The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[Supreme Dirt]

I can't wait to use RC and Brinstar in peace

imo Brinstar should be banned regardless of MK legality.

I could see arguments being made for Skyworld and possibly (though gl to whoever makes it, lol) Hanenbow.

 

[Xubble]

Frankly, I don't see how we can have Norfair with its lava and lava walls and lava waves and lava frappés be legal, but Skyworld is not due to possible stage spikes. I mean, you can avoid the bottom of the stage if need be, and you can eliminate the "ceilings" if you want to eliminate the issue (albeit temporarily).

 

[Supreme Dirt]

lolstagespikes

lrn2tech

Seriously, teching is NOT hard, as much as some people would like to think it is.

Though obviously ability to tech is not a skill we care about in Brawl

 

[Xubble]

Exactly. I don't see any real issues with Skyworld. It's pretty basic and would make a good neutral in my opinion. Just, you know... Learn to tech. >_>

 

[DRN]

shut up mekos. you saw that m2k posted that same EXACT arguement and your trying to sound like your some god of brawl who is so much better than everyone else but the stone cold fact is your not some god of brawl and while your lucas style is different it doesn't change, you just make smarter reads like every other pro/top character main. nobody cares that you did good when you teamed with m2k (who can win double's with a computer falcon on his team) and nobody cares that your the best lucas because lucas is a ****ty character. your opinion is not the be all end all word of the prophets, and the fact that you think the MK mu with lucas is even is sad and ****s on whatever credibility you have. so does saying there are no pros at siis6 when
1. there are plenty there
2. the fact that it's not mk banned ****s over whatever point you were trying to make
3. the fact that you like watching a **** load of MK matches makes me worry about your health.

also, plenty of top level MK players have secondaries they can switch too and will not quit brawl, you've got people like ally and atomsk and vinnie who have characters like wario DDD ICs g&w snake and i can guarentee they won't be quitting just because of the MK ban.

TL:DR
nobody cares that the best lucas likes watching MK dittos and if a few solo mk mains rage quit this game, oh well, new players will rise and join the community and this game will mimic something that's kind of balanced.

Uhh i like how Mekos didnt mention anything about doubles and you brought it up. If Mekos was to say anything about his skill he would bring up how he beat ESAM a weekend ago in winners finals at Gold Mine 3. Also you should watch a video of Mekos a couple months ago and then watch him vs ESAM and you will def see new stuff in his game and not just better reads. M2K is good but hes not a god. At BBC M2K teamed with BigLou and they ended up losing finals to Kismet and Reflex. Just because M2K is in the team does not mean its an instant win. Teamwork is a lot more important then individual skill.

I don't really know why you guys are arguing... the poll is done and done. It's all up to the BRC now.

This^

I guarantee no one in the RC is reading any arguement in this thread especially with all the silly posts in the past like 20 pages.

 

[John12346]

lava frappés

Sorry this is offtopic, but that sounds absolutely delicious and I would buy one immediately if a store started selling anything by that name.

Ontopic, Norfair is pretty controversial, even without MK, unlike Brinstar and RC, although that's stating the obvious, w/e...

 

[DMG]

Skyworld is not up for debate.

Enjoy the rest of your day.

 

[Xubble]

OBJECTION!!

I like Skyworld, your argument is invalid.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I think the fact that we only have like two or three top level MK only mains proves that MK isn't broken. Without M2K, MK would lose at least 1/3 of the money he has in John12346's chart.

 

[popsofctown]

Then gain most back when you remove the top main of every other character to be fair.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Then gain most back when you remove the top main of every other character to be fair.

Not really when you consider the fact that M2K goes to more tournaments than almost any other top level player

 

[popsofctown]

I disagree.

Doesn't John have enough info in his chart that you could do that? blot out MK and every other character's most money earning player?

 

[MechaWave]

Green Greens should be legal imo. :3

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I disagree.

