Why wouldn't this rule set work?

[Mr.-0]

I"m very confused at what you just said SaveMe. Not that many people main more than one character and use them in a tournament. Your ruleset would encourage the very thing you are against. And skill is what determines who wins. You don't see Ally switching whenever someone picks Olimar or DeDeDe, do you? Nor does Lain switch when he fights Snakes. And yes, we care about winning, this is a COMPETITIVE community. And for the record, unlike Melee, most people only main one character. You're proposing an problem that doesn't exist and are trying to bring up a ruleset which encourages your fictional problem. This thread needs to be locked.

 

[Zeallyx]

This is the reason why I stopped posting here. It seems that all the community cares about is winning. It doesn't matter who out skills who. If you use are character(even if you don't main him) and beat someone who is clearly more skilled than you, it doesn't matter as long as you win.

Playing to win the bottom line of a tourny.

This thread needs to be locked.

 

[Mr.-0]

Playing to win the bottom line of a tourny.

This thread needs to be locked.

And a designated ruleset discussion thread needs to be made to prevent threads like this from getting started and in order to stop all these threads from coming into the tactical discussion board.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I"m very confused at what you just said SaveMe. Not that many people main more than one character and use them in a tournament. Your ruleset would encourage the very thing you are against. And skill is what determines who wins. You don't see Ally switching whenever someone picks Olimar or DeDeDe, do you? Nor does Lain switch when he fights Snakes. And yes, we care about winning, this is a COMPETITIVE community. And for the record, unlike Melee, most people only main one character. You're proposing an problem that doesn't exist and are trying to bring up a ruleset which encourages your fictional problem. This thread needs to be locked.

Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Iv'e seen Mike Haze play against M7H(a really good DK player) and lose. Then all he has to do choose DDD and he brings the set back. Same thing happened when he played Commander Beef(a really good DDD main) except this time he went MK(Didn't see this match). In my opinion, these MUs do not really take any skill to win. As for Ally vs DDDs, I heard that he was never going to go snake against a DDD. I could be wrong though

EDIT: At ToKneeOrNotToKnee, Isn't saying "playing to win is the bottom line of a tourney" and playing a character like Captain Falcon a contradiction?

 

[Mr.-0]

How many examples is that, two? MikeHAZE decided he needed an extra boost to win against DK, so he went DDD. The main goal of the game is to win. Stuff like this happens, but not a whole lot. Your not going to change anybodies mind with your opinion that you should only ever play as one character. I take it that's what your main goal in the end is, but I could care less. And for the record, even in a bad matchup, like Snake vs IC, it takes skill to win. Unless theres an infinite or a super awesome CG that's auto one grab kill in a MU< it still requires skill to win. Will someone please lock this thread? If you need an excuse it's getting off topic.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

How many examples is that, two? MikeHAZE decided he needed an extra boost to win against DK, so he went DDD. The main goal of the game is to win. Stuff like this happens, but not a whole lot. Your not going to change anybodies mind with your opinion that you should only ever play as one character. I take it that's what your main goal in the end is, but I could care less. And for the record, even in a bad matchup, like Snake vs IC, it takes skill to win. Unless theres an infinite or a super awesome CG that's auto one grab kill in a MU< it still requires skill to win. Will someone please lock this thread? If you need an excuse it's getting off topic.

This rule set was never about forcing people to main one character. It was about making a balanced rule set that made it so that it did not matter whether you mained one character or all the characters.

 

[Zeallyx]

EDIT: At ToKneeOrNotToKnee, Isn't saying "playing to win is the bottom line of a tourney" and playing a character like Captain Falcon a contradiction?

I wasnt saying I am playing to win, was I?

Obviously, if you play to win, you dont main falcon.

So no. I didnt contradict myself.

And a designated ruleset discussion thread needs to be made to prevent threads like this from getting started and in order to stop all these threads from coming into the tactical discussion board.

Seconded.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

let me ask you guys a question. Why aren't all of the stages in this game legal?

 

[Zeallyx]

let me ask you guys a question. Why aren't all of the stages in this game legal?

That question does it. You are just trolling.

Requesting a lock.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

the answer I was looking for was in short , they are not fair stages or they are vary unbalanced. Why is it that you guys can make exceptions for stage lists but not for a rule set that would make it so that you could main what ever amount of characters you want with out getting punished?

 

[Mr.-0]

Okay, I'm sorry, but now I'M requesting a lock too. It's just... honestly, i think that's the lowest intelligence post I've ever read. I'm considering that trolling. Do you really know what you just said? I'm curious.

This is the reason for my request for a designated ruleset discussion thread. So threads like this aren't made.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Okay, I'm sorry, but now I'M requesting a lock too. It's just... honestly, i think that's the lowest intelligence post I've ever read. I'm considering that trolling. Do you really know what you just said? I'm curious.

