The Unity Ruleset: Discussion

[san.]

LGL stuff

Logic won't work very well in this situation, since it was an illogical event (DK on the ledge) that caused the largest recent kneejerk reaction in regards to the LGL.

50 LGL on Ike is easily apparent. Ike is broken on the ledge. If Ike gets more than 50 ledge grabs and the match goes to time, he should lose.

Same with wolf. Those two are just too broken to stay on the ledge for long. Don't get me started with Fox.

 

[sunshade]

DLA you need to learn the difference between something being random and something being arbitrary.

Ganon winning or losing out of side-b is random, choosing to ignore what the game says and imposing what we feel is more fair is arbitrary.

Also, has anyone given a single reason why Jungle japes should not be legal?

 

[Sage JoWii]

I love

that pictochat

is still legal

this many years into the game

People are still high as hell.

You. You're stupid. Not that I care whether or not pictochat is legal, but HOW DARE YOU blame it on people being high. You're indirectly attacking a group of very nice (or possible trolls) smashers that ACTUALLY DONT GIVE A **** because the world will spin w/o picto being banned. Jerk.

Tyrant SD'd at 0% on Brinstar and 3% on Norfair against Gnes.

Props to him for winning but still noting part of the reason why he won is important.

I'm lost. Are you agreeing that people can still win on Brinstar against MK or against it? Because all I read in this quote is 'Gnes won because of the stage helping' which is good since it's usually 'MK won because of the stage helping'. The degree to which the stage helps either character is obviously different, but the fact remains the same that if you win on Brinstar, it doesn't matter if the stage screwed your opponent over or your opponent SD'd cuz they still lost and the stage played a factor. Props to him winning and props to him for winning on Brinstar notwithstanding that it's janky. <3

Yeah yeah I know what the rule is All I'm suggesting is that it is worded more clearly.

It's a really stupid rule though... why the **** does Ganon arbitrarily lose 50% of the time if he LANDS a move? He directly loses the game because he successfully lands an attack. How ******** is that? The programming on Ganoncide is obviously faulty if the game RANDOMLY decides whether Ganon wins or not, based on COMPLETELY arbitrary criteria.

Ganon does the same exact animation for Ganoncide EVERY single time. Whether he wins or loses isn't even character-specific. How can the BBR-RC possibly think that deciding the outcome of a match in a COMPLETELY arbitary fashion is competitively viable?

You say that it's unfair to arbitrarily award the win to one player for using a suicide move. Well here's the thing: IT'S NOT ARBITRARY. There is direct evidence that the programming on Ganoncide is broken: the fact that ganonciding arbitrarily results in one of two outcomes, instead of just one outcome every time.

If the game was designed so that Ganon loses 100% of the time he ganoncides, instead of just 50%, THEN it would be arbitrary to award him the win or the 1-stock rematch, because it's not randomly decided. Ganon knows that he'll lose if he ganoncides.

If the game awarded Ganon a win with some characters but a loss with other characters, due to the size of the opponent's hurtbox, then it would be ALSO arbitrary to award Ganon the win/rematch every time, since the Ganon actually has a way of knowing whether or not the Ganoncide will award him the win or not based on the character he's fighting.

However, the way it is now, Ganon players literally have NO way of knowing whether or not a Ganoncide will make them lose or not. It's completely random, due to faulty programming. THIS is the reason that making a rule that gives Ganon ONE result for ganonciding is NOT arbitrary. Deciding a match completely based on randomness is not competitively viable.

Hell, making a rule that says Ganon LOSES every time he ganoncides is more fair than the current rule. At least it's not based on arbitrary factors.

That wouldn't be the right thing to do though, because Ganon's hurtbox is clearly farther from the blast zone than his opponent's hurtbox during the Ganoncide animation. That's why Ganon should win, or at least bring it to sudden death.

I never really care when people complain about stage lists, infinites, and all that other jazz because most of the pros and cons are consistent. You're play a MU w/ an infinite? It's consistently there. You play on Picto? The obstacles are GOING to show up.

But I didn't know Ganoncides were random.

On one hand, the game should decide and if you do the move, you take the risk. It's consistently random :'( but on the other hand, you know it's random, but if you're landing the move by reading (and it takes a quick read) than you should be rewarded. Consistently.

 

[DLA]

DLA you need to learn the difference between something being random and something being arbitrary.

Ganon winning or losing out of side-b is random, choosing to ignore what the game says and imposing what we feel is more fair is arbitrary.

