The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[MK26]

maharba, id be really interested to see what ledgegrab counts are for pit players in non-lgl situations

if you pulled up a few matches like that and showed that even with this short-term planking pits are regularly crossing 50 ledgegrabs, then thatd be justification to raise the limit

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

ill see what i can do on that, i don't have recorded evidence atm but im gonna see if other pits on the board do and if not ill record my ending lgl for each match and record how long it was, who won, whether the match went to time or not, how many ledge grabs pit has. and like i said ill get some actual recorded data on this and let you guys know in a while on this.

all i have atm is in this match at HOM2 on saturday vs ult1m@te r@z3r (no namesearch here lol) i had a total of 39 ledge grabs. now tell me if that match had gone to time with this conventional safe pit vs snake gameplay (before people say it yes i know razer is a better player than i am) that i wouldn't be forced to the grab the ledge 11 more times to get rid of those nades? sure there was some ledge retreating when he died, but that's because invincible snake is scary.

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

also, i know that one match isn't proof of anything, ill have more, just is just the only example available atm.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

You could look up danny vs Afro Thundah from a long *** time ago. He had something like 200 Ledge grabs.

 

[MK26]

@Maharba: tbh youve got a real point there lol

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Look, there is a positive and a negative to every rule. If we don't have a LGL rule, the game, against a large portion of characters and AS a large portion of characters, will degenerate to ledge camping. Although there isn't anything wrong with this, it isn't the type of metagame that is conducive of growth, it is actually the opposite as such. We like to promote a healthy metagame, and the game revolving around the ledge isn't healthy and shows that there is little to no growth.

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

that's why i said 65. it gives characters who can use the edge to fight (pit, rob, g&w) enough ledge grabs to comfortably use the edge for a while without having to worry about exceeding the lgl because their short term planking is being used solely to get back on stage safely. it still prevents planking from characters whose sole purpose of planking is timing out. for example, we all know that DK's planking has no use other than timing out, and that it takes well over 100 ledge grabs to do so (185 to referance will vs RB). his planking and others who would be solely trying to time out would still be inhibited from gay time out planking while it would give those of us who only need just a few more than the set 50 could use their short term planking for a bit and then continue the normal on stage game.
it wouldn't be promoting time out planking at all, it would just allow the characters who 100% NEED short term planking to not get *** ***** getting off the ledge by giving them enough ledge grabs to where if the match did indeed go to time they wouldn't be screwed over even though they didn't try to exceed 50 ledge grabs, they were forced to exceed it.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I noticed people talked about the scouting rule, that's a pretty bad rule.

The rule destroys the purpose of CPing. It's trying to soften hard counters for people so they don't deal with the bad MU's game 2-3, they picked their character why let them repick if they see they got CP'd?

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

You still don't realize how difficult it is to even get to 50 if you aren't trying to run the clock...I've played very defensively on stages like Norfair, where the ledge is your super friend, and I get like 23 in a 5 minute game...

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

ummmmm....... YOU'RE PIKACHU. pika does not require planking at all ever. he can do it sure and but it doesn't really play anywhere near as big a role in his metagame as pit, rob, g&w, samus, etc. you just can't even compare pika's need of the ledge to these characters' need of the ledge. mayb that's why you aren't seeing my side of the arguement as well. try using pit against snake, diddy, and falco. you will see that unless you spend a decent amount of time being patient on the ledge when they get you there, you will never get them below 2 stocks because they will punish you for getting off at the wrong time.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

I understand the MUs. So you are saying we should sacrifice dozens of MUs for a lot of characters just to save a smaller # of Match-ups? Sweet, I guess that makes sense.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I noticed people talked about the scouting rule, that's a pretty bad rule.

The rule destroys the purpose of CPing. It's trying to soften hard counters for people so they don't deal with the bad MU's game 2-3, they picked their character why let them repick if they see they got CP'd?

I do not know you have a DDD. I go DK against you. You pick DDD. I (pretty much) automatically lose.

With scouting: I do not know you have a DDD. I go DK against you. You pick DDD. I can try for a matchup I won't automatically lose. I'll still get stuck with you counterpicking me, but I at least know I can't go DK or I'll get stuck in that nasty 90-10 matchup.

It's not perfect or anything, and I'm not going to strongly advocate it, but to claim that it ruins counterpicking is really pretty wrong.

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

how does that sacrifice any MUs at all? where did that even come from? 65 is still gonna stop people from planking to time out. i don't get what you mean. explain plz

 

[NickRiddle]

how does that sacrifice any MUs at all? where did that even come from? 65 is still gonna stop people from planking to time out. i don't get what you mean. explain plz

The characters who "need the ledge to win" will get a higher number.
You're not looking at the flip-side.
Characters that "suck against ledge play" are forced to wait longer, and will get timed-out easier.

Example:
ZSS vs. Falco.
Falco wins because his stage control is better, and it's very hard for ZSS to get in. ZSS's off-stage game is MUCH better than Falco's. She generally wins when she gets a couple of gimps in on Falco.
ZSS now has 65 ledge-grabs as you said. She also has one of the longest "ledge-times" in the game due to her being able to drop and tether, and wait for the tether to retract automatically. (Once she's grabbing the stage, she gets her invulnerability.) As such she could run the clock for 3-4 minutes, easily, and the only thing that can stop her is Falco possibly killing himself if she reads him once.

Now, you're saying that because those characters need the ledge more, characters like Falco/Wolf/Olimar who people say suck vs. ledge play should be put at a disadvantage against anybody with a good off-stage game that isn't MK?
That's a little biased.

 

[Luigi player]

I do not know you have a DDD. I go DK against you. You pick DDD. I (pretty much) automatically lose.

With scouting: I do not know you have a DDD. I go DK against you. You pick DDD. I can try for a matchup I won't automatically lose. I'll still get stuck with you counterpicking me, but I at least know I can't go DK or I'll get stuck in that nasty 90-10 matchup.

It's not perfect or anything, and I'm not going to strongly advocate it, but to claim that it ruins counterpicking is really pretty wrong.

Good players would just pick the worst MU of the opponents character so that they switch the next time and then you can CP them anyway.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

The characters who "need gimps to win" will get a higher number.
You're not looking at the flip-side.
Characters that "suck at recovering" are forced to die earlier, and will lose easier.

Example:
MK vs. Olimar
Olimar wins because his stage control is better, and it's very hard for MK to get in. MK's off-stage game is MUCH better than Oli's. He generally only wins when she gets a couple of gimps in on Oli.
MK now can kill Oli via edgehogging 3 times. He also has one of the best "gimping moves" in the game due to upB (can get Oli offstage ridiculously early). As such he could gimp olimar 3 times, easily, and the only thing that can stop him is Oli playing absolutely perfectly.

...Still make sense?

The reason we're biased towards those characters is because, well, the game itself is too. Characters who are awful at dealing with ledge play are awful because of their limitations as a character. You seem to be trying to place "characters with a notable character weakness" on the same level with "characters with a notable strength" as far as matchups being bad or not. It's not even remotely fair to do that, and if you try to use the same logic on anything else, like, say, recovery vs. gimping, ground time/air time limits (**** YOU TKD!), whatever... It just falls apart. Why is it then acceptable for ledge play?

Look, I get it. We don't want half the cast sitting on the ledge all day. But LGLs on characters like, say, ROB, who absolutely fail at really abusing it, and use it as part of their main game plan... It's silly.


@LP: Well yeah, but still, it gives me another chance to not automatically lose. To say it doesn't help is a little... off.

 

[NickRiddle]

...Still make sense?

The reason we're biased towards those characters is because, well, the game itself is too. Characters who are awful at dealing with ledge play are awful because of their limitations as a character. You seem to be trying to place "characters with a notable character weakness" on the same level with "characters with a notable strength" as far as matchups being bad or not. It's not even remotely fair to do that, and if you try to use the same logic on anything else, like, say, recovery vs. gimping, ground time/air time limits (**** YOU TKD!), whatever... It just falls apart. Why is it then acceptable for ledge play?

Look, I get it. We don't want half the cast sitting on the ledge all day. But LGLs on characters like, say, ROB, who absolutely fail at abusing it... It's silly.


@LP: Well yeah, but still, it gives me another chance to not automatically lose. To say it doesn't help is a little... off.

Hey, I wasn't arguing any of that.
He asked what MUs it would mess up.
I just gave a long example.
I'd LOVE a high LGL. ZSS ***** off-stage.

And, okay, characters like ROB cannot abuse the stage and need it in certain MUs.
Are you saying we pick and choose which characters have an LGL?
Are you saying only MK has an LGL?
Are you saying nobody should have an LGL?

 

[MK26]

Let me put this as simply and bluntly as I can: the scouting rule does not mean that you can change your character and re-counterpick your opponent after he counterpicks you. It means that your opponent gets to know what character you switched to and has the option of changing as well, which means he is still counterpicking you, but if you find yourself in a no-win situation you now have a way out.

 

[Luigi player]

@LP: Well yeah, but still, it gives me another chance to not automatically lose. To say it doesn't help is a little... off.

Well I didn't say it doesn't help... but ideally it wouldn't.

It would help against people that wouldn't CP them in the first place.

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

i gotcha nick. but zss is kinda gimp bait for character's with lingering hit boxes if she hangs out there. as pit i would just walk off and use my bair, and there are other characters who can do things about planking. olimar can grab pit out of his planking, pit can curve, loop, or rain arrows down at people planking, etc. while it would be reducing the MU numbers in a lot MUs, overall it would change all of them.

idk im just kinda like i don't want people to plank for an entire game and win by timing out that way, but at the same time i don't want characters who need to plank at least for a while to be so limited. arghh i wish there was a way to balance it out more but im just too tired to put any more thoughts on this down atm. mayb after a good long power nap.

but ya thx for pointing that out mang

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hey, I wasn't arguing any of that.
He asked what MUs it would mess up.
I just gave a long example.
I'd LOVE a high LGL. ZSS ***** off-stage.

And, okay, characters like ROB cannot abuse the stage and need it in certain MUs.
Are you saying we pick and choose which characters have an LGL?
Are you saying only MK has an LGL?
Are you saying nobody should have an LGL?

I'm saying we should pick and choose. DK? Seems to have shown itself as sufficiently broken in enough matchups. MK? No-brainer. Samus? Doesn't need LGLs, kinda needs for them not to be there.

You go down the list and apply either "has LGLs" or "doesn't have LGLs" based on tournament experience. Not "this is gay" (like with Samus or ROB), "this is actually broken".

...Now, if you want my opinion that isn't based on ruleset ******y, I don't give a ****. MK will always have LGLs and will pretty much always need them. Other chars having LGLs additionally just makes my life easier.

 

[NickRiddle]

i gotcha nick. but zss is kinda gimp bait for character's with lingering hit boxes if she hangs out there. as pit i would just walk off and use my bair

Except... I can fall off my tether, and use my double-jump during your lag.
But, this isn't a ZSS thread, so I'll stop here.

I'm saying we should pick and choose. DK? Seems to have shown itself as sufficiently broken in enough matchups. MK? No-brainer. Samus? Doesn't need LGLs, kinda needs for them not to be there.

You go down the list and apply either "has LGLs" or "doesn't have LGLs" based on tournament experience. Not "this is gay" (like with Samus or ROB), "this is actually broken".

...Now, if you want my opinion that isn't based on ruleset ******y, I don't give a ****. MK will always have LGLs and will pretty much always need them. Other chars having LGLs additionally just makes my life easier.

So, it'd need to be proven broken?
There's a problem still with people agreeing/disagreeing with what's broken and what isn't...
I mean, I like the idea of picking and choosing as well, but it'd be hard to have enough people agree upon broken or not.

 

[Maharba the Mystic]

now this.... this would be an interesting topic to discuss. someone who knows more about multiple chars that plank than me should me a list of who in this game can plank efficiently broken or not (i only know pit, rob, samus, g&w, dk, MK) and then we should discuss the aspects of each character's planking one at a time and decide whether it is truly broken or if it can be beaten.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

Planking is a key part of Jigglypuff's game, since in about 70% of MUs the goal of the puff player is not to KO the opponent 3 times, but to gain a lead (preferably stock, but in some cases like Lucario a small % lead) and time them out.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Top Tier (Broken):
Meta Knight

Mid Tier:
Jigglypuff
Mr. Game & Watch
Pit
Marth
Samus

Low Tier:
Yoshi
Donkey Kong
R.O.B.
Bowser (?)
King Dedede
Kirby (?)

Characters aren't ordered within their own tiers.

 

[Flayl]

I'm saying we should pick and choose. DK? Seems to have shown itself as sufficiently broken in enough matchups.

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Lol I like how you don't have Pikachu there.

 

[Tesh]

A top level player not knowing what to do in a rare matchup doesn't prove DKs planking is broken. At that point sponsors shouldn't even be brought up or how "pretty" things can look. ALOT of stuff thats beatable can look very ugly if one player is ignorant about his options.

If I spam nado over and over and over until it kills you at 250% and you NEVER punish me because you DONT KNOW HOW, sponsors probably wont like how it looks either. But that doesn't mean we should ban tornado.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

I have never seen Pikachu plank sufficiently, ever.

 

[san.]

With a slow fast fall, it's hard for jigglypuff to evade the opponent forever. I wouldn't put her very high.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

He DOES say that it's not in any order within the tiers. Also Ganon should be near the upper end of Low on that list.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Because Pikachu never has to. I planked Hylian for 3 minutes straight and he killed himself twice trying to hit me. Uair fastfall QA to the ledge. If you grab the ledge, I can just QAC on the level and go to the other side (after throwing a T-jolt at you). Yeah...its really easy and effective.

 

[Tesh]

That doesn't sound that good at all tbh. You need powerful safe mixups imo. The uair ain't mk's.


Also can teams have coaches? Like can 2 players have a 3rd player coaching them between matches in teams?

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

If it is in the middle of a match...no.

If it is in between matches (In between games 1/2 let's say), yes. Same as singles.

Also, no **** it isn't as good as MKs. NOBODY'S is as good as MKs...that's why it was originally going to be MK only.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I do not know you have a DDD. I go DK against you. You pick DDD. I (pretty much) automatically lose.

With scouting: I do not know you have a DDD. I go DK against you. You pick DDD. I can try for a matchup I won't automatically lose. I'll still get stuck with you counterpicking me, but I at least know I can't go DK or I'll get stuck in that nasty 90-10 matchup.

It's not perfect or anything, and I'm not going to strongly advocate it, but to claim that it ruins counterpicking is really pretty wrong.

Well they shouldn't main DK in the first place if they hate that so much.

It does wreck Counter picking to a degree, and at the same time does nothing about it. One one hand, we do remove those icky hard counters some characters have, yet at the same time people can still counter pick against who you do pick the second time.

Still I don't see why we would need to change it, considering the system was fair from the start to the players and if they knowingly main DK with that in mind, well why can't we apply it to game 1 and scout that if we hate hard counters so much?

I would say leaving the system alone imo. The rule's bias is clear when you think about who made it and what character they play.

