is a mockery of their game; league soccer has been played for over 100 years on grass fields... why change now? Some feel this is not the game they have trained years to excel at.

There are a lot of new things to consider when playing on muddy fields... maybe the defenders could dig trenches around their goal, for example. More new strategies could surface. It is quite possible this may be a fair and fun environment to play in. However, this is not the environment the best teams are used to. And as a result, it is likely many of the best teams will not travel to this tournament, because they feel they significantly less confident in their ability to win such a tournament.

So, there's my analogy.

 

[ph00tbag]

Yuna, I can't understand how you can continue to be this ****ing dense. Tournament evidence is the only viable evidence in determining bans, and your pathetic attempts to portray my refusal to accept any other evidence as indicative of a lack of intelligence aren't going to change that.

I think it's reasonable to deduce that if something can happen at all, it can happen in a tournament. In fact, in many cases it has.

The people arguing in favor of items here seem constantly to brush off the experience of the SBR in this regard, but they really shouldn't, because believe it or not, Smash used to be played with items on. For the longest time, this very debate raged over items in Melee, and there were very many tournaments that used items. In fact, items were so important to the metagame that were it not for item tourneys, it would likely have taken even longer for wavedashing to be discovered. The depths of the item metagame were plumbed long before this debate ever took place.

Ultimately, what ended up happening? Items off became the standard. I don't pretend to know the extent of why items are off as standard, but since plenty of much more experienced players than I have actually played the style the whole way through, and found it in fact to be less deep, I'm going to trust their judgement.

 

[SynikaL]

Imagine if there was a soccer tournament, with an open invitation to all the best teams around. The fame and prizes this tournament offers are enough to attract any and every good team. But the teams learn of one caveat: all tournament games are played on muddy fields. It's the type of mud that the soccer ball will still travel well on, but players are much more likely to fall (in dramatic fashion), and over the course of the game, the field will become torn up and difficult to maneuver around. This variation on soccer would be more likely to attract a greater percentage of non-soccer fans, and it would provide many moments we wouldn't see in a regular soccer game.

When the players hear of this rule, a large percentage are displeased. Some players think that playing on a muddy field could be fun, but it's not something where they'd be willing to put money on the line. Some think this is a mockery of their game; league soccer has been played for over 100 years on grass fields... why change now? Some feel this is not the game they have trained years to excel at.

There are a lot of new things to consider when playing on muddy fields... maybe the defenders could dig trenches around their goal, for example. More new strategies could surface. It is quite possible this may be a fair and fun environment to play in. However, this is not the environment the best teams are used to. And as a result, it is likely many of the best teams will not travel to this tournament, because they feel they significantly less confident in their ability to win such a tournament.

So, there's my analogy.

Persuasive analogy.

Unfortunately, despite the neutrality of its presentation (or because of it), the parties involved will simply take it, and spin it to conform to their ideals. It's a shame because the neutrality is the real take away point, or, big picture here.


-Syn

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I thought there already was an items-on Brawl tournament. KotC, wasn't it?

Wasn't it the Family Fun Arcade tournament or something?

 

[Zankoku]

No, King of the Couch was the one that was brought up as an example of an items-on tournament, Family Fun Arcade was the one everyone boycotted due to the rules.