Yes Ganon winning out of side B is random... but deciding the game based on a random event is arbitrary, especially when we have rules (such as stage lists) that are designed to get rid of arbitrary events in competitive play.

 

[sunshade]

No, arbitrary is when we choose to go against what the results are because of that being the way you think it "should" be.

If making rules to protect ganon when his side-b kills him is ok then making rules to ignore game and watch's 9 kills is also ok. Except neither are ok.

 

[san.]

Also, has anyone given a single reason why Jungle japes should not be legal?

Some people do not know to jump when they hear their characters gasp for breath. Others like to hang near the right ledge at XX:X7 and on the left ledge at XX:X4. Others may be afraid that Cranky Kong might leave his cabin.

Other than that, I can't think of anything. It is the most sensible large stage available. The rushing water and klap trap prevents excessive water camping. For some characters like DK who can water camp, their situation gets dangerous when the klaptrap comes near, which gives them far less space and freedom to abuse this tactic.

There is not enough space to camp on the sides. A strong attack can even push shields to the ledge. Controlling the middle may be even more effective. There is no character that gains an extreme advantage or disadvantage as long as each player understands the stage.

 

[Gea]

San, I... I.. may love you.

 

[DLA]

No, arbitrary is when we choose to go against what the results are because of that being the way you think it "should" be.

If making rules to protect ganon when his side-b kills him is ok then making rules to ignore game and watch's 9 kills is also ok. Except neither are ok.

No, Game and Watch's 9 hammer works as intended. Judgment hammer is SUPPOSED to be a randomly generated number.

I can't make an analogy between 9 hammer and ganoncide because the moves do entirely different things. Ganoncide automatically ends the game when you use it (assuming it's the last stock). There's no DI or anything--Ganoncide does the exact same thing every time. Both characters are in the exact same position in EVERY single ganoncide; every single condition is the same in every ganoncide. The only thing that varies is the random factor that was arbitrarily inserted into the game, that serves no purpose, and decides whether or not Ganon loses the entire match.

This is clearly a programming error... why wouldn't we fix this? This random factor serves no purpose, and is detrimental to competitive play.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Logic won't work very well in this situation, since it was an illogical event (DK on the ledge) that caused the largest recent kneejerk reaction in regards to the LGL.

50 LGL on Ike is easily apparent. Ike is broken on the ledge. If Ike gets more than 50 ledge grabs and the match goes to time, he should lose.

Same with wolf. Those two are just too broken to stay on the ledge for long. Don't get me started with Fox.

I love you so much right now <3 No homo.

 

[sunshade]

No, Game and Watch's 9 hammer works as intended. Judgment hammer is SUPPOSED to be a randomly generated number.

I can't make an analogy between 9 hammer and ganoncide because the moves do entirely different things. Ganoncide automatically ends the game when you use it (assuming it's the last stock). There's no DI or anything--Ganoncide does the exact same thing every time. Both characters are in the exact same position in EVERY single ganoncide; every single condition is the same in every ganoncide. The only thing that varies is the random factor that was arbitrarily inserted into the game, that serves no purpose, and decides whether or not Ganon loses the entire match.

This is clearly a programming error... why wouldn't we fix this? This random factor serves no purpose, and is detrimental to competitive play.

It is not detrimental to competitive play in the slightest. Putting in rules because we think that the game "should" or "is supposed" to be a certain way is detrimental to competitive play.

You think that Ganon's side-b should either always make him win or should always make him lose, but the thing is thats not how the move works, developer intent or not. The way Ganon's side-b works is that it will randomly make you win or lose if you use it when both players are last stock. If you don't like that it works that way, tough **** because thats how it is.

Changing the game to what you feel it "should be" or "is supposed" to be is arbitrary. The game says that ganon's side-b is random, so if you don't want to take that chance, dont use his side-b.

 

[Sage JoWii]

It is not detrimental to competitive play in the slightest. Putting in rules because we think that the game "should" or "is supposed" to be a certain way is detrimental to competitive play.

You think that Ganon's side-b should either always make him win or should always make him lose, but the thing is thats not how the move works, developer intent or not. The way Ganon's side-b works is that it will randomly make you win or lose if you use it when both players are last stock. If you don't like that it works that way, tough **** because thats how it is.

Changing the game to what you feel it "should be" or "is supposed" to be is arbitrary. The game says that ganon's side-b is random, so if you don't want to take that chance, dont use his side-b. Crying to change the rules is a immature as scrubs playing street fighter saying "no throws", grow up.

Lol. This guy is talking like EVERYTHING decided in the rules isn't up to us. Stop throwing around big words like they do anything for you. LAWL.

Ganon mains arguing for ganon-specific rules about a ganon tactic is JUST AS VIABLE as the stage rage gang's arguments for their agenda, or the LGLLosers whining abt planking specific rules.

You're crying about a ganon asking NOT YOU abt rules NOT INVOLVING YOUR MAIN at tournaments HE attends. What an immature thing to do. Jerk.

 

[sunshade]

Lol. This guy is talking like EVERYTHING decided in the rules isn't up to us. Stop throwing around big words like they do anything for you. LAWL.

Ganon mains arguing for ganon-specific rules about a ganon tactic is JUST AS VIABLE as the stage rage gang's arguments for their agenda, or the LGLLosers whining abt planking specific rules.

You're crying about a ganon asking NOT YOU abt rules NOT INVOLVING YOUR MAIN at tournaments HE attends. What an immature thing to do. Jerk.

I don't need to play ganon to find an illogical rule illogical.

Nice ad hom attacks by the way.

 

[BSP]

To me a neutral stage is where character vs. character interaction is the least interfered with. This is why FD is such a good pick. It's not about who does well on the stage over other characters. If a character does bad on a stage like fd then the character is bad, not the stage

I'm surprised no one commented on this. So the static = fair/best/doesn't affect the MU mindset lives on.

It would be nice to see some support for Pictochat, because atm it's just a stage littered with frequent random rewards all around that throws any possible standard we could have out the window.

If Picto is going to stay, why are Japes and Norfair banned?

 

[MK26]

LGLLosers

that's a new one lol

 

[z00ted]

Nah, joWii not really.

You use a move on last stock and the game declares a winner randomly. It's pretty simple when you think about it - you throw out a move in a certain situation and you expect a certain outcome. It just so happens that his character has a move that isn't always guaranteed. Note the rule that says you are responsible for all traits your character possess.

 

[Sage JoWii]

Well you don't need to think you're a **** to look like one Sunshade. I'm not 'debating' over a ruleset because I have an agenda to push. I also wasn't 'debating' any of your points.

I'm just commenting that he has every right to posts his thoughts for the BBR-RC's reference in regard to his character's GAME ENDING tactic.

So **** your ad hom *****. <3

Edit: I'm not getting what you're sayin' Ill. >_> I have no opinion on the rule. I see both sides and I think they're both valid.

edit2: Oh. You mean the 'just as viable...' part right? I'm not saying they're comparable in agenda specifically. I'm just sayin' he has every right to argue for his own agenda in the same way the other groups can argue theirs.

 

[z00ted]

Ohhhh.

I just assumed that since you seemed a bit angry in your posts you were pro ganon-cide wins every time.

 

[sunshade]

I never said he didn't have a right to post, I said he was wrong, and I know you don't have any arguments, thats why I pointed out everything you said was ad hominen.

Go troll somewhere else.

 

[Sage JoWii]

@Ill- It's ok bro <3.

@Sunshade- Is that what you high and mighty debaters refer to everyone who isn't posting the same way you are? Trolls? LAWL. He's not wrong in the same way wanting Jungle Japes to be legal, or being anti-LGL is wrong. It's not at all.

Edit: Everything in this ruleset is up to the BBR-RC. In other words, if DLA posts what he thinks about a specific rule, he's posting in order to let the BBR-RC know his thoughts. It's not an open invitation for any of you pseudo-debaters to come in and say he's wrong or right. That's just stupid. So if you're saying he's wrong, I'm calling you out on why you're wrong.

 

[Keitaro]

I haven't been able to read everything but some people are saying interesting stuff. I may bring some of these topics into discussion in the backroom.

 

[DLA]

Changing the game to what you feel it "should be" or "is supposed" to be is arbitrary. The game says that ganon's side-b is random, so if you don't want to take that chance, dont use his side-b. Crying to change the rules is a immature as scrubs playing street fighter saying "no throws", grow up.

I'm not even going to bother to post if I'm called "immature" for stating my opinion, and then being told to grow up. Thanks for supporting a proactive discussion of the ruleset.

 

[Sage JoWii]

Nah nah DLA, back up. I got dis.

 

[sunshade]

@Ill- It's ok bro <3.

@Sunshade- Is that what you high and mighty debaters refer to everyone who isn't posting the same way you are? Trolls? LAWL. He's not wrong in the same way wanting Jungle Japes to be legal, or being anti-LGL is wrong. It's not at all.

