Victory Outcomes Produced by Ganoncide

[-Vocal-]

Ganon emits a burst of dark powers and hurtles through the air, hand outstretched. He grabs his foe by the throat and grins, uttering a single demonic chuckle. With terrifying speed, he slams the opponent below him and flies towards their mutual destruction in the darkness of the abyss, from whence their is no escape. As they plummet, the king of evil slowly closes his grip around the neck, executing the MURDER CHOKE!
He proceeds to lose the match.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-​

\|/Introduction\|/​

After seeing debate about this in the Ruleset 3.0 thread, I did the only sensible thing there was to do - testing. I have a few notes before presenting the data I've collected

• THIS DATA PROVES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ANY OTHER SUICIDE MOVE IN THE GAME. ANY OTHER MOVE WOULD REQUIRE ITS OWN INDEPENDENT TESTING BEFORE MAKING ANY CLAIMS ABOUT IT.
• Ganoncide, in the course of my testing, did not once produce victory for Ganondorf. If the Ganoncide did not result in a victory for the victim, it led to a Sudden Death.
• Ganoncide was performed by moving the victim to the very edge (where they enter the teetering animation), facing away from the victim with Ganondorf, jumping backwards, and performing SideB. (I did it this way specifically because there may or may not be a difference in results between forward facing SideBs and those that are B-reversed. Anyone is welcome to run the testing through this method and report results.)
• For segments of the test, I needed to apply damage to Ganondorf or his victim, and the same move was used each time. When applying damage to the victim, Ganondorf always used the strong hit of his dash attack. Snake used all three hits of his jab; Peach used a sweetspotted Usmash; Meta Knight used Dsmash; Jigglypuff used Fsmash.
• The three test conditions (Equal percentage, Opponent % Lead, and Ganondorf % Lead) were each tested with both Grab Priority (Port 1) and Outside Damage Priority (Port 4).
• I ran each test condition on each character 10 times.
• In each case of a Ganoncide victim victory, the victim gained a 4% increase in damage.
• I invite anyone to continue the work I have started - as you can see I have only run the test on four characters, and that took a significant amount of time in itself (several hours over the course of last night and today). I would expect the Ganondorf boards to explore this if they are interested.

\|/Results\|/​

Now for the results. I have put them in a chart for easy viewing, and have included the raw data below them.

[collapse="NTSC Testing Raw Data"]With Grab Priority (Same Percentage)
Metaknight
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

With Grab Priority (Opponent % Lead)
Metaknight
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

With Grab Priority (Ganon % Lead)
Metaknight
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

---

With Damage Priority (Same Percentage)
Metaknight
1. Sudden Death
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Victory

Snake
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

Peach
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Victory

Jigglypuff
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

With Damage Priority (Opponent % Lead)
Metaknight
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Sudden Death

With Damage Priority (Ganon % Lead)
Metaknight
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Victory

Peach
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Victory[/collapse]

\|/Analysis\|/​

• When Ganondorf has Grab Priority, opponent percentage does not seem to have a large effect on the chance of opponent victory.
• When Ganondorf has Grab Priority, it would appear that short characters have a higher chance of claiming victory than tall characters. The same cannot necessarily be said for light characters in general.
• From the results of the Grab Priority test, it can be gathered that the result of a Ganoncide is quite possibly character dependent and different in each matchup.
• The chance of a victim victory as opposed to a Sudden Death rises significantly when Ganondorf has Damage Priority (Port 4) as opposed to Grab Priority (Port 1).
• It is unclear as to whether damage percentages ever have an effect on Ganoncide outcomes. This may possibly be due to the relatively low percentages used during testing. However, when Ganon has Damage priority, this data would seem to suggest that a percentage lead on either side leads to a higher chance of victim victory. (Once again, this cannot be said for certain; it would probably be more clear if each test condition was run 100 times as opposed to 10.)

\|/Theories\|/​

• SideB has some type of interaction with a character's bones and the bone structure of small characters leads to different results during Ganoncide.
• Victory from Ganoncide is actually a glitch with an unknown cause. Support for this theory is gained from (of all places) Sudden Death: if a Ganoncide is performed during Sudden Death, the game will declare a victor based upon percentages, but there is still a chance of victim victory (with the accompanying 4% increase in percentage).
• As there are differences in outcome between characters, it may be possible that a Ganondorf victory from a Ganoncide may only be possible against certain characters.

\|/Conclusion\|/​

This testing's primary purpose was to gather enough data to make an informed decision on the validity of a rule concerning Ganoncide that would declare the initiator as the victor. Seeing as the game rarely declares Ganondorf as the victor of a Ganoncide (so rare that it did not occur once within my 120 tests in Grab Priority or 120 tests in Damage Priority), it is not logical to add such a rule to a competitive ruleset. Such a rule would be an arbitrary buff to the character. (As much as I sympathize with Ganondorf mains, this is unfortunately the truth )

\|/PAL Testing\|/​

Exalted was kind enough to do some testing on the PAL version of the game so that we could have data regarding that version as well. While there are slight differences between his set of data and mine, they largely resemble each other; this leads me to believe that the discrepencies simply highlight the margin of error.
[collapse=PAL Testing Raw Data]

Just to clarify: "Victory" means that the opponent has won.