 

[MK26]

alright, why fix what aint broken?

and the bias thing is true loool

 

[WindMajor]

A top level player not knowing what to do in a rare matchup doesn't prove DKs planking is broken. At that point sponsors shouldn't even be brought up or how "pretty" things can look. ALOT of stuff thats beatable can look very ugly if one player is ignorant about his options.

If I spam nado over and over and over until it kills you at 250% and you NEVER punish me because you DONT KNOW HOW, sponsors probably wont like how it looks either. But that doesn't mean we should ban tornado.

I already went over this like a page or two ago. Quoting cause I'm lazy:

It's not so much that the sponsors want a pretty game as much as it's the sponsors want an appealing community.

Our community tolerates most of the defensiveness in this game, but people REALLY get turned off by the planking, and you can see it in the events and on the boards. It's a lot of negative light that the community casts itself under, and that's not appealing when you're trying to sell a gaming community to sponsors.

It's not just the game itself, it's everything around it as well.

In other words, sponsors don't really care if the game is fun to watch, as long as the game brings a lot of people, interest, and money.

The characters who "need the ledge to win" will get a higher number.
You're not looking at the flip-side.
Characters that "suck against ledge play" are forced to wait longer, and will get timed-out easier.

Example:
ZSS vs. Falco.
Falco wins because his stage control is better, and it's very hard for ZSS to get in. ZSS's off-stage game is MUCH better than Falco's. She generally wins when she gets a couple of gimps in on Falco.
ZSS now has 65 ledge-grabs as you said. She also has one of the longest "ledge-times" in the game due to her being able to drop and tether, and wait for the tether to retract automatically. (Once she's grabbing the stage, she gets her invulnerability.) As such she could run the clock for 3-4 minutes, easily, and the only thing that can stop her is Falco possibly killing himself if she reads him once.

Now, you're saying that because those characters need the ledge more, characters like Falco/Wolf/Olimar who people say suck vs. ledge play should be put at a disadvantage against anybody with a good off-stage game that isn't MK?
That's a little biased.

I'm pretty sure he's saying that there's no reason to limit a character that doesn't need limiting, and doing so is unnecessarily nerfing the character.

For example, Toon Link gets trapped on the ledge against characters like Marth and Falco all the time. Since he can't approach all the time, all he can do is hold on to the ledge for a while and wait for an opening, which doesn't come easy. Toon Link doesn't have a broken planking method, or even a planking method that's remotely safe to begin with. Why should his ledge grabs be limited?

The rule was placed on him, so the Unity Ruleset is unnecessarily nerfing Toon Link, and buffing the ledge guarder. Wanting to remove the ledge grab limit to buff TL and nerf the ledge guarder shouldn't be seen as a bad thing because it nerfs the ledge guarder, it should be seen as a good thing because it's removing an unnecessary and unfair addition to the ruleset.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yeah, as said, a case by case basis. I mean, hell, you could even err to the side of caution and ban people who might be ridiculous (G&W, Pikachu, Marth) in some matchups. But don't go with those who struggle getting off the ledge, or who need the ledge for their aggro game (Samus, ROB, etc.)

 

[DeLux]

The act of stalling is banned: stalling is intentionally making the game unplayable: Such as becoming invisible, continuing infinites past 300%, and reaching a position that your opponent can never reach you.

I feel the BBRRC ought to consider rewording the bolded part.

I assume the goal of the rule seeks to include the Ice Climbers chain grab in the tactics that can't be done past 300%.

However, after testing I've confirmed that the ICs CG is not an infinite on at least three members of the cast. It will most likely end up being significantly more. At the same time, I've confirmed that it IS a true infinite on one member of the cast. However, It's 5am and I just did a huge amount of testing in one night and don't want to do anymore for now.

But I'm positive that I'm correct.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I'm positive you're INCORRECT, unless you are talking about tripping.

 

[DeLux]

No. I'm sorry. Extensive frame testing says I'm right on this one.

What evidence do you have to say that I'm incorrect?