Doesn't John have enough info in his chart that you could do that? blot out MK and every other character's most money earning player?

I don't think so but if you remove Ally from Snake, you are also going to have to remove his winnings as MK. Same thing with Lain

 

[Omni]

You have to take out the fact that if M2K or Ally or any of those top MK's weren't making the money then others characters and players will have probably received more.

Just removing the winnings from top players or characters doesn't give a proper reflection of what's leftover considering that amount of money is missing.

This is just impossible to calculate unless someone decides to remove said players and try to distribute the winnings to the 2nd place player behind them.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

You have to take out the fact that if M2K or Ally or any of those top MK's weren't making the money then others characters and players will have probably received more.

Just removing the winnings from top players or characters doesn't give a proper reflection of what's leftover considering that amount of money is missing.

This is just impossible to calculate unless someone decides to remove said players and try to distribute the winnings to the 2nd place player behind them.

That could work but I doubt anyone would want to do that seeing as how everyone wants to take the easy way out by just banning MK

 

[Omni]

Nah, it couldn't work.

If M2K or top MK players were removed, then that means players who they took out in bracket may have received different placings. 2nd place to M2K is essentially a reflection to how well a player can beat top tier players/characters which may include top-level Metaknight.

Too many variables.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Nah, it couldn't work.

If M2K or top MK players were removed, then that means players who they took out in bracket may have received different placings. 2nd place to M2K is essentially a reflection to how well a player can beat top tier players/characters which may include top-level Metaknight.

Too many variables.

I think it could work, but it is true that it will not be 100% accurate. I would like to know how much of MK's money comes from M2K. Does anyone know how I can find that?

 

[Kewkky]

imo Brinstar should be banned regardless of MK legality.

I could see arguments being made for Skyworld and possibly (though gl to whoever makes it, lol) Hanenbow.

IMO RC is just fine. What's your reasons why RC should be banned? Also, which arguments can be made for Skyworld and Hanenbow that apply to RC?


The control of the center of Skyworld is pretty overcentralizing, considering you have access to the entire stage while the opponent does not if the platforms are there. It's also hard for your opponent to actually get in and kick you out of the center, since you can shark his every attempt and there's only few ways he can come in from, and while destroying the platforms is possible, this requires commitment and staling, while your opponent can just punish you for it. Plus, could you imagine someone trying to use dtilt in the lower platform of Skyworld when the platforms are destroyed? Wouldn't it be hilarious if it were Sheik or ZSS, or someone with a dair that lasts long enough to potentially kill them? I would laugh out loud if I saw someone dairing to their deaths because of trying to dtilt, kinda like how I do now when I push Ike's shield off a ledge and he nairs to his death.

Hanenbow, I dislike it so I never play there in fun friendlies, so I can't say anything about it except that I dislike the stage. :|

Not really when you consider the fact that M2K goes to more tournaments than almost any other top level player

That's pretty irrelevant in how good of a character MK is. And even though M2K goes to lots of tourneys, he doesn't win 1st all the time, nor does he go to every tourney out there. There's lots more going on every week with other top placers around the world, it just so happens that MK is the most used character in the game by a huge margin due to him being so good.

 

[DeLux]

I guarantee no one in the RC is reading any arguement in this thread especially with all the silly posts in the past like 20 pages.

I have been reading literally every post. And I've seen other members of the committee lurking as well

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I don't think it was good idea to use the amount of money a character makes to determine how broken a character is since it's not really the character making the money, but the player. Take away the player and you take away the character's ability to place high.

 

[-Ran]

I guarantee no one in the RC is reading any arguement in this thread especially with all the silly posts in the past like 20 pages.

I've read everything. I just don't post since it can detract from the discussions that are occurring, or it might be viewed as me speaking of the RC's stance.

 

[Kewkky]

I don't think it was good idea to use the amount of money a character makes to determine how broken a character is since it's not really the character making the money, but the player. Take away the player and you take away the character's ability to place high.