With Grab Priority (Same Percentage)

Meta Knight
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

With Grab Priority (Opponent % Lead)

Meta Knight
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

With Grab Priority (Ganon % Lead)

Meta Knight
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Sudden Death

---

With Damage Priority (Same Percentage)

Meta Knight
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Sudden Death

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Sudden Death

Peach
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

With Damage Priority (Opponent % Lead)

Meta Knight
1. Victory
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Victory
10.Victory

Snake
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Victory

Peach
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Victory

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Sudden Death
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Victory

With Damage Priority (Ganon % Lead)

Meta Knight
1. Sudden Death
2. Victory
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Victory

Snake
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Sudden Death
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Sudden Death
9. Victory
10. Victory

Peach
1. Victory
2. Sudden Death
3. Victory
4. Victory
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Victory
8. Victory
9. Sudden Death
10. Victory

Jigglypuff
1. Sudden Death
2. Sudden Death
3. Sudden Death
4. Sudden Death
5. Victory
6. Victory
7. Sudden Death
8. Victory
9. Victory
10. Sudden Death

[/collapse]

 

[Ganonsburg]

I disagree that these findings hurt us. The BBR's just stupid (ie, ignoring the spirit of the game).

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

BBR stands for Basic Brawl Rules. Just go with what the game says since we don't want to give an "arbitrary win to Ganon."

 

[Luxor]

This data is goooooood.

If you're P1, you have a pretty good chance of drawing a tie. Very good, against some characters. Seems close to 100% vs. Snake- but trading off grab armor for grab priority and better Ganonciding is an iffy tradeoff.

Apart from possibly against Snake, it seems Ganon should always always try to be in a lower port.

 

[-Vocal-]

BBR stands for Basic Brawl Rules. Just go with what the game says since we don't want to give an "arbitrary win to Ganon."

Well we don't give an arbitrary win to anyone else, do we? There are things that give characters advantages (like RC and MK for instance, which I'm also against) but I don't think there's anything in the ruleset that gives someone a win.

@Luxor: Yea, I considered saying that you have a 100% chance of Sudden Death against Snake and tall characters, but I only did ten tests; I'd feel bad about saying that without doing 100, but this is still good enough to say that it's extremely safe.

And even against the characters that do sometimes get the (possible) glitch victory, he still stands a pretty good chance

oh, and thanks ^_^

 

[Ganonsburg]

If I have to repost my big argument here, I will. And I'll edit it too to be even better. But the fact of the matter is that the BBR is just cherrypicking what they want to do and what they don't want to do. Regardless of whether Ganon did or didn't have a rule in the previous ruleset is of little consequence considering the Big Bumbling *******' hypocrisy considering the issue.

 

[-Vocal-]

If I have to repost my big argument here, I will. And I'll edit it too to be even better. But the fact of the matter is that the BBR is just cherrypicking what they want to do and what they don't want to do. Regardless of whether Ganon did or didn't have a rule in the previous ruleset is of little consequence considering the Big Bumbling *******' hypocrisy considering the issue.

That's why I'm asking you for what it is that's causing them to be so hypocritical. Is there actually another rule or standard in place that literally gives a character a victory when the game would not have given them one otherwise and instead given the victory to his opponent or led to a sudden death?

(Note: This does not include time out victories, which A) Do not hand a victory to anyone B) Apply to all characters equally and C) Are determined by stock and percent leads, much like concurrent deaths in Sudden Death lead to the percent lead being claimed the victor.)

 

[Bahamut777]

Thank you for all the testing, Vocal.
This is the proof we needed to ask for a correction in the current ruleset.

It's a very sad fact, tho'.

 

[-Vocal-]

Thank you for all the testing, Vocal.
This is the proof we needed to ask for a correction in the current ruleset.

It's a very sad fact, tho'.

For a rule change? I can't say that I'm particularly familiar with the reasoning pro-Ganon, I tend to skim sometimes ^_^ How does this help you?

 

[Bahamut777]

This is concrete information that the new ruleset nerfs a character when BBR's goal is to "balance the game", as well as other port-dependant suicidal characters, like Wario, Kirby and D3. I'll try to formulate a somewhat formal requirement for a rule change and then submit it to BBR.

 

[-Vocal-]

This is concrete information that the new ruleset nerfs a character when BBR's goal is to "balance the game", as well as other port-dependant suicidal characters, like Wario, Kirby and D3. I'll try to formulate a somewhat formal requirement for a rule change and then submit it to BBR.

Whoa whoa whoa - slow down there! This data proves absolutely NOTHING about Wario, Kirby, DDD, or Bowser - those characters would require independent testing of their own. (You would be free to do this testing yourself if you feel passionately enough about it, though don't go in with a bias and do your best to produce fair results. I threw away my first 40 tests when I realized that I was B-reversing some of the chokes and not others - you want to be absolutely sure of the data you're presenting.)

Also, how does the ruleset nerf Ganondorf? This would be like saying that every time a G&W lands a hammer you must replay until he gets a nine, or Luigi gets to Missile until he gets a misfire.

Aside from three instances mentioned by someone in your social, Ganoncide rarely if ever determines Ganondorf to be the winner - why on Earth would we hand him a victory for that? I feel your pain but I'm just thinking logically here

I'm glad you mentioned the suiciders too; I had told myself during testing that I needed to make sure to mention that in the OP but I forgot when I made it

 

[Luxor]

This is concrete information that the new ruleset nerfs a character when BBR's goal is to "balance the game", as well as other port-dependant suicidal characters, like Wario, Kirby and D3. I'll try to formulate a somewhat formal requirement for a rule change and then submit it to BBR.

BBR's goal is not to balance the game. Many of the BBR-ers are originalists simply trying to stay true to the game as it came, hence their reasoning on the new suicide rule.

Few tournaments are going to use this suicide rule anyway; ideally it's better, but in practice rewarding suicides is fun and pleasing to almost everybody. Heck, I wouldn't even use this rule.

 

[-Vocal-]

BBR's goal is not to balance the game. Many of the BBR-ers are originalists simply trying to stay true to the game as it came, hence their reasoning on the new suicide rule.