This is the reason for my request for a designated ruleset discussion thread. So threads like this aren't made.

you're not even explaining anything. What's wrong with what I posted?

 

[Mr.-0]

There is a CLEARLY obvious reason why not all stages are legal, and an even more obvious reason why secondaries, all characters, and the maining of several characters is legal. The reason why we're not changing the ruleset is because IT"S FINE AS IT IS! You're "problem" with it is of no importance. Everybody will agree with me that there should be secondaries and that you should NOT be forced to only main one character. After a while, not only would the game get dull, but tournaments would be even duller. There's a reason why there are secondaries, and it's as clear as the fact that nothing you say is thought out. Your arguments are pointless, your ruleset makes you a sort of hypocrite, and you fail to realize that we've already pointed out why your ruleset does the opposite of what you "encourage" and does not work. We've also pointed out why the ruleset should remain as it is. You fail to comprehend the flaws in your ruleset, arguments, and you fail to comprehend why everybody thinks that your just trolling and that nothing you say is of worth any value. The reason why people are raving about the stagelist is because MLG is implementing a new stagelist, and because ADHD has publicly stated that he doesn't like it. I honestly wish for this thread to be locked, for it to be an infraction for people to make ruleset threads like these, and for there to be a designated ruleset and stagelist discussion thread so that people like you stop making pointless threads like these with a ruleset that doesn't work and people like you stop posting extremely low intelligent posts like all of yours. Your ruleset does not work, nothing you say makes sense and is of no point, and this thread should be locked.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

There is a CLEARLY obvious reason why not all stages are legal, and an even more obvious reason why secondaries, all characters, and the maining of several characters is legal. The reason why we're not changing the ruleset is because IT"S FINE AS IT IS! You're "problem" with it is of no importance. Everybody will agree with me that there should be secondaries and that you should NOT be forced to only main one character. After a while, not only would the game get dull, but tournaments would be even duller. There's a reason why there are secondaries, and it's as clear as the fact that nothing you say is thought out. Your arguments are pointless, your ruleset makes you a sort of hypocrite, and you fail to realize that we've already pointed out why your ruleset does the opposite of what you "encourage" and does not work. We've also pointed out why the ruleset should remain as it is. You fail to comprehend the flaws in your ruleset, arguments, and you fail to comprehend why everybody thinks that your just trolling and that nothing you say is of worth any value. The reason why people are raving about the stagelist is because MLG is implementing a new stagelist, and because ADHD has publicly stated that he doesn't like it. I honestly wish for this thread to be locked, for it to be an infraction for people to make ruleset threads like these, and for there to be a designated ruleset and stagelist discussion thread so that people like you stop making pointless threads like these with a ruleset that doesn't work and people like you stop posting extremely low intelligent posts like all of yours. Your ruleset does not work, nothing you say makes sense and is of no point, and this thread should be locked.

You guys are the ones who don't pay attention. I already said that my rule set does not force anyone to main one character. It just makes it so they are not punished for doing so. There's really is no reasons for anyone to have to main more than one character other than the fact that your main has some really bad MUs or unless they want to main more than one character. The only reason people are being forced to pick up characters is because of the current stage list and rule set. The only way that someone can counter pick a stage without getting counter picked themselves is by maining or second maining MK. You have people Who are afraid of going to the stages they are most comfortable with because they are afraid of getting countered there.

 

[Mr.-0]

You guys are the ones who don't pay attention. I already said that my rule set does not force anyone to main one character. It just makes it so they are not punished for doing so. There's really is no reasons for anyone to have to main more than one character other than the fact that your main has some really bad MUs or unless they want to main more than one character. The only reason people are being forced to pick up characters is because of the current stage list and rule set. The only way that someone can counter pick a stage without getting counter picked themselves is by maining or second maining MK. You have people Who are afraid of going to the stages they are most comfortable with because they are afraid of getting countered there.

Okay. I'm done. If, after this post, you don't understand what I'm saying, I'm done.

Your ruleset punishes people who main one character. In fact, it punishes the winner of every match. Due to the fact that the winner picks his character and then the loser picks right after, it gives the loser a tremendous advantage. They can now counterpick the winners character. And then the winner gets to ban his stage. Big effing deal. All characters have at least TWO bad and TWO good stages. Let's say it's ADHD against Lain. Lain wins, cause he knows the match up and his timing for his CG's and his ability to deal with naners is off the charts today. In other words, he's having a good day. ADHD can now pick snake. Uh oh, your ruleset just encouraged ADHD to pick another character in order to beat Lain. That's bad, at least according to you. Now Lain can pick what stage he wants to ban. Obviously, he picks Halberd. Now Snake picks Rainbow Cruise. Or it's the other way around. Either way, Snake does better than the climbers do on both halberd and RC, and now Lain just got the heaviest counterpick of his life. It gives the loser to much of an advantage, centralizes the game on how I can counterpick my opponent, encourages the learning of multiple characters, has an unnecessary stage list cut, and doesn't work.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Okay. I'm done. If, after this post, you don't understand what I'm saying, I'm done.

