• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

WHOBO Results, and the Conflict at hand.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zenjamin

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Messages
1,244
Location
Reading, Pa.
no thanks. if i want a melee type game i go play the REAL thing.
good idea. But B+ is not a melee type game. It still feels like brawl, just better.

Think of it this way.... name one thing that brawl has that makes it unique, and that you actually like. B+ has it.

Name one thing that Brawl has that B+ doesnt.... and that you like.
Im sure some people might be able to find something.... but most wouldnt. That, or they would create something new out of not understanding B+ mechanics.


relax. brawl+ will bever become standard.
It depends on who you ask, or where you live...

For me and my friends B+ already standard.
For at least these two tourny orginizers I have seen, it is already standard.
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=229750
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=228711
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=229679


Will the entirety of the smash community ever consider it standard?
No. Just as the entirety of the smash community will never consider Brawl standard. Many still love Melee.

Is this bad?
No.


Just go with the community/game that you feel has the most potential to evolve.
 

CRASHiC

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
7,267
Location
Haiti Gonna Hait
Either way his rule doesn't work, dont bull **** me on that.
Its not inevitable, but after the flaws he pointed out, I do believe that we can improve it.

Also, for those who think that Brawl is imbalanced and it is impossible to place high with one charecter other than Metaknight.
Look at Co18. Boy took down many Metaknights and only lost to a metaknight by 2 % on a timeout. Anther can go all Pikachu. As each charecters Metagame advances, charecters will be able to hold their own. And it won't take long for Metaknight to begin fearing Diddy Kong, Pikachu, and Falco.
 

ShadowLink84

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
9,007
Location
Middle of nowhere. Myrtle Beach
Would you mind explaining to me how large tournament organizers are suppose to have huge numbers of wiis, all with Brawl + certified setups, as well as national tournament scene is expected to hack all of their Wiis, all the while trying to avoid Nintendo stopping hacks to Wiis.
here is a solution.
Turn of wii24.
install starfall/softmii/preloader to stop the updates and ensure you don't loseyour homebrew.

All the files are free and all you need is an SD card and a computer.
Telling players not to update their Wiis is not the solution, because of important updates like the wii menu 4.0, and once they start manufacturing Wiis with the 4.0 menu, the trouble increase.
The firmware updates are not important. Especially considering that ALL OF THEIR UPDATES WERE USELESS FOR HOMEBREW USERS EXCEPT FOR SD LOADING!
AND THAT WAS DONE TOO!

And even when those firmware updates actually have something important, there are ways of getting the files that you need instead of the homebrew blockers included with the update.



The trouble that Brawl + offers TOs and players, as well as the fragile nature of Wii hacking makes Brawl + not a liable option.
it isn't fragile at all.
Where did you ever get this idea?
if somenoe loses their HBC because they decided to update, that was stupidity o their part.
We had SDHC capability.
We have SD loading.
We have increased loading speeds.
Like really?
There is NO reason at all t make such a claim.

It is simply the fact on whether people choose to hack their wiis or not.
That in itself is the issue as well as whether or not it has truly recognized as a iabe option.
There are circuits with hacked games but they are a minority.

Now as for people with system menu 4.0, there are ways being looked into for HBC to be placed in and then pll back the wii so they can update to a safe 4.0

Otherwise, there is absolutely no need to update your firmware, when the homebrew available allows you to perform everythg that they offer and more.
And when you can' get what the firmware update provides (IOS files and the like) a few days later, amethod becomes available where there is a safe update.

What can we do to fix the broken Brawl CP system that Mew2King pointed out that the person who won the first match will almost inevitably win the set?
??? I thought he meant the suggestion from earlier concerning the "winer stays character" thing.
 

pure_awesome

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
1,229
Location
Montreal, Canada
It seems like every thread where we discuss ways to make competitive Brawl better, some random B+ supporter feels the need to drop in and tell us why Brawl+ is so great and how we should all be playing it and blah blah blah.

I tried Brawl+. I hated it. I think Brawl with hitstun is dumb. I think no auto-sweetspot is dumb. I think Dash cancelling is counterintuitive and has no place in the game.

You clearly don't think this. You clearly like the game. And that's fine. But it's a different game. If Jason Wong came onto this board and told us that we should all be playing SF4, we'd all laugh at him. Please, just stop. We evidently don't want to play it, or we would be playing it. Brawl+ has it's own problems and I prefer vBrawl's pitfalls to Brawl+'s.