Few tournaments are going to use this suicide rule anyway; ideally it's better, but in practice rewarding suicides is fun and pleasing to almost everybody. Heck, I wouldn't even use this rule.

Translation: Diplomacy is necessary, but doesn't mean it'll be listened to or enforced

 

[Vermanubis]

Awesome job on the data collection, Vocal. Really appreciate it, dude.

Anyway, I think the only argument we have in our defense is the fact that the PAL version allows wins according to Dirt and Z1g. By only argument, I meant the only argument that the infinitely handicapped BBR will listen to and not dance around. The hypocrisy behind it all is that they want to maintain fidelity to the game's inherent structure. Yet, as Burg said, they cherrypick what they do and do not want to have a particular mandate applied to for the sake of what I can imagine is nothing more than aesthetics.

All we have are these vague and nondescript principles that are adhered to to govern the ruleset, yet we're never given a direct answer as to why it's that particular facet of the game that retains a faithful observation and not others. Why solidarity has to be achieved through imperfect means. The answer is simple if you're not pedantic and overly-concerned with technicalities. I think the animation itself and the nature of the move should be taken into account and be seen that it's clearly a move meant to hurt the opponent, not Ganon.

 

[-Vocal-]

Awesome job on the data collection, Vocal. Really appreciate it, buddy!

Anyway, I think the only argument we have in our defense is the fact that the PAL version allows wins according to Dirt and Z1g.

No problem at all It needed to be done, so I figured I'd step in and lend a hand - plus now you guys know you should put up a fight for that first port JUST in case ^_^

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

Also, how does the ruleset nerf Ganondorf? This would be like saying that every time a G&W lands a hammer you must replay until he gets a nine, or Luigi gets to Missile until he gets a misfire.

I'm tired of this argument, we're not talking about landing a risky/hard move here. We're discussing a move that ends the game on the last stock NO MATTER WHAT. Applying this to a buggy move dependent on port's and luck is inconsequentially full of fault's and drawbacks. Balancing the game when all the suicide moves differ from each other by outcomes is incongruous by being unfairly decided against.

The best decision the BBR could make is by letting the game decide for us when something is inconsistent from the other characters moves and the previous rules THAT WE HAD BEFORE. Why should it be the other way around when it made perfect sense the first time? Something does not add up. The Ganoncide outcome is UNBALANCED with the rest of the moves of it's kind. This isn't a good decision, it's just saying, "Hey let's listen to Sakurai now! The guy who didn't even want the game to be competitive in the first place."

 

[-Vocal-]

I'm tired of this argument, we're not talking about landing a risky/hard move here. We're discussing a move that ends the game on the last stock NO MATTER WHAT. Applying this to a buggy move dependent on port's and luck is inconsequentially full of fault's and drawbacks. Balancing the game when all the suicide moves differ from each other by outcomes is incongruous by being unfairly decided against.

The best decision the BBR could make is by letting the game decide for us when something is inconsistent from the other characters moves and the previous rules THAT WE HAD BEFORE. Why should it be the other way around when it made perfect sense the first time? Something does not add up. The Ganoncide outcome is UNBALANCED with the rest of the moves of it's kind. This isn't a good decision, it's just saying, "Hey let's listen to Sakurai now! The guy who didn't even want the game to be competitive in the first place."

First, as far as I understand, there was never a suicide rule concerning Ganondorf in the official ruleset; many TOs extended Bowser's suicide rule to other suicide moves, but it was never present in the original.

Second, I will concede that the move MIGHT contain a coding error, but this could only proven by much more extensive testing (some of which I may do tomorrow).

Third, don't use other suicide moves as an argument that this one should be given a victory. If others can be coded to give victory, then this one could have as well.

Fourth, as far as I can theorize from my test results, the move was intended to always KO both players at the same time. Support from this comes from Sudden Death, where both player die at the same time and the win is given to % lead. This is the reason that I believe the move MAY have an error in coding - the +4% victim victory can still occur here (meaning the victim is not killed).

Fifth, GANONDORF DID NOT CLAIM VICTORY ONCE DURING MY 240 TESTS. The most that you could ever hope to debate out of the BR is a rule claiming that all Ganoncides should be treated as Sudden Deaths and follow proper protocol from there, but I don't even believe you have a good argument to push that with. One thing is for certain: YOU WILL NEVER GET THEM TO DECLARE GANONCIDE AS VICTORY. The move itself doesn't, so they aren't going to either; if you believe it's not fair that Ganon's doesn't produce victory while others do then empathize with your unhappiness but that's tough and you'll have to deal with it. It's how the character was made.

6)The BR is not in the habit of trying to balance the game. Read Luxor's post.

I would be on your guys' side if this data didn't oppose it so much and I actually did argue your case a couple times before doing all this, but I sadly just cannot support it after learning all of this

 

[-Vocal-]

I've done a little bit of fooling around with the other suicide moves in the game, and while I don't have conclusive data like that of the OP I've seen enough to say that other suicide moves are highly over rated. The only ones I've seen give victory are Bowser's (seems to be port dependent) and Wario's (seems to be character dependent, perhaps also port dependent). Kirby's and DDD's never produced a win (always went to Sudden Death), and DK's cargo throw was always a loss

At some point (soon) I'll do some real testing on these things. Perhaps I'll expand the thread to include information on all suicide moves if I have the time...

 

[Terodactyl Yelnats]

First, as far as I understand, there was never a suicide rule concerning Ganondorf in the official ruleset; many TOs extended Bowser's suicide rule to other suicide moves, but it was never present in the original.

Second, I will concede that the move MIGHT contain a coding error, but this could only proven by much more extensive testing (some of which I may do tomorrow).

