The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[Maharba the Mystic]

get better bro

 

[Conviction]

Well damn

 

[Gifts]

get better bro

This man knows whats up

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I have to keep adding more variables because Gifts is really good at missing the point and attacking parts of my argument that don't actually matter. So I have to keep making up new **** to try and fill in the gaps.

 

[ZTD | TECHnology]

Why not cut the crap and post things that actually matter then? If you don't want someone to attack "the parts of you post that don't matter, then maybe you should not post them? Just a suggestion.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

1. I make a perfectly valid point
2. One crazy person can't comprehend it
3. I try and explain it, they still don't understand
4. I have to create more and more intricate examples to try and get him to understand
5. Said crazy person misses the point and attacks accidental straw-men

This is why I hate debating with Jebus.

 

[Gifts]

I have to keep adding more variables because Gifts is really good at missing the point and attacking parts of my argument that don't actually matter. So I have to keep making up new **** to try and fill in the gaps.

Missing the point? You are butthurt about not being able to counterpick a stage you already won on. Lets say this isnt a ditto mu and you are still better on sv than x character. You win game 1 on sv. You ban y stage and z stage that dont matter. Your opponent wins. He has to ban rc and brinstar because more tan likely they are auto loose stages to x character your opponent plays. Now you get to cp him back to sv? Wherr you already won. How is his fair in any way? You know you can beat your opponent on a stage you already won on. Even with 2 bans this doesnt solve much imo.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

That's not a problem with the 2-stage ban rule, that's a problem with a character (Meta Knight, obviously) having two auto-win stages.

 

[Conviction]

What TC said. If your base and points of your agrument were solid all around there wouldn't be anything stupid to attack. Feel me homes?

Gifts what are even talking about? The dsr prevents you from cping a stage you won on. Understand this, people have to agree to go back to previously won stage in said set. Which is the case 100% of time if the players in the said set, know the rules.. What are you even arguing?

 

[Gifts]

What TC said. If your base and points of your agrument were solid all around there wouldn't be anything stupid to attack. Feel me homes?

Gifts what are even talking about? The dsr prevents you from cping a stage you won on. Understand this, people have to agree to go back to previously won stage in said set. Which is the case 100% of time if the players in the said set, know the rules.. What are you even arguing?

You might want to tell grim that because obviously he doest understand. Read his posts and tell me he understands his rule because he clearly does not. In all honesty the 2 stage rule isnt that bad. Im am just pointing out the stupidity in grims posts because obviously he thought that you didnt have to agree to go back.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

What?

I know how DSR works, lol. What made you think I didn't?

 

[Tesh]

When are you guys gonna put in a scrooging rule. You might be able to argue MK has even matchups with the proper restraints, but scrooging adds a drastic change to risk/reward enough to put every matchup solidly in his favor. It doesn't have to be an easily enforceable rule, just enough to stop someone from going under the stage over and over.

Sure most people don't scrooge much, so you won't see it happening alot regardless. But most people won't walkoff camp, most people won't IDC and most people won't yell in someone's ear during a match. BUT, we have rules for those things anyway, because you don't wanna be caught with your pants down when someone decides he REALLY wants to win.

 

[Conviction]

Laziness previals so ill just ask.

Is that true grim?

 

[Gifts]

I could win on any other neutral, but I want to win on Smashville again.

And the only reason I can't is because there is a rule punishing me for out-playing my opponent on Smashville for... no adequate reason.

Lol...............

This was when we where just talking about the 2 stage bans. You mentioned nothing about the rule where you had to agree to go back to a stage.

 

[Conviction]

Wait...so are you arguing for the abloshiment of dsr?

Lol time for me to step back. Well damn, I'm lost.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

The ENTIRE TIME I've been saying that DSR should be abolished >_____>

Which is what that quote says, I am getting punished for out-playing my opponent on Smashville because I can't re-pick it.

 

[Conviction]

Aiyyo, I'm not apart this anymore.

Haha

 

[Overswarm]

Wait, so the same time people are complaining about MK being too broken on Rainbow/Brinstar, there are people saying we should be allowed to take people back to the same stage they beat them on earlier so that they only need one good stage?

 

[Gifts]

Wait, so the same time people are complaining about MK being too broken on Rainbow/Brinstar, there are people saying we should be allowed to take people back to the same stage they beat them on earlier so that they only need one good stage?