Your ruleset punishes people who main one character. In fact, it punishes the winner of every match. Due to the fact that the winner picks his character and then the loser picks right after, it gives the loser a tremendous advantage. They can now counterpick the winners character. And then the winner gets to ban his stage. Big effing deal. All characters have at least TWO bad and TWO good stages. Let's say it's ADHD against Lain. Lain wins, cause he knows the match up and his timing for his CG's and his ability to deal with naners is off the charts today. In other words, he's having a good day. ADHD can now pick snake. Uh oh, your ruleset just encouraged ADHD to pick another character in order to beat Lain. That's bad, at least according to you. Now Lain can pick what stage he wants to ban. Obviously, he picks Halberd. Now Snake picks Rainbow Cruise. Or it's the other way around. Either way, Snake does better than the climbers do on both halberd and RC, and now Lain just got the heaviest counterpick of his life. It gives the loser to much of an advantage, centralizes the game on how I can counterpick my opponent, encourages the learning of multiple characters, has an unnecessary stage list cut, and doesn't work.

First of all, the fact that they can counter pick a persons character does not mean that they are going to counter pick a persons character 100% of the time. You can argue with me about this, but I feel that it is a lot easier to switch your character once a stage has been chosen than it is before the stage is chosen. Second of all, no matter what the rule set, the loser is always going to pick his character after the winner. The only difference is that with the current rule set, the loser gets to see the stage before he chooses his character. You may argue that the winner should get to see the stage that way he can decide whether to stick with his character or switch. But by doing this, you are basically forcing the player to counter pick a neutral or risk getting countered in his own stage unless he mains or second mains MK.

 

[Mr.-0]

Yeah, I'm done. What you say makes no sense, is unintelligent, and you've already been proven wrong. And for some reason I highly doubt you go to college. You're inability to understand that you're wrong and that we've proven you wrong countless times yet you still seem to have some fake idealogical view of the smash community and it's ruleset makes me think that no college would accept you.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Here are two of the main reasons why I feel that My rule set is better than the current rule set:

1. More character stage viability: with my rule set, you will see more players counter pick different stages. This is because they will no longer have to fear their opponent countering them on their own counter pick.
Example: Players that main DK can now counter pick Delfino Plaza(a good DK counter pick in my opinion) without having to fear his opponent switching to DDD.

2. No need to pick up secondaries on tourney viable characters: The name says it all. The current rule set makes it so that you basically have to pick up a secondary unless you main MK. This is one of the main reasons you have so many people who main secondaries. With my rule set, You will not be punished for maining only one character(although on mid/low tiers, I would advise picking up a secondary)
Example: Someone who mains Marth will no longer have to pick up a secondary because he will always know what character his opponent will counter him with and therefore can now ban their best stage.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Iv'e seen Mike Haze play against M7H(a really good DK player) and lose. Then all he has to do choose DDD and he brings the set back. Same thing happened when he played Commander Beef(a really good DDD main) except this time he went MK(Didn't see this match). In my opinion, these MUs do not really take any skill to win. As for Ally vs DDDs, I heard that he was never going to go snake against a DDD. I could be wrong though

1. DDD-DK is not nearly as easy as some claim. If you go into that match unprepared, you will get ***** pretty hard.
2. MK-DDD is NOT easy, what the hell are you smoking? That matchup is actually pretty tricky and takes a lot of getting used to.

EDIT: At ToKneeOrNotToKnee, Isn't saying "playing to win is the bottom line of a tourney" and playing a character like Captain Falcon a contradiction?

It is...

let me ask you guys a question. Why aren't all of the stages in this game legal?

$200 MM, you vs. me, you go your main, on temple hyrule?

EDIT: God **** you are stupid. With your ruleset, the counterpicking player pretty much automatically wins. The REASON why you counterpick stages, then your opponent picks his character, is so that he has a chance on your counterpick.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I'm not saying that the MUs are easy. I'm just saying that the DDD and DK players had to put in a lot more work than MikeHaze did. Using real players and their real secondaries, can anyone give me an example of my rule set not working(the old rule set has to work in the same situation though)?http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262480 I will make examples using this list to not get confused

 

[Mic_128]

First of all, the fact that they can counter pick a persons character does not mean that they are going to counter pick a persons character 100% of the time. You can argue with me about this, but I feel that it is a lot easier to switch your character once a stage has been chosen than it is before the stage is chosen.

It is, and that's the point. People should not be picking characters without knowing what the stage is going to be, as that could basically give someone a free win. In theory it might work, but there's too many holes and heavy disadvantages to winning.

You asked for an answer, and you got a lot of people saying why it's bad. You can't keep telling them they're wrong, you should be trying to address the issues if you're serious about trying to improve things.