Third, don't use other suicide moves as an argument that this one should be given a victory. If others can be coded to give victory, then this one could have as well.

Fourth, as far as I can theorize from my test results, the move was intended to always KO both players at the same time. Support from this comes from Sudden Death, where both player die at the same time and the win is given to % lead. This is the reason that I believe the move MAY have an error in coding - the +4% victim victory can still occur here (meaning the victim is not killed).

Fifth, GANONDORF DID NOT CLAIM VICTORY ONCE DURING MY 240 TESTS. The most that you could ever hope to debate out of the BR is a rule claiming that all Ganoncides should be treated as Sudden Deaths and follow proper protocol from there, but I don't even believe you have a good argument to push that with. One thing is for certain: YOU WILL NEVER GET THEM TO DECLARE GANONCIDE AS VICTORY. The move itself doesn't, so they aren't going to either; if you believe it's not fair that Ganon's doesn't produce victory while others do then empathize with your unhappiness but that's tough and you'll have to deal with it. It's how the character was made.

6)The BR is not in the habit of trying to balance the game. Read Luxor's post.

I would be on your guys' side if this data didn't oppose it so much and I actually did argue your case a couple times before doing all this, but I sadly just cannot support it after learning all of this

Never a rule for Ganon? Where ever did the "If Ganondorf initiates a Ganoncide, ignore the outcome and the win will go to Ganondorf" come from? Why was it used so frequently if it was not a BBR rule? It would make sense to make the suicide moves equal for balanced gameplay.

This is so facetious, the suicide move argument is so broken by the game's unfair competitive results that it would be illogical to use them in the first place. The key word you used was "could." Sure every suicide move in the game works exactly the way they were meant to. But you are not sure if the other suicide moves were coded right either, they might all be faulty and need testing to prove. But that shouldn't be enough of a given that you would have to just let the game decide for you when the results are unjust. Creating a fair game SHOULD be your job because like you say, we could make rules that arbitrarily buff a character or we could let the game arbitrarily buff other suiciders over Ganondorf which is much worse. Don't think of it as a rule buffing Ganon, it's a rule that fixes the game's broken codings/errors and judgements.

Not trying to balance the game you say? You're only trying to Accept the game as it came? Oh I completely understand you now. This explains why we don't use 2 minutes matches with items on 75m. This arbitrarily buffs Sonic and Meta Knight, but since it came in the game and is true to itself let's use it. Wait we can't have that, we'll just come up with a certain way to play the game and include all other game and character misfortunes, THEN we'll stay true to the game. This is perfect, you'll only stay true to the game when you're comfortable with the rules that YOU made. Sounds much more like theory crafting to me.

Please Vocal, I don't understand why this rule was even put into place if it was perfectly fine to begin with. The data is only circumstantial towards this unfair rule. If so many players are in dislike of this rule, something has to be wrong.

 

[-Vocal-]

Never a rule for Ganon? Where ever did the "If Ganondorf initiates a Ganoncide, ignore the outcome and the win will go to Ganondorf" come from? Why was it used so frequently if it was not a BBR rule? It would make sense to make the suicide moves equal for balanced gameplay.

This is so facetious, the suicide move argument is so broken by the game's unfair competitive results that it would be illogical to use them in the first place. The key word you used was "could." Sure every suicide move in the game works exactly the way they were meant to. But you are not sure if the other suicide moves were coded right either, they might all be faulty and need testing to prove. But that shouldn't be enough of a given that you would have to just let the game decide for you when the results are unjust. Creating a fair game SHOULD be your job because like you say, we could make rules that arbitrarily buff a character or we could let the game arbitrarily buff other suiciders over Ganondorf which is much worse. Don't think of it as a rule buffing Ganon, it's a rule that fixes the game's broken codings/errors and judgements.

Not trying to balance the game you say? You're only trying to Accept the game as it came? Oh I completely understand you now. This explains why we don't use 2 minutes matches with items on 75m. This arbitrarily buffs Sonic and Meta Knight, but since it came in the game and is true to itself let's use it. Wait we can't have that, we'll just come up with a certain way to play the game and include all other game and character misfortunes, THEN we'll stay true to the game. This is perfect, you'll only stay true to the game when you're comfortable with the rules that YOU made. Sounds much more like theory crafting to me.

Please Vocal, I don't understand why this rule was even put into place if it was perfectly fine to begin with. The data is only circumstantial towards this unfair rule. If so many players are in dislike of this rule, something has to be wrong.

I'll try to address your post paragraph by paragraph.

P1: There was a rule concerning Bowser's Koopa Klaw suicide in the official ruleset; many TOs extended this to other suicide moves as well. However, it would seem that A) Bowser's is one of the few that may end in victory (Wario's being the other, but I must test these claims) B) There is still a possible chance of the move not giving him victory, which is why the rule was removed. If the game doesn't give him the win, the BR isn't either.

P2: I fail to see how the move's results are not competitive. Random =/= not competitive. There are many random outcomes in this game (turnips, misfires, G&W hammer) and they are all accepted as part of the competitive scene. If a move's result is random it is taken as it is and is not given rules to regulate it. In this case, the random outcome is between your opponent's victory and Sudden Death, but regardless of the stakes it is a random based outcome and deserves to be treated like the other moves of its kind. And you are not allowed to claim that this is a coding or judgement error; you do not have data to support the first claim and the second is not something you are allowed to decide. You could say it was a judgement error to make Ganondorf slow - that doesn't mean it should be regulated.