Well if you take away the players, no one uses any character, so they all win the same amount of money and now the game is balanced perfectly.

...

Even if you remove the player, the character's traits are still there. Their potential to win money when used by a skilled player will always be there.

Also, it does prove a bannable offense, if anything: overcentralization. Too many people depending on one character. He might not be broken to some, but you have to be crazy if you don't say he's not overcentralizing, what with tons of people having pocket MKs (including top players), or outright maining MK, because he's hands down the best and safest choice.

 

[-Ran]

I don't think it was good idea to use the amount of money a character makes to determine how broken a character is since it's not really the character making the money, but the player. Take away the player and you take away the character's ability to place high.

Take away the player, and you never get to the character select screen.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Well if you take away the players, no one uses any character, so they all win the same amount of money and now the game is balanced perfectly.

...

Even if you remove the player, the character's traits are still there. Their potential to win money when used by a skilled player will always be there.

Also, it does prove a bannable offense, if anything: overcentralization. Too many people depending on one character. He might not be broken to some, but you have to be crazy if you don't say he's not overcentralizing, what with tons of people having pocket MKs (including top players), or outright maining MK, because he's hands down the best and safest choice.

Every character that is that is tournament viable has a chance at making money in tournaments.

A lot of top players pick up MK to fight on stages like Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise. Take away those stages first or if you don't want to take those stages out, add an extra stage ban. It should at least be tried before you do something like ban a character that doesn't deserve to be banned

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=308724

 

[Conviction]

You mean add more surgical nerfs that were intended for MK but it hurts the whole cast as well?

 

[SaveMeJebus]

You mean add more surgical nerfs that were intended for MK but it hurts the whole cast as well?

The winner of a match will get two stage bans for their first win and an extra ban for each additional win. No DSR

Character's like Falco, Diddy and ICs may lose two of their best stages, but they also get two ban two of their worst stages. Characters like MK, G&W and Wario may lose some of their best stages, but they can also take away two of their opponent's best stages

give me an example

 

[popsofctown]

I don't think so but if you remove Ally from Snake, you are also going to have to remove his winnings as MK. Same thing with Lain

That doesn't come close to making sense.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

That doesn't come close to making sense.

No Ally means no Snake or MK next to his name in the tournament results because he won't be on them

 

[Xubble]

The fact that we have to make these surgical nerfs shows me that MK deserves to be banned.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

The fact that we have to make these surgical nerfs shows me that MK deserves to be banned.

What surgical nerfs? Every character has a LGL. Stalling is banned and IDC counts as stalling

 

[popsofctown]

not every character has an LGL of 35.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

not every character has an LGL of 35.

No character is ever going to go over 35 ledge grabs unless they are trying to stall. We never had a problem with a universal LGL of 35 in Socal. The LGL shouldn't be more than 40 for every character

 

[Marc]

Money is a nice, but flawed, indicator of how well a character does. Some regions are stronger than others, it's easy to make errors and it doesn't really say anything other than what characters are the most succesful tournament performers across the board in the US (which doesn't necessarily fall in line with the tier list or matchup chart). It's a good source of data though, when used and framed properly.

You mean add more surgical nerfs that were intended for MK but it hurts the whole cast as well?

Never in the history of competitive smash have stages had priority over characters. If a character breaks a stage, you ban the stage, not the character. Rainbow Cruise is usually banned in Europe (both Melee and Brawl) because of its own characteristics rather than characters potentially breaking it, but we had Brinstar legal until recently. It was MK's most preferred counterpick and the only other characters who also liked to go there were more obscure ones like Ness. If only one or a few characters can reasonably be expected to do well on a stage (AKA it's an auto-ban in virtually every matchup), it probably has to go. This isn't a new concept; Fox got several stages banned in Melee, Jigglypuff got rid of Brinstar and Jiggs and Peach together dominated Mute City. Should the Melee scene have banned those characters instead?