I am not saying DLA is a troll, I am saying you, are a troll. You have no opinions on the matter at hand and are doing nothing but attempting to derail discussion. You are using attacks at peoples character and are doing nothing to continue the conversation in a productive way. Unless you start to actually make comments stating opinion, and then backing them, I and hopefully nobody else, will be responding to you.

DLA has every right to his opinion on the matter. I find his opinion to be illogical and I stated why. Your move.

 

[Sage JoWii]

Refer to DLA's post above and pretend it's what I said to respond to your most recent post.

Edit: And it's very, very, obvious to see who you're calling a troll. That part of the comment wasn't meant to defend DLA, but rather, to laugh at why you called me a troll.

 

[sunshade]

Ok, my apologies to you DLA. I will edit my post to be less abrasive. I stand by my opinion that wanting to change the game out of a sense of how it should be is illogical but if my choice of words offends you I will discontinue my current mannerism.

 

[Sage JoWii]

Mission accomplished.

Back to supporting, and following, this thread.

 

[BSP]

Understand that this is just one of MANY examples, but if you support Pictochat, explain to me how this helps in deciding who is the better player please, or tell me how he could've avoided it, and I and others who see why this stage is BS will try to persuade you as to why that is false.



how to decide who the better player is...or is it luckier?

 

[Tesh]

time for everyone to drop mario/lucas/ness/DK etc.

kprime mashing

Mario/Luigi/Samus can mash out if DDD goes for it too early.

Kprime mashing means too early = 150%+

Congratulations!

You just removed 4 characters from the game!

Kprime mashing


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4pHZUJGG0k

THAT is Kprime's video. If you look near the end, you can see how fast he breaks out of a grab at 200%. Thats SHORTER than the amount of time it takes for DDD to pummel (he pummels really slow). Any character that requires pummeling to "infinite" can easily escape. This also applies to grab releases on Ness/Lucas that aren't true infinites. With proper mashing they do BARELY any damage.


Could someone from the BBRRC clarify that all chaingrabs are legal not just all infinites. Some tournaments ban things that aren't true infinites.

 

[NO-IDea]

Pretty sure D3 can standing infinite characters without pummeling.

In other news, I am and have always been a supporter of all infinites legal. Play as the game intended as long as it does not severely infringe upon the viability of tactics (see how this language makes room for a LGL rule catered specifically for planking?) The option to pick up a secondary is always available to those affected by D3's infinite if they feel they cannot win with the tools of their character within the mechanics of this game.

I am not, however, a fan of how we must cater to MK. 35 on MK, 50 on everyone else? I don't think other characters care so much for the extra 15 ledge grabs as long as we place a limit on planking (again, emphasis on language. I said limit on planking, NOT MK.) This same exact reasoning would then go on to defend how we shouldn't excessively change the dynamic of this game and how we should treat all characters equally.

Hell, do LGLs really matter? Most games don't go to time-out and more often the ones that do are because the player's primary intention going into the match was "time him out." This is a different mindset than "play to live." Play to live means don't fish for kills and don't approach with the lead. "Time him out" means run away. And that should constitute as stalling, but that's a touchy subject that's hard to judge and goes beyond the scope of this post.

The main point I wanted to bring up is: "What does the current debate over an extension of the time limit to 10 minutes look like?" The Japanese have incorporated this but are not as strict on a LGL rule as the U.S. has been. It would certainly make time-outs substantially harder and therefore most likely remove intentions of win by "time-out" strategies. And this change in motivation would in turn address any counter-arguments about prolonging a tournament. (Honestly, I also believe a handful of tournaments run so long because of inefficient use of resources, and some times just not enough. To blame the hindered progress of a tournament on a 2-minute extension rule is absurd when far better things can be done to increase efficiency.)

I'm curious as to what people think on this matter.

 

[-DR3W-]

Looks good to me.

No arguments.
No objections.
No drama.
No stupid people opinions.

Ima just enjoy this simple game with a simple ruleset like a simple person.

 

[Deleted member]

@Shadowlink, you make a good point about the global LGL. Now I'm not so sure if it's the best idea.

As for MK, I'm still in favor of it. If MK mains have to keep track of their ledge grabs, so be it. We have to implement surgical rules against the character since he won't ever be banned.

And thank you for your reply. Much better than herp derps in a thread like this.

 

[Chuee]

kprime mashing

Kprime mashing means too early = 150%+

Kprime mashing


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4pHZUJGG0k

THAT is Kprime's video. If you look near the end, you can see how fast he breaks out of a grab at 200%. Thats SHORTER than the amount of time it takes for DDD to pummel (he pummels really slow). Any character that requires pummeling to "infinite" can easily escape. This also applies to grab releases on Ness/Lucas that aren't true infinites. With proper mashing they do BARELY any damage.


Could someone from the BBRRC clarify that all chaingrabs are legal not just all infinites. Some tournaments ban things that aren't true infinites.

Kprime mashing doesn't do a thing.
The main infinites concerned with are D3 infinite on DK and DK infinite on Ness Lucas. Neither of those require pummels to do.

 

[Tesh]

No one actually cares what DK can do to Ness and Lucas. I also quoted the people that mentioned Marth v Ness/Lucas, DDD v Mario, Luigi, Samus. I KNOW DDD has to pummel to infinite certain characters. Its been known for a while and with Kprime's mashing technique, it means he would not be able to pummel and the infinite would NOT work.

 

[NO-IDea]

Again, I'm pretty sure D3 can standing infinite characters without pummeling.

 

[Chuee]

No one actually cares what DK can do to Ness and Lucas. I also quoted the people that mentioned Marth v Ness/Lucas, DDD v Mario, Luigi, Samus. I KNOW DDD has to pummel to infinite certain characters. Its been known for a while and with Kprime's mashing technique, it means he would not be able to pummel and the infinite would NOT work.

For one, Marth doesn't even have an infinite on Ness/Lucas. He has a dash regrab.
As for D3 vs Mario & crew, from what I've heard it's only an infinite >100% which isn't even that big of a deal anyways.

 

[ErikG]

Again, I'm pretty sure D3 can standing infinite characters without pummeling.

He can standing infinite DK, and Wolf and DeDeDe on the ledge. That's it.

 

[NO-IDea]

5 grabs until a pummel is necessary.

Well regardless, I'm still an adamant supporter of infinites. With full knowledge that these infinites have the potential to completely turn the match upside-down momentum wise at any landing of the grab. (5 grabs into a follow-up is what, +40% ish?)

 

[z00ted]

The main point I wanted to bring up is: "What does the current debate over an extension of the time limit to 10 minutes look like?" The Japanese have incorporated this but are not as strict on a LGL rule as the U.S. has been. It would certainly make time-outs substantially harder and therefore most likely remove intentions of win by "time-out" strategies. And this change in motivation would in turn address any counter-arguments about prolonging a tournament. (Honestly, I also believe a handful of tournaments run so long because of inefficient use of resources, and some times just not enough. To blame the hindered progress of a tournament on a 2-minute extension rule is absurd when far better things can be done to increase efficiency.)

I'm curious as to what people think on this matter.

Did you see my $50 money match set against Ensis at WHOBO 3?

If anyone saw any of it - they will immediately realize why a 10 minute timer wouldn't really change a thing in certain matchups that at a high level were designed to go to time. At first everyone was hyped about our set, but probably around the middle of the second gime the crowd went from an easy twenty plus to a low amount like three or four. Every one of our games went to time and the funny thing is neither one of us were even going for a time out. The majority of the time (lolpun) we ended the match with two stocks each at a rather high percentage. Judging from the eight minute time span I don't think a ten minute timer would really change matchups that usually go to time - only extend the length of the tournament.

 

[Sage JoWii]

Did you see my $50 money match set against Ensis at WHOBO 3?

If anyone saw any of it - they will immediately realize why a 10 minute timer wouldn't really change a thing in certain matchups that at a high level were designed to go to time. At first everyone was hyped about our set, but probably around the middle of the second gime the crowd went from an easy twenty plus to a low amount like three or four. Every one of our games went to time and the funny thing is neither one of us were even going for a time out. The majority of the time (lolpun) we ended the match with two stocks each at a rather high percentage. Judging from the eight minute time span I don't think a ten minute timer would really change matchups that usually go to time - only extend the length of the tournament.

THIS. I bought my food, sat down, and watched the whole thing while I ate. I finished my food, and the match still wasn't over (a min left lol), and if Frigate hadn't screwed Ensis over, it'd have gone ANOTHER match. Gaaaawddamn, I dunno if I would've sat through that one.

But basically, the whole time, they just looked for openings while staying safe and it lasted forever because that's just how that top level MU is. And at regionals, or bigger, 10min timed matches would just make the tournament run longer because the quality of player is better meaning more high- to top-level matches being played.

 

[z00ted]

looooooooooooool

I walked to my apartment, took a shower, made a sandwich, watched TITANIC, came back, and Ensis and Illmatic were STILL playing their $50 money match set.