P3: You seem to be confusing "balancing the game" and "creating a competitive ruleset." To create a competitive ruleset, the BR has removed things that it has conversed upon and found to be anit-competitive - this includes stages like 75m and Meta Knight's IDC. Balancing the game would be trying to regulate the things that it has left in the game - LGLs, for instance, would be an attempt to balance the game, as would any suicide rule for Ganon or another character. If you were going to try to make an argument based on this paragraph's point, it would be to remove Ganondorf's ability to Ganoncide entirely, but that would only be considered if it was found to be roadblock to competitive gameplay. (Once again, the fact that it has a random outcome does not make it anti-competitive; see the response to P2.) (On a side note, you are entirely correct by saying that stages are legalized/banned based upon subjective criteria of what is competitive; I just had a long argument in tactical proving that to someone However, this does not change the fact that the BR has no subjective rules concerning characters themselves. If you would wish to discuss randomness in movesets and stages, then simply say so - I haven't compared the two but I'm fully prepared for a conversation, and conversation is the best thing on matters such as these.) And no, none of this has to do with theory-crafting.

P4: I'm not sure if you're talking about the addition of the Bowser suicide rule in 2.0 or the removal of it in 3.0. I'll just answer both: the Backroom was composed of different members when 2.0 was created and perhaps they did not fully explore the implications of what they were doing when they instituted the rule. When the BR created 3.0, they chose to discuss the rule's importance and meaning and found it to be unnecessary.

You keep somehow avoiding the fact that Ganon is rarely, if ever against some characters, declared the victor of a game through Ganoncide. This is entirely possible to be coded - Bowser's Koopa Klaw works this way with higher Grab Priority. The creator's of the game had the capability to program Ganoncide in this way but chose not to - asking the BR to hand Ganondorf a victory is biased and ignores the fact that the game (on purpose) just does not work that way. Like I said, the most you could ever try to convince the BR to give Ganondorf is a rule that always treats Ganoncide as a Sudden Death, but even the case for this plea is thin.

Sorry for the whole "long wall of text" effect, that's part of why I wanted to break it up by paragraph ^_^

 

[Exalted]

I've won with Ganoncide around 3-4 times on my PAL version of the game.

 

[B!squick]

We're currently working on data concerning Bowser's Klaw move -Vocal-. I'd link it, but it should be easy enough to find. If you'd like to help us out with data gathering and such, you're more than welcome to.

 

[-Vocal-]

I've won with Ganoncide around 3-4 times on my PAL version of the game.

So I've heard - I've also heard Vermanubis say that he's seen Ganon claim victory as well, I'm assuming with NTSC. This, in combination with the highly probably fact that Ganoncided interacts differently depending on the character, is what leads me to theorize that Ganoncide will provide Ganon with the win only when performed against specific characters. Only a theory of course - testing the entire character roster would be necessary, and while I'm happy to help in some form I don't think that's a task I'm willin to undertake

That said, I would be very interested in seeing if there truly are differences between the NTSC and PAL versions of the game - if you ever got a chance to run this exact same test in the exact same manner on your version I would be quite grateful If the results showed favorable outcomes for Ganon, I'm sure your character boards would be grateful as well. No cheating though! If you plan to gather data make sure to represent your findings truthfully

@Jay: Interesting I'll go check it out

 

[Ganonsburg]

I'm just going to post this here....

But the BBR is still inconsistent with the "Stick to the results screen lol" crap.

(And this is where I post my logic from the thread...)

1) The BBR says they don't want to unnecessarily buff characters. They sad they'd rather remove a buff than apply a nerf (or something like that).

2) The BBR says they want to stick with the results screen.

3) However, the BBR says that if the time runs out and both characters are on their last stock, the character with lower percent wins.
-This rule was decided on other fighters, which are HP based
-This rule disregards the fact that even though one character has a higher percent, the other character may be much closer to dying (thanks to the fact that this game is based on getting the other character into the blast zones, as well as different weights and powers)
-Thus, this rule BUFFS campy characters and NERFS those characters that are more for direct combat
-Campy play is often considered degenerate, which is why we ban super large stages that support fast, campy characters, so why do we buff them with this rule?

4) When the game's time runs out, if both characters have the same number of stocks, regardless of percent, the game calls a sudden death
-If the BBR wants to honor the game's "decision," why is SD not played out?

5) The BBR also says that in the case of Sudden Death due to suicide moves, a one stock 3 minute game will be played.
-Why is this not the same case for time outs? Why is there the difference in standards, especially when this rule HINDERS the recovery of one character and the attacks of a few other characters, but the other rule BUFFS the few ultra campy characters?

Thus, the BBR is inconsistent. On one hand they say that they want to honor the results screen and not buff characters unnecessarily, but on the other they buff the characters that cause semidegenerative play and nerf a handful of characters that already do not need to be nerfed.

Now, I heard that there is a difference in these two rules because in one case the match has run its course and the minimatch would lengthen the time of a set unnecessarily. However, if the suicide is performed in the last 3 minutes of a match, then the 1 stock 3 minute match could run over the original time. This is also inconsistent.

Lastly, I also heard a comparison to Peach pulling out a bomb and killing both herself and her opponent. Firstly, if this happens the Peach should have spaced better. Secondly, if the opponent did not allow her to space better so that he could cause Peach to die as well, the Peach got outplayed (same for catching and throwing back or reflecting the bomb). Thirdly, the Peach could have DIed better to give herself a bit more time. The Peach has full control over this situation, whereas Ganonciding does not.

Aerudo is an integral part of Ganon's recovery. If we cannot use this to recover on our last stock because we will lose the match, we're already at a far worse chance of winning. The game calls players to KO their opponents and do what you can to make sure you aren't KOed. Aerudo does both of these, yet the BBR decides that it should reverse the spirit of the game to honor the results screen (which the BBR only does some of the time to begin with).