Note that I'm not even entirely convinced that MK breaks those stages, but it's a very common view in the only scene that has them legal (the US), which also happens to be the only scene dominated by the character. Note that this doesn't even touch upon the fact that we should consider systems that make the first game and subsequent counterpicking less overcentralizing in general.

 

[TheSlothStyle]

yes
it is not up to the players to decide how the game "should" function when pushed to its limits (i.e. "play to win"). outside of the banning of random factors such as items and polarizing stages or stages that randomize results more than desired, you shouldn't need anything else to ensure the competitive integrity of the game. banning specific strategies, limiting the number of times you can do something that occurs frequently while recovering, and even preventing players from choosing a character selectable from the character select screen should not be necessary. if it really is, the game's competitive integrity itself is shallow and weak, and it shouldn't be played competitively. play it casually, put up with the bull****, or find another game.

That makes so much sense. I think I'm getting the jist why people who play Melee don't like Brawl... Besides the lack of wavedashing.

 

[CT Chia]

What I like about money charts is that it's automatically weighted so that -
1. Events with more players are worth more
2. More "serious" events are worth more (prevents saying eh this guy just didn't care cause it was only $20 on the line)

 

[Supreme Dirt]

IMO RC is just fine. What's your reasons why RC should be banned? Also, which arguments can be made for Skyworld and Hanenbow that apply to RC?

Um, I mention RC nowhere in that post, lol. Brinstar =/= Rainbow Cruise. I DON'T think RC should be banned.

That's like linking talk of FD to talk of SV, after all Diddy does well on both stages.

 

[Kewkky]

Every character that is that is tournament viable has a chance at making money in tournaments.

A lot of top players pick up MK to fight on stages like Brinstar and Rainbow Cruise. Take away those stages first or if you don't want to take those stages out, add an extra stage ban. It should at least be tried before you do something like ban a character that doesn't deserve to be banned

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=308724

Not completely true, a lot of top players pick up MK to fight off MKs/bad MUs as well. Your stage-banning rule will just resolve having to fight MK in those two stages, and even though it's an improvement, the bat is still there with all its glory.

Um, I mention RC nowhere in that post, lol. Brinstar =/= Rainbow Cruise. I DON'T think RC should be banned.

That's like linking talk of FD to talk of SV, after all Diddy does well on both stages.

I understood you were talking about RC, since I mentioned both of them, and you separated both statements that are talking about the same thing into two paragraphs. In one you were talking about Brinstar, and it was one single sentence. The other separated sentence shouldn't have been talking about Brinstar, you should've linked them both together. Separating statements means that you're separating it from the previous topic since it's not talking about the same thing, ergo, different topic.

See how improper grammar made me misunderstand your post? Tsk tsk tsk.

 

[TheSlothStyle]

Supermodel From Paris, I'm not going to respond to your posts if you're going to try to repeatedly (and fruitlessly) change the subject away from my or anyone else's points. Nowhere in any of my posts here today have I mentioned that Melee or even Project M are superior alternatives to Brawl. My original post only outlined why I believe LGL's and banning any character should not be necessary, and explained several courses of action for if such were deemed necessary.

While I most assuredly don't have as much experience in playing this game competitively as you well-established (read: generally, loud) members of the community are, I did indeed play the game competitively for a time — wait a minute.

I don't play the game competitively (anymore) because of many factors; the effectiveness of planking and other such tactics is only one item on a very long list. The average maturity of its fanbase being slightly lower is also one of them (and I do mean slightly; the Melee community has its fair share of loud and obnoxious). I'll give the Brawl community the benefit of the doubt and assume that at this point the loud people are mostly Smashboards Heroes and don't actually attend relevant tournaments, similarly to the Melee ones.
There are times where I do play this game, but I do so casually, and have quite a bit of fun doing so. The game is not bad, or awful, or terrible, or anything of the sort. If my ulterior motive was really to convince you highly important members of the Brawl community to instead join my community, I'd probably be storming in here explaining that Brawl's air dodge system contributes to defensive play being largely favored among many other such examples (despite the fact that whether or not defensive play being favored being a good or bad thing is subjective) and as such Brawl is teh suck.