Anyway, back on topic. When we were playing yesterday, my friends and I started trying out different ways to alter the CP system to try and make it more fair, while still giving a slight advantage to the loser. We ended up using:

Winner picks the stage.
Loser strikes a character from the next match.
Winner picks a character.
Loser picks a character.

Or, alternatively, Loser picks the stage and then Winner strikes a character.

The system still allowed the loser to select the best possible character for the next stage/opponent's character combination, while still ensuring that neither the winner nor the loser got to stack the odds too much by picking MK on Luigi's, Falco on JJ, etc.

Obviously the downside with this system is that it uses character strikes, which everyone seems really opposed to doing for some reason. The version of this system that doesn't use character strikes goes:

Winner picks a character
Loser picks a character
Winner strikes a stage from the next match
Loser picks a stage

Same concept, but no character banning. Personally I like the first one.

The big problem with trying to fix the CP system is that there's literally thousands of ways we could potentially do it. Maybe the loser is allowed to alter the damage ratio by .1 to avoid chaingrabs and infinites? There's going to be flaws with every system, including the ones I proposed before this. It's ultimately going to be up to individual TOs to just try out random ones and hopefully, eventually we can all settle on one that works.
 

CRASHiC

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
7,267
Location
Haiti Gonna Hait
I like the second one.
It keeps it from being completely disadvantageous to the winner of the previous match.
What still worries me however, is that the winner of the first set will get the advantage in the final match. If both players are 1-1, why should either get a major advantage? What if we switched it to where on the final match, both players went back to a double blind character pick, and then the loser of the previous match picks his place, after a player strikes a place (to incorporate pure awsome's CP system).
 

JOE!

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
8,075
Location
Dedham, MA
Response to people who responded to me :p

I thought all those guys went even with MK?

Did planking suddenly mess it up? I mean, eggs and firebreath can get around it....not sure about Nanners or Falco's reflector...

On topic a bit more:

The only problem with MK as I see it is one or two powers having broken KB

Dsmash, Shuttle Loop and I think his Fair (that thing has killed my bowser at 113% at the ledge of FD, its not as bad as the other two, but still >.>)

They come out fast, great priorety...and then they have the KB to just screw you over more

If he had no Quick Power-moves, he'd be fine IMO
 

Turbo Ether

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
3,601
No Brawl+ please. They changed the game way too much. The only thing Brawl needed was a few tweaks here and there to further balance game, not the major overhaul that is Brawl+. Dave Sirlin had the right idea when his team rebalanced Super Turbo. They didn't decide to haphazardly alter the fundamental game mechanics.
 

AvaricePanda

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,664
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
Ignore it dude.
How?

When in every controversial or debating Brawl thread, 2 or 3 people walk in and say, "Hey, play Brawl+, it's in every way better and there's no excuse not to play it!" it's kind of hard to ignore.

Saying that it's in every way better is a subjective opinion. Hitstun doesn't mean better. No autosweetspot doesn't mean better. Like pureawesome, I hate Brawl with both of those. That doesn't mean my opinion is right or wrong, nor does it mean your opinion is right or wrong, but I'm tired of people just flat out saying, "Brawl+ is better."

But besides, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with Brawl+, so it shouldn't even be brought up.

(oh wait, Falcon beat me to it)

Related: I still have yet to see how MK overcentralizes the meta-game, or how he's some unbeatable force, or how he even breaks the CP system. Yes, he doesn't have bad stages by himself. However, against certain characters on certain stages, you can still help yourself with the match-up (like Diddy vs. MK on FD or Smashville). You don't only have to CP a stage the opponent is bad at, you can also CP a stage you're good at.
 

pure_awesome

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
1,229
Location
Montreal, Canada
Stop talking about Brawl+. The point of my post was to get people to stop bringing it up, not to focus in on it.

I like the second one.
It keeps it from being completely disadvantageous to the winner of the previous match.
What still worries me however, is that the winner of the first set will get the advantage in the final match. If both players are 1-1, why should either get a major advantage? What if we switched it to where on the final match, both players went back to a double blind character pick, and then the loser of the previous match picks his place, after a player strikes a place (to incorporate pure awsome's CP system).
See, I disagree with that (the second part). The player who won the first match won the match that was (in theory), perfectly neutral for both players. He won a match that was, at least theoretically, based entirely on skill. The player who won the second match simply won a match that was in his favour, if only slightly.