All in all, whether or not the rule was there for Ganonciding in the first place, it SHOULD be included. It is a small buff compared to the large nerf that is already in place. The BBR should be a consistent, logical group of intelligent smashers (and TOs), and by being inconsistent you place your reputation for reliability on the line.

Spoiler

If a fellow Ganon main feels that there's a better way to organize this or has an additional point that would fit in here, feel free to let me know. I feel like I have left out something or made my organization a bit confused.

The point is, the BBR is just stupid. Thank you for the effort you put into this, but it doesn't justify the BBR's rule in any way. Fortunately for us TO's DO respect the nature and spirit of the game. If the BBR is this willing to ignore what is supposed to be happening in the game, then they are out of touch with the game and don't know what they are talking about.

(My appreciation for .joel's understanding and helpfulness still stands)

 

[B!squick]

Yeah, I'm fully in support of the push for a new BBR or at least a different one because of this silliness.

 

[Luxor]

BBR-esque post:

Even if Ganoncide never producing victory is a coding error, we can't ignore it. Ganon has a MUCH more relevant coding error on his Fair. That thing is supposed to autocancel out of a SH lol. We know what the game designers meant, and we could easily switch the synchronous timer to asynchronous in PSA, but we don't. We could just say "hey Ganon's opponent, just ignore Fair's terrible landing lag and do nothing in that time," which isn't so different from having Ganoncide's result ignored in favor of a win. We could change his Fair or his Ganoncide like that, but then we're playing BBrawl as opposed to vBrawl.
I seriously think Ganon would be like C or D tier without that Fair error lol.

Also umad

 

[Vermanubis]

BBR-esque post:

We could just say "hey Ganon's opponent, just ignore Fair's terrible landing lag and do nothing in that time," which isn't so different from having Ganoncide's result ignored in favor of a win. We could change his Fair or his Ganoncide like that, but then we're playing BBrawl as opposed to
Also umad

This is the same fallacy-plagued argument many of the BBR members posited. So I'll say the same thing to you that I said to them.

The two are farthest thing from each other. They both involve coding errors. That's the only thing they share in common. FAir's coding error is not relevant to Ganoncide's, however. Ganon has full control over his FAirs. He does not, however, have control over his Ganoncides in the event the opponent is rewarded. You're taking the premise of the moves and failing to discriminate between their conclusions. It's the quintessential composition fallacy. BBR will never be caught in this though, because they never give a clear-cut answer as to their universal criterion, so they can morph it depending on the situation or inquiry.

Everybody needs to stop categorizing erroneous coding into one group. Now, if I may introduce a few ostensible points about why visual clues should influence the rule. Instead of playing semantics and seeing in tunnel-vision, read the foillowing.

1) Pay attention to what Ganon is actually doing. I could be crazy, but isn't it Ganon who grabs them by the throat and slams them down?

2) On lava stages, when Ganon slams them into the lava, they go under the lava's hitbox and drop, whereas Ganon is just above it so he bounces back up. Clearly indicative that Ganon is above the opponent.

If we cannot determine things by reliable factors, then we, as intelligent individuals, should determine them by observable ones.

 

[Dumbfire]

Wow you guys are good at discussing.
*Not getting into discussion*

 

[Ganonsburg]

So what are our points thus far?

-Spirit of the game
-Animation
-Version differences

I feel like those are our main points points for going on the offensive against the BBR. Anything else?

 

[-Vocal-]

But the BBR is still inconsistent with the "Stick to the results screen lol" crap.

(And this is where I post my logic from the thread...)

1) The BBR says they don't want to unnecessarily buff characters. They sad they'd rather remove a buff than apply a nerf (or something like that).

2) The BBR says they want to stick with the results screen.

3) However, the BBR says that if the time runs out and both characters are on their last stock, the character with lower percent wins.
-This rule was decided on other fighters, which are HP based
-This rule disregards the fact that even though one character has a higher percent, the other character may be much closer to dying (thanks to the fact that this game is based on getting the other character into the blast zones, as well as different weights and powers)
-Thus, this rule BUFFS campy characters and NERFS those characters that are more for direct combat
-Campy play is often considered degenerate, which is why we ban super large stages that support fast, campy characters, so why do we buff them with this rule?

4) When the game's time runs out, if both characters have the same number of stocks, regardless of percent, the game calls a sudden death
-If the BBR wants to honor the game's "decision," why is SD not played out?

5) The BBR also says that in the case of Sudden Death due to suicide moves, a one stock 3 minute game will be played.
-Why is this not the same case for time outs? Why is there the difference in standards, especially when this rule HINDERS the recovery of one character and the attacks of a few other characters, but the other rule BUFFS the few ultra campy characters?

Thus, the BBR is inconsistent. On one hand they say that they want to honor the results screen and not buff characters unnecessarily, but on the other they buff the characters that cause semidegenerative play and nerf a handful of characters that already do not need to be nerfed.

Now, I heard that there is a difference in these two rules because in one case the match has run its course and the minimatch would lengthen the time of a set unnecessarily. However, if the suicide is performed in the last 3 minutes of a match, then the 1 stock 3 minute match could run over the original time. This is also inconsistent.

Lastly, I also heard a comparison to Peach pulling out a bomb and killing both herself and her opponent. Firstly, if this happens the Peach should have spaced better. Secondly, if the opponent did not allow her to space better so that he could cause Peach to die as well, the Peach got outplayed (same for catching and throwing back or reflecting the bomb). Thirdly, the Peach could have DIed better to give herself a bit more time. The Peach has full control over this situation, whereas Ganonciding does not.

Aerudo is an integral part of Ganon's recovery. If we cannot use this to recover on our last stock because we will lose the match, we're already at a far worse chance of winning. The game calls players to KO their opponents and do what you can to make sure you aren't KOed. Aerudo does both of these, yet the BBR decides that it should reverse the spirit of the game to honor the results screen (which the BBR only does some of the time to begin with).