I've played this game competitively. I've hacked the **** out of it. I'm in the Smash Lab. I understand its mechanics most likely more thoroughly than you do. Your claim that my (incorrectly assumed) little experience in the matter makes my opinion irrelevant is itself about as relevant as if I were to mention your September 2010 join date and question your experience in the matter because of it. It's a cop-out to an argument, and you should feel bad for making it as opposed to actually responding to my points. I hope the discussions in the BBR have more content and thought, than this. I'd be appalled if a Smash Back Room discussion were going on about the MK ban issue and a Metaknight main made a worthy argument with relevant examples and then his post was quoted, with simply "Of course you say this; you use MK. I have now successfully refuted your argument. Aight who else wants to say something about this?" Such logic would pit (no pun intended) the players who don't main MK and are anti-ban against the players who are pro-ban, which aside from some notable exceptions, are mostly non-MK players. It's pretty obvious why this logic doesn't really work.
While such weak as **** arguments are certainly easier to make than actual ones (and it's certainly fairly easy to just out-talk someone who is putting effort into posts when he is outnumbered as is the case here; I wouldn't be surprised if this occurs), it'd behoove you as both a player and as a person to put a little more effort into something you seem to care about so fervently. I have done so and I'm largely indifferent to the outcome of the MK ban issue.

My opinion on LGL and MK, however, is still an informed one, and the fact that I don't play the game competitively is mostly irrelevant. If anything, it should strengthen my points, as I am unaffected emotionally either way by the MK ban, and look at it in a less influenced manner.

If you want to play this game competitively and enjoy it, you should put up with any such (already established as should not be necessary to ban) bull**** that's in it, similarly to a low tier main dealing with his character's weaknesses and outplaying his opponents. I know this because I use a bad character in the game I play competitively. Are there truly unbeatable tactics in the game? If so, then should it really be played competitively? I think not, and have explained why I think so. Defend your game/viewpoint properly, or be a piece of **** that can't contribute healthy discussion on the Internet about something they supposedly care about. It is your choice.

This dude makes too much sense. Everyone tends to want to ban this and ban that to prevent bull****, but when it all comes down to it, it's almost impossible to make this game perfect.
...Then again, I'm still new here to Smashboards. What do I know?

 

[Mekos]

My playstyle changes completely all the time, your point is invalid.

I'm actually expecting the poll results to be ignored and MK to remain legal.

Guys I'm speaking generally. Anyways, how am I speaking like an elitist? I'm just trying to say "don't give up".

I keep saying smash is a mental game and I guess people don't know what I mean by that statement.

For example, IMO you should have a strat for the beginning, middle, and end of each match. If your just playing blindly through it then you are not critically thinking about the match. The reason I speak like this is because I played FPS competitively and bring some of those mentalities to brawl.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said I wanna watch mk vs mk all day long. I said I look forward to watching the top of the top players play. And I never even brought up the fact that m2k and I won a dubs. That has nothing to do with what we are talking about lol. Lol at the reads thing. That is just a small part. I gave an example to compare vids of mine just months ago to see added twerks to my playstyle in more current vids. I'm just using myself as an example. I'm saying people need to work on themselves and not just giveup. I don't see how that makes me an elitist by saying I'm not a quitter.

For example, during the melee days I would watch melee to see people like Ken, Korean Dj, and M2k. I wasn't going to tourneys but I knew about them and watched MLG. Now you guys are telling me you want to do something to help get rid of some of our top brawl players. That will only hurt our community. That is my argument.

@DRN - I just read your comment. Preciate that