So yes, they're even at 1-1, but one player had an "easier" route in getting his one than the other player did. It only makes sense that the advantage should fall on the player who worked harder. Think of the third match as a sort of second chance for the player who lost the first match. He proved he can at least hold his own in the second match when he had an advantage, now he has to prove he's actually the better player by taking out his opponent when the chips are stacked against him.

The big problem I see with the CP system as it is now is that certain character/stage combinations are crazy strong. The most famous being MK on Luigi's. Since we aren't going to ban these characters completely and the stages alone aren't bad enough to be banned completely either, the most obvious route is to give players the chance to ban characters and stages for specific sets, or specific matches, in order to avoid playing these overpowered character/stage combinations. Since people seem dead-set on not allowing anyone to ban characters, allowing match-up specific stage bans seems like the best course of action.

So pick characters, then have whoever isn't picking the stage ban one or two stages to prevent too big of an advantage. Then pick the stage and gogogo.


Example:

I use Toon Link to beat my opponent's DDD in the first match on Final Destination.

Second match, I go to Snake. My opponent picks MK. I ban Rainbow Cruise and Luigi's Mansion from the match. He picks Delfino. It's still a solid MK stage and will give him the advantage, but it's in no way near as bad as RC or Luigi's would be. (I'm personally very bad on RC)

He takes the second match and decides to stay MK. I CP to Falco. He bans Final Destination and Jungle Japes. I go to PictoChat. Again, the stage favours Falco most of the time, but it's nowhere near as much a hurdle as fighting him on Japes would have been.

Note that in the third match, Rainbow Cruise and Luigi's Mansion are now viable counterpicks again and are no longer banned (unless of course my opponent bans them.)
 

Dojo

Smash Champion
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,978
Location
Time Chamber, Texas
Heh...DSF sure picked MK in desperate measure against Dojo.
DSF didn't go MK at first because he saw me 3-0 Tyrant in a set just before that. I also 2-0'd Tyrant's MK in winners earlier that day. I was also going close to even with M2K in friendlies all day.

After the first 2 matches against his Snake though, what other choice did he really have?
 

RATED

Smash Lord
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,627
Location
The Grand Line... PR
Sure. I now believe that MK beats Snake 60/40. Maybe.
I think the same of that matchup!, I hate that matchup with all my heart! , I main ddd and snake at tournaments and wow! I use ddd against MK( it sounds weird) but I get better results with ddd vs MK than snake vs mk. but I am sure that a MK like dojo or m2k they will beat my ddd for sure. I think that MK should be ban he is not a super broken character... he just breaks the counterpicking system. bcuz that diddy in FD is BS , I mained MK before I used ddd and snake, now I barely use him even though I use him for friendlies and if the mk know how to play against the diddy in fd he will beat the diddy for sure.
 

Hylian

Not even death can save you from me
Administrator
BRoomer
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
23,165
Location
Missouri
Switch FC
2687-7494-5103
You DO realize that Azen or Hylian most certainly did not play metaknight for most of the tournament. Playing them in a set or two does not qualify them for being on the characters used, because then results are skewed. However, people see the one or two games they played and decide they count.

Ally played like 15 different characters at the last Canadian tournament. Did he just get first with mario, G&W, metaknight, wario, etc.? no. He got first with Snake because that's who he used for most of the tournament.
Azen had to use MK to beat Lee Martin, but I didn't use MK once in brackets at Hobo11.

I went ONLY GW, and one match as IC's vs Roy_R which I lost.

I don't know why MK was by my name.
 

Trela

Smash Lord
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
1,748
Location
Cypress, TX
I was also going close to even with M2K in friendlies all day.
Really? I thought you beat him more than he beat you. You would beat him in a best out of 3, then he would go "Umm, best out of 5!" You would beat him again: "BEST OUT OF 7!" lol it was kinda funny (no offense M2K).

=Trela=
 

Shaya

   「chase you」 
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
27,654
Location
/人◕‿‿◕人\ FABULOUS Max!
NNID
ShayaJP
System 1 = Current System (ban, stage, winner char, loser char)
System 2 = Blah -> winner char, loser char, ban, stage
pure_awesome, the CP rules you brought up (System 2) is/was used in Australia. Depending on who hosts the tournament, that is.