Awwww ****. The call out.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

DSR
diddy wins fox on smashville
diddy bans halberd
fox goes battlefield
fox wins and bans FD

2 Bans Rule
diddy wins fox on smashville
diddy bans halberd and RC
fox goes battlefield
fox wins and bans FD and smashville


What's the problem?

 

[M@v]

DSR
diddy wins fox on smashville
diddy bans halberd
fox goes battlefield
fox wins and bans FD

2 Bans Rule
diddy wins fox on smashville
diddy bans halberd
fox goes battlefield
fox wins and bans FD and smashville


What's the problem?

What if diddy bans halberd AND battlefield

 

[Zankoku]

Sounds completely fair considering Fox can ban two stages as well.

Too bad DSR is getting twisted so much. It was originally implemented to promote stage diversity; not to restrict player choice.

 

[Ghostbone]

More stage bans accomplishes the exact same thing that DSR does, and more, and it's unbiased.

Also if winning on a stage guarantees that you would win on it for the rest of the set, you wouldn't have people counter-picking stages they lost on, without even changing characters, or even playing an entire set on smashville.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Wait, so the same time people are complaining about MK being too broken on Rainbow/Brinstar, there are people saying we should be allowed to take people back to the same stage they beat them on earlier so that they only need one good stage?

No, because I also proposed two stage bans IN PLACE of DSR.

Nice try though.

 

[DMG]

DSR is different than a stage ban. You ban a stage, neither player can go there. DSR kicks in only after you have won on the stage, and only applies to the winner.

It would not be the same thing at all lol.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

You're right, it would be better and less biased.

 

[DMG]

Maybe.

For longer sets, hell no.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

The winner of a match gets two bans for the first win and an extra ban for each additional win. This rule is better than DSR for longer sets. With this rule players can ban they stage they beat their opponent on.This can increases stage diversity.

Fox player beats Diddy player on Smashville
Fox player bans Brinstar and RC
Diddy player counter picks FD
Fox player switches to falco and beats Diddy player on FD
Fox/Falco player can now choose to ban FD and force his opponent to play another stage.

 

[Ghostbone]

I don't see why bans should apply to both players

I mean, on your counter-pick, I'm banning you from picking stage X, and then on my counter-pick, you're banning me from picking stage Y.
Why shouldn't I be able to pick stage X, I just didn't want you to pick it.

 

[Life]

*plays MK, bans Brinstar*

 

[Grim Tuesday]

*ignoreplz*

 

[Ghostbone]

*plays MK, bans Brinstar*

K, I'll just ban Brinstar as well when it comes time for you to counter-pick.

Note in the system I'm proposing, bans would only apply for that specific counter-pick.

 

[Yikarur]

the ban System says "I choose I stage I don't want to play on this set" and not "I choose a stage I don't want to get counterpicked to"

and it's called BAN. So it's not allowed overall.

 

[Ghostbone]

I don't see why that can't be changed, in any case most rulesets allow you to change which stages you ban in a Bo5 set on your opponents 2nd counter-pick. So that already goes against the idea that a ban lasts for the entire set.

 

[Gifts]

I don't see why that can't be changed, in any case most rulesets allow you to change which stages you ban in a Bo5 set on your opponents 2nd counter-pick. So that already goes against the idea that a ban lasts for the entire set.

Wtf are you talkig about? Bo5 matches only happen in winners, losers, and grand finals. Thats what not even 1/8 of the tournament. I have never seen a rule set hat allows you to change your ban on your opponents 2nd counterpick in a bo5. That would be broken.

 

[DMG]

Yeah. Never seen a rule like that as well. If you make a stage ban, it's supposed to be a permanent ban for that set unless you and your opponent agree to go to the stage.

 

[Alex Strife]

cheese tried arguing that he should be able to CP his ban lol

 

[Deleted member]

cheese tried arguing that he should be able to CP his ban lol

typically, you can. all a ban does is keep that player from picking it against you. it's actually a really good strategic play to CP to your own ban if you have a good unexpected pocket character.

 

[DMG]

Nope, cause that leads to ******** **** where I play IC's, Ban FD, now my opponent can't ban FD, and I turn around and CP there.

Edit: Banning a stage tends to mean removing it from play. If I ban FD in a set, neither one of us can pick the stage for the set. Most exceptions come from both players agreeing to go to the stage someone banned, or people forgetting that banning it means banning it from selection for both parties.

 

[Alex Strife]

he used it so he could CP with mk on FD vs someones rob that ***** his ICz