All in all, whether or not the rule was there for Ganonciding in the first place, it SHOULD be included. It is a small buff compared to the large nerf that is already in place. The BBR should be a consistent, logical group of intelligent smashers (and TOs), and by being inconsistent you place your reputation for reliability on the line.

Spoiler

If a fellow Ganon main feels that there's a better way to organize this or has an additional point that would fit in here, feel free to let me know. I feel like I have left out something or made my organization a bit confused.

Valid concerns to be sure; however, it still would logically lead to a justification for a Ganoncide rule. Let's begin.

As I mentioned before, the BBR is NOT in the business of balancing the game but they ARE in the business of removing things that are counterproductive to competitive play. Let me ask you this: do you have 2-3 days to commit to every tournament you attend? No one does (well M2K does, but this is practically his job). Because of this, extremely long matches are most definitely counterproductive to competitive play and thus must be removed in a competitive ruleset. This is the reason we have a timer.

The same can be said for Sudden Death. It is next to impossible to argue that such a thing could EVER be good for competitive play, which is the reason that it is removed in competitive rulesets.

And there is no specific Ganondorf nerf. He plays under the same rules as everyone else - how well anyone contends under them cannot be classified as a character specific buff or nerf.

This is the same fallacy-plagued argument many of the BBR members posited. So I'll say the same thing to you that I said to them.

The two are farthest thing from each other. They both involve coding errors. That's the only thing they share in common. FAir's coding error is not relevant to Ganoncide's, however. Ganon has full control over his FAirs. He does not, however, have control over his Ganoncides in the event the opponent is rewarded. You're taking the premise of the moves and failing to discriminate between their conclusions. It's the quintessential composition fallacy. BBR will never be caught in this though, because they never give a clear-cut answer as to their universal criterion, so they can morph it depending on the situation or inquiry.

Everybody needs to stop categorizing erroneous coding into one group. Now, if I may introduce a few ostensible points about why visual clues should influence the rule. Instead of playing semantics and seeing in tunnel-vision, read the foillowing.

1) Pay attention to what Ganon is actually doing. I could be crazy, but isn't it Ganon who grabs them by the throat and slams them down?

2) On lava stages, when Ganon slams them into the lava, they go under the lava's hitbox and drop, whereas Ganon is just above it so he bounces back up. Clearly indicative that Ganon is above the opponent.

If we cannot determine things by reliable factors, then we, as intelligent individuals, should determine them by observable ones.

I'm sorry, but this simply won't do. If we were going to say "Look at the game and see what it tells us and base our ruleset off of that" we'd have to ban Snake because of his ridiculous disjoints. He can be a fully Snake's length away and still hit you with Utilt - are you saying we should look at what happens and say that it shouldn't? No, that's the way the game was coded.

Furthermore, the only part of Ganoncide that MAY POSSIBLY be a coding error is the outcome of the opponent's victory, but even that may not be true considering what a large effect port priority has on Ganoncide. It may be entirely possible that the move was coded to have this random factor, or it may also be possible that certain, difficult to discover conditions will always produce the same result and it just looks random from the surface. Only EXTENSIVE testing could lead to a conclusion, and I'm talking extreme precision, something I'm not equipped to do.

Finally, just look at Bowser's Koopa Klaw. The move can give him victory, yes, but only if he is in Port 1 - if he's in Port 4 then the game goes to Sudden Death, even though he's clearly on top of his opponent (though I already addressed the issue of visual cues earlier). I think it's a safe bet that this isn't just a coincidence; something like that was likely purposefully programmed into the game, and the same can be said for Ganoncide.

All of this has gotten me into thinking about what happens when two characters involved in a grab cross a blastline. I might do some testing on this on RC sometime.

So what are our points thus far?

-Spirit of the game
-Animation
-Version differences

I feel like those are our main points points for going on the offensive against the BBR. Anything else?

I'm not sure what spirit of the game is, so I can't speak on that matter. However I addressed the animation point in response to Verm and until testing that at least matches the data provided in this thread is performed on the PAL version I doubt you can use that as a argument.

 

[Divilenta]

I'm not getting into this discussion.

But I will say that Verm and Ganonsburg are right. Stay cool.

 

[Vermanubis]

I'm sorry, but this simply won't do. If we were going to say "Look at the game and see what it tells us and base our ruleset off of that" we'd have to ban Snake because of his ridiculous disjoints. He can be a fully Snake's length away and still hit you with Utilt - are you saying we should look at what happens and say that it shouldn't? No, that's the way the game was coded.

Why is what we're saying such a difficult concept to grasp? Just because two things bear similar premises does not mean their means and ends are concurrent. Snake's disjoints are just that: disjoints. What we're talking about is something that is completely unobservable, but using observable cues to determine the conclusion. Coding errors in most moves have observable outcomes. The only comparison would be that if sometimes Snake's ftilt hurt him and sometimes hurt the opponent (or killed him or killed the opponent). Or sometimes the hitbox was huge, and sometimes it wasn't there at all.

I REALLY want you to reread that last paragraph a couple times so you don't end up pulling a BBR and spewing a load of sophistry.

There is a range of coding errors, and what they affect and how profound the affect is is what we should consider. Really, Vocal. You seem like a smart enough guy, you shouldn't be having this tough a time understanding such things.

Just so there's NO misunderstandings, let me make a formula for why this particular instance is far different from other coding errors.

Ganon's FAir/Snake's disjoint: Observable. Constant. We know what will happen and how often it will happen, therefore we can deal with it and circumvent these issues.

Ganoncide: Unobservable. Stochastic. Random. We do not know what will happen or how often it will happen.

The fallacy of comparing the two: They both share the same premise. The premise is a broken mechanic/bug/error. That's the only thing the two have in common. Their constituents are wholly different. Their conclusions/ends are wholly different. Ganon's FAir, by our logic for Ganoncide, should not be punished if it misses by your logic. Bad reasoning. FAir is entirely controllable and is not random in its outcome. And before anyone tries to bring up crap like Peach and G&W's turnips and hammer, they both are predictable and no, they are not random. The only thing that is random is damage/knockback.

A good analogy would be shooting a gun with either a jammed chamber, or a rotating one. FAir and Ganoncide, respectively.

 

[-Vocal-]

Why is what we're saying such a difficult concept to grasp? Just because two things bear similar premises does not mean their means and ends are concurrent. Snake's disjoints are just that: disjoints. What we're talking about is something that is completely unobservable, but using observable cues to determine the conclusion. Coding errors in most moves have observable outcomes. The only comparison would be that if sometimes Snake's ftilt hurt him and sometimes hurt the opponent (or killed him or killed the opponent). Or sometimes the hitbox was huge, and sometimes it wasn't there at all.

I REALLY want you to reread that last paragraph a couple times so you don't end up pulling a BBR and spewing a load of sophistry.

There is a range of coding errors, and what they affect and how profound the affect is is what we should consider. Really, Vocal. You seem like a smart enough guy, you shouldn't be having this tough a time understanding such things.

But that's the reason why I told you about Bowser's Koopa Klaw - as far as I've seen, the move will consistently give either victory or Sudden Death depending on what priority he has. He's on top for both moves, so we can't look to the visual. The results are consistent, so we can't say it's an error. I have some trouble saying this as I haven't run a full gauntlet of tests on the move, but from what I've seen so far this would be the case.

Because of this, saying "the opponent is below Ganondorf" doesn't hold water because the opponent is below Bowser but that doesn't explain how the move works. You can say it's a stupid way to visualize things, and perhaps a suplex would have been more appropriate, but it doesn't change the way to move works.

 

[Vermanubis]

But that's the reason why I told you about Bowser's Koopa Klaw - as far as I've seen, the move will consistently give either victory or Sudden Death depending on what priority he has. He's on top for both moves, so we can't look to the visual. The results are consistent, so we can't say it's an error. I have some trouble saying this as I haven't run a full gauntlet of tests on the move, but from what I've seen so far this would be the case.

Because of this, saying "the opponent is below Ganondorf" doesn't hold water because the opponent is below Bowser but that doesn't explain how the move works. You can say it's a stupid way to visualize things, and perhaps a suplex would have been more appropriate, but it doesn't change the way to move works.

The results may be, but the results make little sense. I think it's more random in the sense that the devs got lazy, because there is no reason for this move to be so sporadic.

 

[-Vocal-]

The results may be, but the results make little sense. I think it's more random in the sense that the devs got lazy, because there is no reason for this move to be so sporadic.

You're theorizing about the developers mindsets now, something you could not prove to the BBR nor get taken seriously. For that matter someone could say "the developers hate Ganondorf so they programmed it so that he'd lose more than 50% of the time from a Ganoncide unless he's closer to Port 1." That's not going to convince anyone.

In the end, while they may not make sense to you, it doesn't make sense to anyone how Kirby has enough room inside of him to hold Donkey Kong. My point: the results are what they are.

Btw that last analogy may not entirely be relevant; I just put it in cuz I find it funny

 

[Luxor]

Randomness is to some extent a part of Brawl. Tripping and losing due to Ganoncide are gay, yes, and no one is saying the game would be worse with them gone, but they ARE part of the game.

Personally I liked the old suicide rule, but this one is more "logical" TBH.

 

[-Vocal-]

Randomness is to some extent a part of Brawl. Tripping and losing due to Ganoncide are gay, yes, and no one is saying the game would be worse with them gone, but they ARE part of the game.

Personally I liked the old suicide rule, but this one is more "logical" TBH.

I agree. This approach is the proper one for a ruleset of this kind, but suicide kills are ******

 

[Luxor]

I agree. This approach is the proper one for a ruleset of this kind, but suicide kills are ******

Ganon emits a burst of dark powers and hurtles through the air, hand outstretched. He grabs his foe by the throat and grins, uttering a single demonic chuckle. With terrifying speed, he slams the opponent below him and flies towards their mutual destruction in the darkness of the abyss, from whence their is no escape. As they plummet, the king of evil slowly closes his grip around the neck, executing the MURDER CHOKE!
He proceeds to lose the match.

Ganoncide da bess.

 

[-Vocal-]

Ganon emits a burst of dark powers and hurtles through the air, hand outstretched. He grabs his foe by the throat and grins, uttering a single demonic chuckle. With terrifying speed, he slams the opponent below him and flies towards their mutual destruction in the darkness of the abyss, from whence their is no escape. As they plummet, the king of evil slowly closes his grip around the neck, executing the MURDER CHOKE!
He proceeds to lose the match.

Ganoncide da bess.

LOL

Added to OP

 

[Vermanubis]

You're theorizing about the developers mindsets now, something you could not prove to the BBR nor get taken seriously. For that matter someone could say "the developers hate Ganondorf so they programmed it so that he'd lose more than 50% of the time from a Ganoncide unless he's closer to Port 1." That's not going to convince anyone.

In the end, while they may not make sense to you, it doesn't make sense to anyone how Kirby has enough room inside of him to hold Donkey Kong. My point: the results are what they are.

Btw that last analogy may not entirely be relevant; I just put it in cuz I find it funny

Thank you, but I wasn't postulating a point against the BBR. Just throwing it out there is all.