I debated System 1 is less broken in terms of meta knight than System 2. Which people argue encourages tier whoring; depending on the stage chosen by the loser, they pick the best character possible for that stage.
My stance on it, is that the loser of the first match get's less of an advantage on the CP with system 2.

Because Meta Knight is fantastic on every stage, system 2 is completely 'broken' by just always picking meta knight, then when the loser picks their character, banning their best stages that COULD have given your meta knight issues with. Then the loser generally is left with only picking a 'neutral'/starter against meta knight; and will probably have a similar result to the first match.

This system focuses on striking stages that are bad for your opponent's character, while system 1 is meant to be for banning a stage that is bad for you as a player or bad for your character (but is most often not used as so).

At least with the current system, MK is at disadvantages against certain characters on certain stages (final d, jungle japes, corneria), so if the MK hears the words "Jungle Japes", not being aware they can use Falco (this is why you should be striking a stage bad for you/your character not your opponents), they can either stay MK and be at a disadvantage, or switch character. Can your Falco beat this guy's Falco in a ditto? Maybe I could use another character? Snake? ROB?

I think this is better than just being forced to cp neutrals against a meta knight who will most likely have the advantage.

I guess system 2 stops the meta knight from getting a 'shock' of being cp'd an extremely hard match up.... yay for meta knight.


But hell, I'm in the firm belief stages that are pretty much guaranteed wins for a certain character shouldn't be legal in the tournament scene; especially using system 1. Rainbow Cruise, Luigis and Norfair are pretty much "insta win" for meta knights (especially without a ledge grab rule). When you hear those stages getting cp'd, there is no reason NOT to use meta knight...
 

Cirno

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
203
Location
Gensokyo
That's incorrect. DDD & Snake are def. not debatable 50/50s. They are clear disadvantages for Marth.

(especially if the Snake has port advantage)

Marth has clear counters. People will go to Snake and other higher tiered characters before they go to Marth as their "no bad match-up'' character.

(obviously all of the characters will have bad match ups)

Everyone has their own opinions on certain matchups. If you look at the matchup numbers on character boards many people disagree with the set numbers the majority presents. The fact that you see it clear cut disadvantage and I don't is debatable( with more trust behind your words however since you do main Marth).

Marth also has a 'clear' advantage on Diddy according to my brother who mains Marth. I'm curious as to whether Nanerz, NL, and Alpha Zealot feel the same.


And Snake has a 'clear' disadvantage to DDD. 35:65 according to matchup numbers.
Why would people who are after the 'no bad matchups' syndrome MK supposedly has if Snake has that when Marth has two 60/40s in matchup numbers, 3 evens and then advantage across the board?

Especially if we have Marths beating their 35:65 now.

I just think if stuff like this happens, and occasionally at high levels, the 'clear' matchup ideas we have must not be as clear as we thought yet...



Marth can't really beat Snake if Snake has controller port advantage (yeah, the match up is so drastically changed, imo).

Dedede is so so, depending who you ask. However it's been a while since I've seen co18 come outta left field claiming Marth and D3 are even. But when it comes down to it, two players of 'equal skill', Marth cannot cover the damage (in relation to weight difference) that D3 can rack up on Marth.

Either way, if MK was banned, Marth would become a SAFE character to main for high level tournaments, covering Falco, Diddy, Wario and Game and Watch quite well. The emphasis here is on the word SAFE; Meta Knight being 'safe' is an understatement, a big one.

The top players maining Falco, Diddy, and Wario mostly agree Marth has the advantage, yet the best players of these characters are known to outdo the respectable Marths.

Still, these results are missing out on the "MK slayers" or whatever you'd like to call them.
A lot of the time when you see interviews before fights or just even just asking a friend if they think they can beat so-and-so the answer you hear a lot is " I don't know. " or "I'll have to fight him to see." Because in a game like Smash Brothers players of equal skill make 60/40s and the like seem even or completely different.

Watch the Kismet v Reflex grand finals set and tell me Reflex is at the clear disadvantage he's supposed to be.

I know people are tired of hearing the 'too early' line, but things are happening in matches of equal skill that shouldn't happen if things are as clear as they ought to be.

More often than not, the better player wins that match. And I believe a dedicated Marth can force an even out of bad matchups if not better in the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom