Evo Brawl Rules Discussion

[UltraDavid]

On the other hand, the backroom 100% knows what it's doing.
And how, exactly, do I know that?
This is a good point. What people talk about happening in the Backroom is per se untrustworthy to me as long as it's locked to outsiders.

I'd be fine with the Smash community playing with some different ruleset for SF4. Like, what would that matter to me? If I didn't like their rules I could just keep playing in my community's tournaments, and if I didn't mind their rules I could play in my community's tournaments and also Smashboards' tournaments. Sound alright?

[Galactic]

You mean the most skilled brawl player when he doesnt have to deal with wild terrain, item use and defense, and luck manipulation. Right?

Yup. I mean the most skilled person in the FIGHTING GAME ASPECT of Brawl. Someone who doesn't have to deal with random elements effecting the overall score of the game.

The way I see it, Smash can be 2 different games in one.

One is with all items and stages on, where it becomes an incredibly fun, chaotic game of randomness. The best player does not always win in this game.

The other is with all items off and only certain "Even" stages. It becomes an intense chess match where skilled players can shine. Basically it becomes a real fighting game, where the best player will win every time.

Smash can be a deep, intense fighting game. Let's take any other fighting game, say 3S. Imagine there were items in 3S that randomly popped up and made Ryu invincible for 10 seconds, or would randomly explode in front of Oro and cost him a round. I think those would be off in a tourney with money on the line, no?

Basically what I'm saying is, EVO has always been a FIGHTING GAME TOURNEY. Let Brawl be played as a fighter, not a party game.

But heck, we're all due our own opinions, and I'm just stating mine.

EDIT:
I'd be fine with the Smash community playing with some different ruleset for SF4. Like, what would that matter to me? If I didn't like their rules I could just keep playing in my community's tournaments, and if I didn't mind their rules I could play in my community's tournaments and also Smashboards' tournaments. Sound alright?

Gotta agree with this 100%. If SWF went and started a bunch of MVC2 tourneys with some stupid ass rules (No Air Combos or something) that I don't agree with, I would go over to their boards and go "Hey shitheads, you're doing it all wrong. I'm from SRK and we know better than you fuckfaces about this shit." That's just retarded. I just wouldn't play in your tourneys. I'd give my opinion if it was asked for (Not like I'm some top tier player or whatever but I have played JWong in Mah-vel and not gotten embarassed) but I wouldn't act like my word was the be-all and end-all of the discussion.

^_-;

[Keits]

One is with all items and stages on, where it becomes an incredibly fun, chaotic game of randomness. The best player does not always win in this game.


Really? You did know that the best player does not always win at any game, correct?

The other is with all items off and only certain "Even" stages. It becomes an intense chess match where skilled players can shine. Basically it becomes a real fighting game, where the best player will win every time.

Yeah, i guess you didnt.

Items and uneven terrain dont stop brawl from being a fighting game. Items randomly spawn and explode or heal in Samurai Showdown 2, one of the SF communities favorite SNK games. Random parry into super happens in 3s. Random dizzy into kill happens in ST. Doesn't stop those games from being about player skill. I just think that saying that random elements suddenly cause wild variation in results is very shortsighted and dishonest.

Lets be honest, its just your preference. You like items off play more, and due to whatever, feel its a better measure of skill.

I feel its a measure of incomplete skills.

[UltraDavid]

There's an argument to be made that having items on decreases strategy because of randomness. I think it's a poor argument, at least for most items, because that randomness can be largely controlled and items make the strategy more interesting to me.

But with nonflat stages, there is real chess-like strategy to be had, and that's undeniable. Finding and maintaining positional advantage is even more important in these stages than it is on flat stages. I think even if we decide to not have items on, we need to have almost all stages on. I think allowing the super-random stages like Warioware would make the strategy worse, and the infinite run-away stages like Summit, Temple, and New Pork City might be dumb anyway and are especially dumb without items (items discourage "camping" because they're likely not to spawn where you're camping), but the rest of the stages really help make the strategy better.

[lamewadd]

The best player does not always win in this game.


When were tournies decided by selecting the "best" player? Then Evo may as well be cancelled right now, and Jwong, Daigo, Valle and Afrolegends should be sent their checks right now.

The best player? He's the one who wins the tourney. Period.

[AaronS]

Lamewadd - Yeah, you're right.

However, if he wins because of a lucky item spawn is he REALLY the best player?

[Keits]

Lamewadd - Yeah, you're right.

However, if he wins because of a lucky item spawn is he REALLY the best player?

Yes. Like it or not, thats brawl.

There is potential, however slim, for a total poker novice to get purely amazing hands all day and win a huge tournament on nothing but luck. The chances are probably as slim as this happening in 3 out of 5 matchups in Brawl. You KNOW this when you enter. The excuse is poor after the fact.

"The more I practice, the luckier I seem to get". When you are aware of all the possible WTF moments and situation, you are going to LOOK like the luckiest player ever to everyone who doesnt know better.

[lamewadd]

However, if he wins because of a lucky item spawn is he REALLY the best player?

Who determines the best, if not the tournament? You? Me? The SWF backroom?

[Galactic]

When were tournies decided by selecting the "best" player? Then Evo may as well be cancelled right now, and Jwong, Daigo, Valle and Afrolegends should be sent their checks right now.

The best player? He's the one who wins the tourney. Period.

Jwong, Daigo, Valle, those guys win, so they're the best. Did anyone ever think they're the best BEFORE they won? Most importantly, they're the best because they won in an EVEN PLAYING FIELD. Anyone could have done what they did, if they were good enough. There was no randomness involved there.

Would JWong still be considered the best at MVC2 if in his last match in his first Evo, a bomb appeared out of nowhere and killed Magneto, costing him the match? There's no way to prepare or train for random shit like that! Any advantage or disadvantage that is completely random and doesn't reward or punish good or bad play is directly hurting the chances that the player who is actually the more skilled (AKA "the best player") comes out victorious.

I agree with your statement but I'll add something to it. The best player? He's the one that wins the tourney. IF the game being PLAYED at the tourney is only based on SKILL.

^_-;

[Galactic]

Yes. Like it or not, thats brawl.

There is potential, however slim, for a total poker novice to get purely amazing hands all day and win a huge tournament on nothing but luck. The chances are probably as slim as this happening in 3 out of 5 matchups in Brawl. You KNOW this when you enter. The excuse is poor after the fact.

"The more I practice, the luckier I seem to get". When you are aware of all the possible WTF moments and situation, you are going to LOOK like the luckiest player ever to everyone who doesnt know better.

Comparing Evo to a poker tourney is a terrible comparison. Poker is AT BEST 30% skill 70% luck. Even the pros will tell you that. You might as well compare Poker tourneys to chess tourneys as well.

Evo has always been and it always SHOULD BE about skill. It loses all credibility as a real fighting game tourney if randomness and luck aspects are brought in.

^_-;

[Keits]

So top poker, magic, yugioh, and backgammon, players can never be considered the best, because the game is not only based on skill.

Very very very very very very shortsighted logic.

edit - im NOT comparing the two games. Im exposing the fallacy of your statement.

[AzN_Skater]

I feel its a measure of incomplete skills.

This.

I don't understand STILL why people are trying to make SSBB out to be like a traditional fighting game when CLEARLY it is not. The measure of skill in, lets says 3s, is based purely on the fighting aspect. SSBB is a completely different monster and should be approached as such.

Being skilled in SSBB measures your fighting skill (character knowledge, matchup, etc) as well as stage control, luck manipulation, item control (both offense and defense), and adaptation to random events. This is the true measure of the 'best' SSBB player and if you focus too much on one are (re: fighting skill) and do not focus on the other areas, than you should not be given the title of 'best'.

[Galactic]

So top poker, magic, yugioh, and backgammon, players can never be considered the best, because the game is not only based on skill.

Very very very very very very shortsighted logic.

edit - im NOT comparing the two games. Im exposing the fallacy of your statement.


If I play him 100 times, I can beat Phil Helmuth heads-up in poker if I get good cards. There's no way I will EVER beat Daigo in 3S if I play him 100 times. They are BOTH better than me at their respective games. One is just better at a pure skill game, while the other is better at a game that revolves largely around LUCK.

That's the problem with skill vs luck. Luck can beat skill sometimes. Which is why the best SKILLED player can forseeably lose if we allow luck elements into the skill portion of his game. That's where I believe you are completely wrong.

^_-;

[UltraDavid]

Maybe a good way to address the argument that it would suck if you didn't finish in the money thanks to some random event is to make the payout system more egalitarian than it is for other games. I mean the best way to address that argument is just to get people to realize that they need to be able to control for randomness and learn item/stage control, but I think there'd be less outrage over the possibility of losing money if more people finished in the money.

Edit: haha why are the all the i's and e's in my signature bleeped??

[Daemonk]

Just turn certain items-on at Evo. If it turn out bad, they'll change it. If not, then they'll keep it. Its only like 10 bucks entry fee or something anyways right? Its not like you go to Vegas only for Evo.

[Galactic]

Just turn certain items-on at Evo. If it turn out bad, they'll change it. If not, then they'll keep it. Its only like 10 bucks entry fee or something anyways right? Its not like you go to Vegas only for Evo.

If I go, it would only be for Evo. I've quit gambling. It was good for my wallet, bad for my heart. Not into hookers either.

Honestly, if I go to Evo, I would enter every single tourney anyway. Hell I would bring my Wii and let a bunch of you punks crash in my room, playing Brawl with all items/stages all night if you wanted. I'm just saying IMHO that for Evo's sake, it should be run without items and all random stages.

^_-;

[Wobbles]

Why does every thread about items, on SWF or not, turn into a goddamn shitstorm?

1) Items completely on VS items completely off

If you have an item that adds greatly to the game's depth, and you have an item that detracts greatly from its depth, and they were the only two items in the game, and you could have one, both, or neither, what setting would you use?

Add an item. Add another. Add another. Some detract from gameplay and make it drastically imbalanced, some make it interesting and deep.

Why would you go with all or nothing in this instance? Especially since that is how the items actually work in Brawl?

When playing with items, some of them give hugely unfair advantages to the player who just happens to be near them. You can argue stage control all you like, but in a match between two closely matched opponents, suddenly and arbitrarily swinging the balance towards one of them is contrary to the nature of the competition.

If the items which do that are turned off, and the items which add depth are kept, then we have a deeper and more interesting game.

2) SWF'ers need to die in a fire.

Please do not generalize about an entire community based on what a few people have posted. A lot flaming occurs on both sides of the argument here, and it's really not getting us anywhere. The calm SRK and SWF people who could benefit from rational discourse are being drowned out by all the internet rage, and it is doing no good.

3) When random settings determine the outcome of a match, the winner is the better player.

I can't help but disagree here, especially in the presence of broken items.

I know significantly more about Smash than my college friends. I understand the game on a deeper level than most of them even know exist. Whenever we play with items off, I win every match. I am undisputedly better at the game in every way.

Except with this group of friends, we always play items on. And I still win most of the time, because I'm better with items. I have actually devoted my time to making sure that I know how the items work, and so when one of them gets a hammer, it's usually *me* with the advantage. I've managed to acquire a decent working knowledge of item strategies thanks to them.

Unfortunately, there are still some items where I have zero chance of beating the person holding them. I can't kill my friends when they have a Starman, I can't touch them when they have curry, and explosive items kill me by randomly spawning in areas where I'm trying to attack. There is no dispute that I am better than them at the game, and items can still gum that up.

The effects of those random items become more and more apparent the closer two players are in skill, to the point where rounds are often determined by the presence of those game-breakers.

Again, I am speaking from the perspective of a competitive player who has played extensively with items in an attempt to genuinely understand how they work. I play items in 1v1s with a competitive friend, in FFAs with non-competitive folks, and the results are demonstrative. Some items drastically alter the flow of the match, regardless of the skill imbalance between opponents.

Some items don't. They give a bit of an advantage and create interesting anomalies to fight over, and the better player consistently prevails in these circumstances. I am in favor of having these items on, compared to the aforementioned gamebreakers.

TBC...

[Keits]

If I play him 100 times, I can beat Phil Helmuth heads-up in poker if I get good cards. There's no way I will EVER beat Daigo in 3S if I play him 100 times. They are BOTH better than me at their respective games. One is just better at a pure skill game, while the other is better at a game that revolves largely around LUCK.

That's the problem with skill vs luck. Luck can beat skill sometimes. Which is why the best SKILLED player can forseeably lose if we allow luck elements into the skill portion of his game. That's where I believe you are completely wrong.

^_-;

I'm not talking about letting luck into a luckless game. You are talking about taking it out. :rofl:

[Galactic]

I'm not talking about letting luck into a luckless game. You are talking about taking it out. :rofl:

If luck was taken out of Poker than the best players would actually win more. Not idiot flukes like Moneymaker.

You CAN take luck out of a skill game in this case. Smash Bros at its core is a skill game. All the frills around it such as randomly spawning items, powerups and random stages are the luck elements.

I don't understand what's so bad about wanting to take the luck factors out of a game that CAN become a skill game.

This also gets rid of any possible stupid contraversies as to the winner. If someone wins the whole damn thing because their final opponent got killed by a randomly spawned bomb, is anyone really going to respect that champion? There's going to be tons of people who watch only the final match and is going to say "He got lucky." Regardless of how well he fought to even get to the finals. That's not fair to him OR to his opponent.

^_-;

[Hogosha]

I lost to a Level 3 computer-controlled Jiggs last night because a Blast Box spawned in front of me when I used forward+B with Zero Suit Samus and a Bob-omb spawned and killed me on the other.

I'm losing to the LEVEL 3 COMPUTER I NORMALLY PUT ON FOR PRACTICING SPACING AND COMBOS.

Will SOMEONE tell me how THAT'S good for a competitive environment?

[Pimp Willy]

so, you got hit with one blast box, and it killed you, and you LOST an entire match? Wow.

I dunno, maybe try level 2 computers? ; )

[Hogosha]

so, you got hit with one blast box, and it killed you, and you LOST an entire match? Wow.

I dunno, maybe try level 2 computers? ; )

Don't remember the stage (it was 3 in the morning), but it wasn't gigantic. I had it on 2 stocks and both stocks were gone from hitting a randomly spawning thing that went boom.

And I've already put my coms down to Level 1 and invited a knitting club over to play against me. My smash-peen needs inflating. ;P


On a more serious note, I'm not entirely sure WHY you guys think it's such a bad thing to listen to some of the better and more influential Melee players when it comes to Brawl. When Tekken 5 came out, people looked to the really good Tag and 4 players. When Soul Calibur 3 came out, SC2 extraordinaires were studied. Are the best of the last game always going to be the best of the current one? No, of course not. New T5 players came out of the woodwork. I see a lot of the top T5 players and I really don't remember any of them coming into the scene before 5. Heck, Mateogalven is probably one of the best (if not arguably THE best) in this area and I'm POSITIVE he didn't play seriously until 5. But I know he studied better players.

When SF4 comes out, I'll definitely be watching what Valle, Wong, Ortiz, and others are doing. They'll be the ones finding the advanced techniques. They'll be the ones developing character strategies faster than most anyone else. They'll be the ones to study. Just as the good Melee players were the ones to start developing strats in Brawl. Just as they're the ones finding advanced techniques. Will we see new players rise to the top few of the ranks? I sure as hell hope so, it makes it interesting. But you know damn well they're getting there by studying what made the last generation of players so good.

*shrugs* Don't see why that's so difficult to understand.

[alphazealot]

You mean the most skilled brawl player when he doesnt have to deal with wild terrain, item use and defense, and luck manipulation. Right?

Funny you mention this...didn't KoreanDJ win the Nintendo tournament...oh, and that was FFA in addition to stages/items. The best Melee players are still the best Brawl players and will continue to be. There will be new faces in the crowd (there already are) but the best from Melee are still among the best in Brawl and they will be that way with or without items and on any stage you want.

Not to also mention the assloads of Smash players from SWF who have advanced far into the gamestop tournament.

And no, that the best players from Melee are still the best with all items/stages in Brawl is not proof for items being positive. Countless people were eliminated in some way/shape/form from gamestop tournaments because of their rules (some people couldn't even choose their characters!).

[margalis]

Most of the people in this thread just need to stop posting. Wobbles is on the right track. This thread is 70 pages long and the discussion of individual items is only about 3 pages.

If bombs can spawn right in front of your attack and get you killed that's a good argument against bombs, NOT A GOOD ARGUMENT AGAINST OTHER ITEMS.

Has anyone ever died by accidentally punching a Super Scope? No.

Start with the assumption that items are on then make good arguments for why certain items should be off. Start with the assumption that all stages are in play as random selects then make good arguments otherwise. Nobody gives a shit about your philosophy of randomness in competetive games.

We are 70 pages in an people still don't get this?

So far I've seen good arguments that items that explode on hit should be off. I also agree with the logic that invincible star should be off because once one player has it the other player can't do anything other than run. Same may be true of curry.

Make good arguments instead of whining about OH NOES THE RANDOMNESS. Smash has random elements - deal.

[alphazealot]

Make good arguments instead of whining about OH NOES THE RANDOMNESS. Smash has random elements - deal.

We can remove most of them. Deal.

Start with the assumption that items are on then make good arguments for why certain items should be off. Start with the assumption that all stages are in play as random selects then make good arguments otherwise. Nobody gives a shit about your philosophy of randomness in competetive games.


Why not start the assumption with them off and then start including them as they are shown that they are appropriate? This makes a lot more sense actually. If you start with everything off and try to whittle down, it will take longer to figure things out (not every item will spawn every game) and its not as conducive to isolating a single variable (in this case, a specific item and its effects on gameplay).

[Hogosha]

(snip)


Dammit, Wobbles, quit being right. ;P

[margalis]

Why not start the assumption with them off and then start including them as they are shown that they are appropriate?

Because the only way to show they are appropriate is to play with them on.

Here are some general guidelines for evaluating items:

1. Can hitting the item just as it spawns either royally fuck you or immensely help you? (Bombs, hearts, etc)

2. Does the item lead to degenerate gameplay? (Like invincible star, which does nothing other than waste time and doesn't interact with the other player or items at all)

Most of the complaints are centered around a few items. Cracker Launcher? Super Scope? I've yet to see a good argument for why these should be off.

[Sample]

what should be banned (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw/intermediates-guide/what-should-be-banned/)

Just thought I'd link this page here, it's an excellent read and makes good points towards the banning of things.

I'd ask Alphazealot to read it too, but while googling for it, I found a thread on wifiwars talking about the very same page. And guess who asks to take Sirlin's page into account.

thread (http://www.wifiwars.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5)

I guess you didn't like where it was leading and changed your mind when you started posting here with your guilty until proven innocent mindset.

[Shade]

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, and I'm going to preface this by saying I don't think I'm great at Brawl and I don't think I'm better than anyone else until I've beaten them, but the shit Shaman posted was not only stated about 100 times before in this very thread, but it's been stated BETTER and in a much less inflammatory way. The bottom line is this: Shaman is a douchebag, I don't give a fuck how good he is in Brawl or how good he thinks SWF is.

That said, people from SWF are free to come here and post their opinions as well, this is an OPEN and FREE messageboard. SRK.Com just happens to be affiliated (Our you might even say they RUN) with probably the biggest and most prestigious fighting tourney in the world called EVO. They decided to add Smash Brawl this year, and Wizard asked SRK's Smash players (Of which there are quite a few) on what their opinions on the rules should be. Now some (Not ALL) people at SWF got all their panties in a bunch because SRK didn't go to them and beg for their input on how SRK'S tourney should be run? If that's not elitist attitude, I don't know what is.

SWF runs their own tourneys their way, it's up to them whether they want to play at Evo or not. No one is forcing them to play with items on or off. Hell for the record, I've stated many times that ALL ITEMS SHOULD BE OFF FOR TOURNEYS but that still doesn't change the fact that some people at SWF are being real dumbasses right now. If they want their opinions heard, come to SRK, make a fucking account, and post your opinion WITHOUT being an asshole about it.

One thing people at SWF need to get through THEIR thick skulls. Evo is a WORLDWIDE fighting tourney, one of (if not THE) the most succesfull and influential fighting game tourneys out there.

It was like that BEFORE Smash, it will be like that AFTER Smash.

SRK and Evo owes you guys NOTHING. Stop acting like you're entitled to anything more than the rest of us.

BTW, when you say someone is "riding something's cock" it usually means you're in love with it or something. From how your post started I thought you were going to flame SWF people.


Repped.:tup:

[Reno K]

One thing people at SRK might find interesting is how the Japanese handled Melee - they were even stricter about bans than SWF was.

The Japanese ruleset -
4 stock
No items
I forget the time limit

Stages allowed: FD, DL64, and maybe Battlefield or YS, I forget which. I don't think any other stages were allowed, even for counter-picks.

[Galactic]

^ I'm all for banning of items but again, that's Melee. This is Brawl. Most US tourneys banned items in Melee tourneys too.

^_-;

[Reno K]

I posted that merely to show that SWF isn't the only group that was gung-ho about banning things; I don't know what the Japanese equivalent of the SWF is though.

[Shaman]

Originally Posted by Galactic View Post
The bottom line is this: Shaman is a douchebag, I don't give a fuck how good he is in Brawl or how good he thinks SWF is.

SWF runs their own tourneys their way, it's up to them whether they want to play at Evo or not. No one is forcing them to play with items on or off. Hell for the record, I've stated many times that ALL ITEMS SHOULD BE OFF FOR TOURNEYS but that still doesn't change the fact that some people at SWF are being real dumbasses right now. If they want their opinions heard, come to SRK, make a fucking account, and post your opinion WITHOUT being an asshole about it.

One thing people at SWF need to get through THEIR thick skulls. Evo is a WORLDWIDE fighting tourney, one of (if not THE) the most succesfull and influential fighting game tourneys out there.

It was like that BEFORE Smash, it will be like that AFTER Smash.

SRK and Evo owes you guys NOTHING. Stop acting like you're entitled to anything more than the rest of us.

BTW, when you say someone is "riding something's cock" it usually means you're in love with it or something. From how your post started I thought you were going to flame SWF people.
Repped. :tup:

its always nice to be totally reasonable and be responded to in kind. I'll demonstrate how that works for those of you who failed; thank you to those who responded constructively, and or politely.

I never claimed to be good at smash so calm your self your sense inferiority should have nothing to do with the discussion, hell you might very well be able to beat me at brawl, I'm not that great, but that neither adds to nor detracts from the arguments i present.

SWF has played the role of Rule standardization since its inception so that players interested in competitive play would know what the standard was for any competitive tourney anywhere they occur. Unfortunately Smash doesn't have the luxury of Arcade versions to determine the competitive rule set prior to smash being released on console.

With that said I didn't say anything inflammatory, the back room and SWF in general have been determining competitive rule sets since the original smash, and they are most knowledgeable in that regard. I don't really appreciate the closed nature of the back room, but seeing all the new shits at SWF in last 2 months, i can understand why they would want to keep them out. considering their knowledge it seens kind of foolish to totally dismiss years of experience and DEMAND testing, simply because the SRK community has yet to find the same findings it doesn't mean that SWF is wrong, and i don't understand why we would cripple what should be one of the largest tournaments of the year so that we can determine what we already know, most items are imbalancing, and we can't decide on which ones aren't.

Of course EVO is the epitome of fighting tournaments, and if I recall correctly melee had the second largest showing last year. So clearly their is allot of potential in the smash franchise but smash proponents since the first game have recognized that the fighting component of the game is severely hindered by items, and I don't need to make the arguments you've heard allot of them before (comparisons to chess and poker are particularly apt. The part I don't understand is that members of the SRK community, the original proponents of competitive fighting games want to use the brawl (party rule set) for an EVO tourney instead of the brawl (fighting rule set).

these facts and opinions aside the only real way to fairly test the items is one at a time against many standardized matches with both varying skill differences
Player 1 - should always play better and win
Player 1 - should win often
Player 1 and Player 2 - should win an even number of matches
then using each item we can determine which items affect results and which don't.

With that said, in my personal opinion if items become the standard I think watching competitive matches will actually be more boring, items are extremely fun to use especially before you totally know what they will do, they add that WTF element to an already interesting game. However what made melee so much fun to watch was the insane combos that players could pull off, but at least in my opinion the mechanics that govern item use would reduce the combo game. Case and point the ray gun is an excellent offensive item, but for just about every character the best possible combo with it would be some kind of lift into possible air hit combo followed by a spike and then continuous fire until you run out of ray gun shots, or your opponent is of the stage and DI's under the fire to recover, its cool to envision and watch the first 2 times, but it makes for rather stale game play with continued use.

a little more about me: i play items on with all my friends, the competitive scene in my areas not that good, but i have a friend who does play quite a bit of competitive smash and MvC2 and well he will win the majority of the time items on or off, but as everyone else has said items on just increase the chance that his superior skill may not clinch victory for him, and in a competitive fighting tournament like EVO, that just doesn't really seem like a sensible game play element to include if it can be removed, and has historically been by the community that plays said game or series.

lastly, i never said that you must listen to SWF, I said that they have very valid and relevant input because they have such an intimate understanding of the game. and that idea is supported by people here saying D3 throws smash balls with item appearance set to none and all items off, because it just doesn't happen. or another poster saying the games been out for 4 months if you include japan, when it came out at the beginning of February which gives us a whopping 2 months with it. that is why i say that we shouldn't discount SWF so easily, they have historically done a good job moderating the competitive smash environment, and well they are the most knowledgeable.

(DISCLAIMER) thats not to say that all of you are like the two posters i highlighted above, but it still does adequately demonstrate the problem with a community that has no historical knowledge of game, and limited testing time determining the rule set of what will likely be the flagship tournament of the year, in spite of the knowledge base that is readily available to them. and the SWF scrubs of whom you may even consider me to be one certainly give the competitive smash community limited credibility, but even Mr Wizard being allowed into the Back room shows that not only is the Smash community Invested in remaining the definitive source for smash info (namely SWF and AIB) but that they are confident in the testing and knowledge base they have, to grant access to the powers that be so they can hopefully implement the current competitive model.

now please call me all manner of vile names again, some of my arguments may have been posted in the last 70 pages, I've only read the last 15, and whatever posts have been linked back to therein, and I think that is a pretty reasonable chunk for me to read before posting anything myself, so call me what you want, but as far as I'm concerned Ad hom's are just proof positive of inferior arguments, or an inability to express yourself.

[Pimp Willy]

Just wanted to add this link in here:

http://nike.cecs.csulb.edu/~sreed/BrawlReplays/rp_080402_1500(Pimp(PT)%20Vs%20Kesh(PT)).bin

Its a replay file of the last tourney match, where I was able to use the Curry with basically no strategic use to kill kesh, whom I played and counterpicked a flat stage. Sorry for not being a straight video, but I am still contemplating my options with buying capture stuff : P


Edit:
The problem that I (and, indeed, it seems like most of the people for Items Testing) is that these people who are creating the ruleset are just grandfathering in melee ruleset to a new game. Everyone has said, that at the very best, you should start with everything off and then gradually add stuff. Melee went through a process of items on to off, culminating with even the pro-items people had to conceed that random exploding capsules could drastically alter a match, with no way to turn them off. That argument doesn't hold water in Brawl, since those can be turned off. So we set out to test the FULL game, not a smaller subset of it, to see what (if anything) can add to the competitive level of the game. We have decided to not ban anything until its completely detrimental to the game.

Meanwhile, the backroom at smashboards has been keeping their "discussions" (as we really don't know what they look like) under lock and key, while here at SRK we have open discussions. You can easily come here, like you have done, register an account, and jump right into the conversation. We, on the other hand, can't do that. As you have said, player skill should have NO bearing on helping discuss the merits of items or any other rules that affect a game. So why should ANYBODY be excluding from the backroom discussions? It's just not right.

In fact, I am actually under belief that the goal of the top Melee players is to make sure they can continue to use Brawl as their personal paycheck. These top players, who constantly feed on the cash of the "little guys" at tournaments, cannot help but constantly argue that they will lose MONEY if items are on. While I can't help but deny that being true in the first place, the fact shows that you can literally see their thought patterns. I cannot find an arguement, thread, or discussion ANYWHERE without some smash player bringing up the concept of losing money. This is baffling to me. So, am I really to trust a set of rules, handed down from people who knew melee the best, whose main purpose is to allow them to CONTINUE to win as much money as possible without needing to LEARN more than they have to in order to do so? I think not.

[Shaman]

you know you can capture your matches to VCR by connecting to the TV via VCR, and recording the input to VHS, then u could transfer it to a computer using a TV tuner, which is pretty cheap, probably run you about 60 dollars, more if you are looking for a good one (note. thats CDN.)

EDIT: Thats a valid point, but i think allot of the members here at SRK misunderstand the closed nature of the back room, you by no means have to be good at smash (at least at the level of say PC Chris, M2K, or Ken) but you have to be a reasonable sensible poster at SWF, because of the type of game smash is, it attracts allot of players who start to get stupid whenever its discussed as the serious fighting game it can be. so for that reason the backroom has taken on the role of discussing what to many other posters at SWF would disrupt, while weighing the opinions of sensible posters with community history, much like how Mr Wizard is now in the back room, because he meets the standards, unfortunately the rest of us can't take that route but regardless it doesn't mean their system wasn't born out of necessity or, a wise move for said community. the obvious opposite would be SRK where all the posters are patient, mature and sensible, and so all discussions, and decisions can be participated in by all. Though perhaps this 72 page long discussion is proof of the opposite, considering how immature some of the posters have gotten in the debate.

I'd agree that money is a large part of the problem, but I don't think their argument is so much, "I'm going to lose money" as its "the best player should win money... and items don't guarantee that will be the outcome" and as things stand they may be the best, but brawls evolving at a pretty impressive rate at this point so really, Evo will be anyones game. but that doesn't mean anyone should be able to win it Ala itemy randomness, it means that the best player should win, we just don't know who that is yet.

[subt-L]

you know you can capture your matches to VCR by connecting to the TV via VCR, and recording the input to VHS, then u could transfer it to a computer using a TV tuner, which is pretty cheap, probably run you about 60 dollars, more if you are looking for a good one (note. thats CDN.)

or if you had a capture card, you can just record straight from the replay on the wii and skip the middle man. but its all the same.

i don't think its an issue of people trying to keep thier bank roll up. i really just think its people who've been playing a certain way for years and can't adapt.

i still remember people complaining in tekken tag about how they'd rather play single character matches. they missed out on so much by not trying out tag.

i really can't imagine what would've happened if the tekken community was so biased that they would've taken the tag format out of tekken tag... it would have died in a week. good thing that tag was good shit.

but people will be set in thier ways. if it isn't what thier used to, they get scared and put off. its not uncommon. people revert back to old games if that happens.

and in all honesty, to all these people who hate items because they love thier melee rule set so much, i'd say go back to melee. but i do think brawl does need to be held in a different light. melee didn't have a rough time getting recognition because of items: it didn't get recognition because its community was way too young.

now that it's a bit more experienced as a fighing game community, it should also fall in line with the same approach everyone takes with EVERY OTHER FIGHTING GAME... learn whats bannable through trial by fire, not fear and what-ifs.

[margalis]

There isn't much evidence that anyone in the backroom is testing items at all. That's been brought up multiple times in this thread without answer.


considering their knowledge it seens kind of foolish to totally dismiss years of experience and DEMAND testing, simply because the SRK community has yet to find the same findings it doesn't mean that SWF is wrong, and i don't understand why we would cripple what should be one of the largest tournaments of the year so that we can determine what we already know, most items are imbalancing, and we can't decide on which ones aren't.


1. They have not done years of testing. It doesn't seem like they've done even days of testing.

2. They don't have years of experience playing Brawl, nor does experience or skill translate into ability to create proper rules.

3. The "neutral stages" / counterpick stages / banned stages is pretty good evidence that they don't have good ability to create proper rules. These rules don't make any real sense and finding a logical explanation for them is basically impossible. It boils down to "some characters are better on some stages" which is of course true of all stages, including flat "neutral" ones.

4. If the EVO tournament is "crippled" because of items it will only be because all the Brawl players who were so sure items were broken couldn't be bothered to prove it because they spent their time posting a page full of their boring personal philosophy as you just did.

[Shaman]

i don't think its an issue of people trying to keep thier bank roll up. i really just think its people who've been playing a certain way for years and can't adapt.

i still remember people complaining in tekken tag about how they'd rather play single character matches. they missed out on so much by not trying out tag.

i really can't imagine what would've happened if the tekken community was so biased that they would've taken the tag format out of tekken tag... it would have died in a week. good thing that tag was good shit.

Thats a very valid statement, but tag mode was a completely new beast, items, are essentially more of the same with a few minor tweaks, i think testing is certainly still important, but since we don't have enough time to do a fair test like I outlined above, does it not make more sense to use what knowledge we do have from prior iterations until we can complete the testing necessary to determine what adds to game play and what weakens it.

also I find it ironic that we want to compete at the game SSBB at EVO the fighting game tourney, instead of competing at the Fighting game, where char on char player vs player interaction are the only factors in victory when its availble with the push of 2 buttons?

though perhaps I'm simply biased due to my love of fair competitive games where the only thing I can attribute my loss to was a lack of skill, instead of, even if I have the skill to handle and manipulate items, a lucky spawn can cause me to lose advantage and possibly the game.

[Reno K]

oand in all honesty, to all these people who hate items because they love thier melee rule set so much, i'd say go back to melee. but i do think brawl does need to be held in a different light. melee didn't have a rough time getting recognition because of items: it didn't get recognition because its community was way too young.

Melee didn't get recognition because a lot of people couldn't see past the party game, the "kiddie" looks, and the non-traditional fighting system.

Melee didn't get recognition from this crowd until it provided through MLG and grassroots that it was competitive, and could deliver a large attendance at an Evo.

now that it's a bit more experienced as a fighing game community, it should also fall in line with the same approach everyone takes with EVERY OTHER FIGHTING GAME... learn whats bannable through trial by fire, not fear and what-ifs.

This sounds rather elitist, if you ask me. Isn't that what most SRKers have a problem with concernign SWF's backroom?

Why should the community fall in line with the views of a crowd which had largely ignored its existence and writes off the enitre community as you do?

There are other reasons why the SWF community should test items, but you provide none besides "because we do" and that is not constructive.

[Shaman]

There isn't much evidence that anyone in the backroom is testing items at all. That's been brought up multiple times in this thread without answer.



1. They have not done years of testing. It doesn't seem like they've done even days of testing.

2. They don't have years of experience playing Brawl, nor does experience or skill translate into ability to create proper rules.

3. The "neutral stages" / counterpick stages / banned stages is pretty good evidence that they don't have good ability to create proper rules. These rules don't make any real sense and finding a logical explanation for them is basically impossible. It boils down to "some characters are better on some stages" which is of course true of all stages, including flat "neutral" ones.

4. If the EVO tournament is "crippled" because of items it will only be because all the Brawl players who were so sure items were broken couldn't be bothered to prove it because they spent their time posting a page full of their boring personal philosophy as you just did.

lol attacking the fact that i posted my opinion is dumb, that is what we are both doing, it is the purpose of a forum; and ultimately i have wasted substantially less of my life posting here at srk, or even SRK and SWF combined than you have, so such an argument, or attack is simply foolish.

arguing your arguments i will say that current talk of what stages should be banned is at the discretion of the tourney organizers, and they will ultimate decide, so who cares what players like gimpyfish or ken say about which stages are in, that was the one thing, that i would say the Back room didn't have all that much influence in. the philosophy behind which stages selected are "random stages should provide minimal, and preferably no interference in the match" now obviously this is asking for 2 much because a stage with no walls will be better for say.. Luigi than it might be for say Diddy but well walls pose their own problems, and stages with interference like spear pillar with time being slowed gravity altered, and constant damage and knock back being done while cool, are "too random for competitive play, to which i offer no opinion, i only host local tourneys in my area, where I'm not necessarily as strict about levels, but certainly Spear pillar will be out, among some of the other most interfering stages, where beating the opponent is secondary to surviving the level. I think that shows that the have a criteria that they fairly use to determine whats in and whats out. the fact that u disagree with the criteria is cool, but everything they do is logical (or at least consistent), even if u disagree with their rational.

[Sample]

i think testing is certainly still important, but since we don't have enough time to do a fair test like I outlined above, does it not make more sense to use what knowledge we do have from prior iterations until we can complete the testing necessary to determine what adds to game play and what weakens it.


From Mr Wizard's post; if you can't prove that an item is broken, it stays. Not the other way around. Likewise, if we can't find the time to test it, every item stays.

Stop going nostalgic on everyone.

[subt-L]

This sounds rather elitist, if you ask me. Isn't that what most SRKers have a problem with concernign SWF's backroom?

Why should the community fall in line with the views of a crowd which had largely ignored its existence and writes off the enitre community as you do?

There are other reasons why the SWF community should test items, but you provide none besides "because we do" and that is not constructive.i don't see where testing out whats broken and whats not is elitist. every fighting game goes through it.

here's an example of the swf way:
hell, in st:hd, lets just keep akuma banned. he was banned in regular st. even though they reworked him, lets not give him a chance.

here's an example of what i'm talking about:
if they rebalanced akuma, let him in until its found out that he's broken, as with every other character.

do i sound elitist because i want to give characters a chance? or maybe its simply the way i phrased it... let me say instead:

hey fuckers, akuma should be in this fucking game because every character should be allowed until proven broken cuz thats what every other fighting game does, dumbasses.

thanks.

[Galactic]

its always nice to be totally reasonable and be responded to in kind. I'll demonstrate how that works for those of you who failed; thank you to those who responded constructively, and or politely.

*sigh* Yes, coming in here with your condescending attitude and re-stating an argument that was made ad nauseum before you was both polite and constructive. OH WAIT...

I never claimed to be good at smash so calm your self your sense inferiority should have nothing to do with the discussion, hell you might very well be able to beat me at brawl, I'm not that great, but that neither adds to nor detracts from the arguments i present.

I really don't have a "sense inferiority." Is that like Spidey Sense? For the record, I never claimed that YOU claimed you were any good at Smash. I just stated that I didn't give a fuck. I still don't. But by YOUR logic, since we should only listen to top level Smash players, isn't your own argument null and void since by your own admission you're not very good at the game? Why are you here then? To repeat what some of the top level players have already stated?

SWF has played the role of Rule standardization since its inception so that players interested in competitive play would know what the standard was for any competitive tourney anywhere they occur. Unfortunately Smash doesn't have the luxury of Arcade versions to determine the competitive rule set prior to smash being released on console.

SRK has also played the role rule standardization in multiple fighting games since its inception. But if someone else is running a fighting game tourney on their OWN, we don't flock to their messageboards with how they're "fucking it all up."

With that said I didn't say anything inflammatory, the back room and SWF in general have been determining competitive rule sets since the original smash, and they are most knowledgeable in that regard. I don't really appreciate the closed nature of the back room, but seeing all the new shits at SWF in last 2 months, i can understand why they would want to keep them out. considering their knowledge it seens kind of foolish to totally dismiss years of experience and DEMAND testing, simply because the SRK community has yet to find the same findings it doesn't mean that SWF is wrong, and i don't understand why we would cripple what should be one of the largest tournaments of the year so that we can determine what we already know, most items are imbalancing, and we can't decide on which ones aren't.

Blah blah the backroom is fucked up bullshit meant to keep the top players on top and the bottom-mid players on the bottom-mid. A private backroom where all the big decisions are made in private just reeks of insecurity to me and most of us here at SRK. Thank god that's not the case here. Evo (and the B tourneys before that) was made for the fans, and run in large part BY the fans. Yes the Cannons get the last say but they've been extremely good about letting the fans give their input. This is largely the reason Evo is what it IS TODAY.

Of course EVO is the epitome of fighting tournaments, and if I recall correctly melee had the second largest showing last year. So clearly their is allot of potential in the smash franchise but smash proponents since the first game have recognized that the fighting component of the game is severely hindered by items, and I don't need to make the arguments you've heard allot of them before (comparisons to chess and poker are particularly apt. The part I don't understand is that members of the SRK community, the original proponents of competitive fighting games want to use the brawl (party rule set) for an EVO tourney instead of the brawl (fighting rule set).

Interesting that the comparisons to chess and poker, which were made by me, you found so apt. Could someone on SRK ACTUALLY understand something that SWF also understands? *GASP* But I thought only the enlightened ones on SWF could come up with such an intelligent conclusion! This is idiotic. There are JUST as many people fighting AGAINST items here on SRK.

Hell there are probably MORE SRKer's against items than for them at this point. (So far I can really only think of like 3-4 people who are completely Pro-Items, they just post a lot.) I've been talking about how we should ban items to take out the "chaotic party aspect" of Brawl the whole day and there have been plenty of others on SRK as well! We don't need you SWF elitists making the SAME EXACT ARGUMENTS WE'VE BEEN MAKING and then calling us all idiots for not bowing to your "superior knowledge."

Maybe if one of you guys could actually come up with something we didn't already know? Dive into your "years of Smash Brothers Melee experience and knowledge" and come up with an argument against items that hasn't already been made in this thread.

these facts and opinions aside the only real way to fairly test the items is one at a time against many standardized matches with both varying skill differences
Player 1 - should always play better and win
Player 1 - should win often
Player 1 and Player 2 - should win an even number of matches
then using each item we can determine which items affect results and which don't.

With that said, in my personal opinion if items become the standard I think watching competitive matches will actually be more boring, items are extremely fun to use especially before you totally know what they will do, they add that WTF element to an already interesting game. However what made melee so much fun to watch was the insane combos that players could pull off, but at least in my opinion the mechanics that govern item use would reduce the combo game. Case and point the ray gun is an excellent offensive item, but for just about every character the best possible combo with it would be some kind of lift into possible air hit combo followed by a spike and then continuous fire until you run out of ray gun shots, or your opponent is of the stage and DI's under the fire to recover, its cool to envision and watch the first 2 times, but it makes for rather stale game play with continued use.

a little more about me: i play items on with all my friends, the competitive scene in my areas not that good, but i have a friend who does play quite a bit of competitive smash and MvC2 and well he will win the majority of the time items on or off, but as everyone else has said items on just increase the chance that his superior skill may not clinch victory for him, and in a competitive fighting tournament like EVO, that just doesn't really seem like a sensible game play element to include if it can be removed, and has historically been by the community that plays said game or series.

I agree with you, items SHOULD be banned in high level tourney play. I stated this opinion and argued my points with a lot of different arguments and scenarios all day.


lastly, i never said that you must listen to SWF, I said that they have very valid and relevant input because they have such an intimate understanding of the game. and that idea is supported by people here saying D3 throws smash balls with item appearance set to none and all items off, because it just doesn't happen. or another poster saying the games been out for 4 months if you include japan, when it came out at the beginning of February which gives us a whopping 2 months with it. that is why i say that we shouldn't discount SWF so easily, they have historically done a good job moderating the competitive smash environment, and well they are the most knowledgeable.

(DISCLAIMER) thats not to say that all of you are like the two posters i highlighted above, but it still does adequately demonstrate the problem with a community that has no historical knowledge of game, and limited testing time determining the rule set of what will likely be the flagship tournament of the year, in spite of the knowledge base that is readily available to them. and the SWF scrubs of whom you may even consider me to be one certainly give the competitive smash community limited credibility, but even Mr Wizard being allowed into the Back room shows that not only is the Smash community Invested in remaining the definitive source for smash info (namely SWF and AIB) but that they are confident in the testing and knowledge base they have, to grant access to the powers that be so they can hopefully implement the current competitive model.

now please call me all manner of vile names again, some of my arguments may have been posted in the last 70 pages, I've only read the last 15, and whatever posts have been linked back to therein, and I think that is a pretty reasonable chunk for me to read before posting anything myself, so call me what you want, but as far as I'm concerned Ad hom's are just proof positive of inferior arguments, or an inability to express yourself.

Yes I was the one who mistakenly said the game has been out for 4 months in Japan. Clearly I was wrong. That said, my original statement being that the game is still brand spanking NEW has not been weakened in any way by that particular snafu. As for the guy claiming a smash ball came out from a Dedede throw, I don't really know what he was doing, maybe he was high or something.

Now I give you credit for the disclaimer, because I can come up with quite a NUMBER of scrub-TASTIC comments made by various members of the SWF community, (especially LATELY, wtf?) but in that very disclaimer you stated that those two examples "adequately demonstrates the problem with a community that has no historical knowledge of game."

HOW exactly does my mistaking the release date by two months (A mistake that didn't even weaken the point I was making) and one other guy claiming he got a smash ball when he couldn't have adequately demonstrate ANYTHING? Would it be fair for me to go find 2 random-ass posts from SWF right now and claim they adequately demonstrate why we shouldn't take ANY advice from these clowns?

Basically what you're saying is "You guys shouldn't be allowed to run your own tourney. You should run it our way because we say so." That is a very strong and compelling argument, I must say.

So instead of just posting your own opinions on what rules should be used in this open discussion of ideas, some of you (read: not all of you) SWF guys have chosen to act all high-and-mighty and basically be a bunch of e-preening teenagers about the whole thing. In retrospect, that was the right way to go. It really strengthened all of your arguments, and you guys weren't written off as a bunch of brats at ALL.

...

Wait...

And you know what elitism is? ALL of you guys at SWF can come here and become SRKer's. You can all have a say in how Evo is run. But not many if ANY of us SRK regs can go to SWF and get into your "Back room". Hell most of us would get flamed to hell and then written off for not being an "elite" player.

^_-;

[Reno K]

now that it's a bit more experienced as a fighing game community, it should also fall in line with the same approach everyone takes with EVERY OTHER FIGHTING GAME... learn whats bannable through trial by fire, not fear and what-ifs.

I don't know how this can be said and then the SBR can be blasted for expecting people to fall in line with its views.

I'm saying there are better arguments for why things should be tested - saying to "fall in line" is a good way to get people to do the opposite.

[subt-L]

I don't know how this can be said and then the SBR can be blasted for expecting people to fall in line with its views.

I'm saying there are better arguments for why things should be tested - saying to "fall in line" is a good way to get people to do the opposite.
i think you're arguing semantics instead of the real point i'm getting across.

i apologize if i phrased it in a way that you find offensive, but its meaning does not differ whether i said it like an asshole or not. nor at its core is it anything i haven't been saying since my first post.

arguing over anything not the issue won't solve much. if you want me to rephrase, i'd say:

"if people want to be responsible for how the game is played for years to come, then actually play the game with what it has to offer"

...

"or shut the fuck up and cry into your pillow more"

heh. sorry, that last part was uncalled for, but i'm keep with the theme of my previous post.

[Scamp]

There isn't much evidence that anyone in the backroom is testing items at all. That's been brought up multiple times in this thread without answer.

Most of the people in this thread just need to stop posting. Wobbles is on the right track. This thread is 70 pages long and the discussion of individual items is only about 3 pages.


I'm reasonably certain that Wobbles is in the SWF back room. So is Alastair Crowley. But I'll let them speak for themselves to be certain.


From Mr Wizard's post; if you can't prove that an item is broken, it stays. Not the other way around. Likewise, if we can't find the time to test it, every item stays.

Stop going nostalgic on everyone.


Wiz also had a post that said that no rules have been decided yet, hence the discussion continues.


Now I give you credit for the disclaimer, because I can come up with quite a NUMBER of scrub-TASTIC comments made by various members of the SWF community, (especially LATELY, wtf?) but in that very disclaimer you stated that those two examples "adequately demonstrates the problem with a community that has no historical knowledge of game."

This kind of response is bugging me more than ever. Unless someone comes in and announces they're from (and/or representing, which is a dumb notion) SWF, how do you know they're a part of that community? And if so, how do you know how much? Likewise, if someone posts here and doesn't say this, does this automatically make them a part of the SRK community?

The debate should be about rules, not SRK vs. SWF. It's easy to generalize into this, but it simply isn't the case for everyone.

[Galactic]

This kind of response is bugging me more than ever. Unless someone comes in and announces they're from (and/or representing, which is a dumb notion) SWF, how do you know they're a part of that community? And if so, how do you know how much? Likewise, if someone posts here and doesn't say this, does this automatically make them a part of the SRK community?

The debate should be about rules, not SRK vs. SWF. It's easy to generalize into this, but it simply isn't the case for everyone.

This is EXACTLY what I've been saying. The SWF people could have just come in here and posted their opinions on what should/shouldn't be done WITHOUT bringing up how little they percieve SRK people to know and how much better SWF is. But that hasn't been the case, has it?

Why do they come in here with the attitude that SRK owes it to THEM to conform to THEIR rules? It's not like they MADE the goddamn game or anything, they just PLAY it a lot. SRK doesn't tell others how to run their tourneys even though we might play most of the fighting games a lot more than they do. (unless they ask for advice, of course.)

Again, I don't want to generalize, I have no hate for SWF people besides the few dumbshits that decided that they had to be assholes in here. I still believe we SHOULD for the most part take on their rule sets. I find the rule set itself to be fair and balanced. I just have a problem with the way a number of their members are carrying themselves.

^_-;

[Scamp]

Galactic I agree with your last post, and those from SWF who are saying "listen to us because we've played the game longer" deserve the response they've gotten. The problem is that some people who have argued no-items (good arguments or not) have also gotten that kind of response, and that just leads to more trouble.

But the fact is that people responding with "SRK rules, we do it this way so GTFO" are just as bad. Just because one person acts a certain way does not make it okay to react in the same way. It just puts you at the same level, which doesn't make sense if it's a level you're arguing about.

So both sides are guilty in a discussion that shouldn't involve sides at all. If you need to make a point about either community, go ahead and make it. There are valid points there. But any kind of argument amounting to "our way or else" is never helpful, even if you're responding to such an argument in kind.

[Shaman]

Galactic
I'm sorry i offended you it was hardly my intention, i won't lower myself to what seems to be the standard of name calling on the internet, but i will say,
that somehow people keep reading into my posts as "SWF IS THE RIGHT WAY, THE ONLY WAY"
and thats not wat I'm saying.

the best analogy would be if the NFL and xfl existed (srry srk for this example you are the XFL)
now most people recognize the NFL as the standard but for whatever reason the XFL has control of the suberbowl this year (the NFLs biggest even at least this year)
there you can easily see why the NFL is being so vocal (SWF) in this case, and i'm simply saying, that they have compelling arguments which some people choose to counter with equally compelling arguments and i think we should consider those opinions with some weight whether you like their management style or not, Mr wizard recognizes this, and i'm simply trying to point it out to everyone else. which isn't to say they are the only voice, but simply saying "FUCK YOU FASCISTS" isn't getting us anywhere.
and its hard to argue against my proposed testing system, but since we honestly don't have the time for that pre-EVO, i don't see why we would go with items on, when we already have data that supports the other style of play. AT LEAST until we have conclusive results.
because seriously reinventing the wheel is hard work.

anyways since everyone just keeps swearing at me I'll stop asserting my opinions they certainly aren't worthy of the respect i give to your ideas. peace

[CyntalanMaelstrom]

the best analogy would be if the NFL and xfl existed (srry srk for this example you are the XFL)
now most people recognize the NFL as the standard but for whatever reason the XFL has control of the suberbowl this year (the NFLs biggest even at least this year)
there you can easily see why the NFL is being so vocal (SWF) in this case, and i'm simply saying, that they have compelling arguments which some people choose to counter with equally compelling arguments and i think we should consider those opinions with some weight whether you like their management style or not, Mr wizard recognizes this, and i'm simply trying to point it out to everyone else. which isn't to say they are the only voice, but simply saying "FUCK YOU FASCISTS" isn't getting us anywhere.
and its hard to argue against my proposed testing system, but since we honestly don't have the time for that pre-EVO, i don't see why we would go with items on, when we already have data that supports the other style of play. AT LEAST until we have conclusive results.
because seriously reinventing the wheel is hard work.

I'd like to take this analogy and instead relate XFL and NFL to Brawl and Melee, respectively. Melee's tried and true, Brawl's new and different. What we're seeing in the rift is people seeing that XFL might be interesting and try like it is, and people who think XFL sucks and wants to change XFL to be as much like NFL as possible in order to make it better. Now, XFL might actually suck, but be worth it to change over time if it indeed makes it better, but the fact remains that XFL is still its own and was made to be different for a reason.

[Galactic]

Dude, that's hardly an apt comparison. Evo has been the "Superbowl" of fighting games for a damn long time now and at NO POINT has SRK not been involved in it. SWL has never been the standard of fighting games, just one game.

If anything Smash by itself is the "newcomer" to many longtime serious fighting fans. And Brawl is a new game altogether.

I'm sorry but the analogy is a terrible one. Evo cannot be defined as a Superbowl because Evo is not one game, it a tourney made up of multiple games. Smash is just a PART of Evo. And as I recall, unlike your NFL/XFL comparison, SRK has been around quite a while longer than SWL, and yes, EVEN in the smash community. The XFL was an upstart league full of nobodies, but some of the best Smash players have been or currently are members of SRK. In fact, there have been a number of in-depth Smash discussions dating back to the N64 days here on these very boards.

^_-;

[Shaman]

wow... i don't ask for much, i already know u think I'm a dumb ass but just think about my post for a second, i said EVO is the fucking super bowl, hence why i said that its run by srk, and SWf is all uppity because last years evo's second largest event was smash, and it was the largest smash tourney to date, hence as a smash minded community evo likely being the largest competitive event for smash of the year, they want to have a say, because as the largest event of the year, and likely the first large one, it may very easily set precedent

regardless of the historical ties the two communities have had, its hard to argue that srk isn't new to the smash scene, only showing any real interest beyond a little discussion last year.

and i know the history of the two boards, just 'cause I registered yesterday doesn't mean its the first time I've been to srk, I'm actually pretty sure i have an account from a couple years ago, but i had so many web identities back then, i can't be bothered to figure out what my account info was..

I must be a masochist, i just keep comin' back for more...

[lamewadd]

srk isn't new to the smash scene, only showing any real interest beyond a little discussion last year.


Absolutely incorrect. SRK and Smashboarders have had Brawl for an equal length of time.

[Shaman]

srk isn't new to the smash scene, only showing any real interest beyond a little discussion last year.

Absolutely incorrect. SRK and Smashboarders have had Brawl for an equal length of time.

did i say brawl, god what is with people and selectively reading what they want to read so that i look like an asshole, read the fucking statement is all i ask, don't just quickly glance at it, and make assumptions based on your own disposition.

[Shade]

did i say brawl, god what is with people and selectively reading what they want to read so that i look like an asshole, read the fucking statement is all i ask, don't just quickly glance at it, and make assumptions based on your own disposition.

You can't make a broad generalization like that, however. I've been playing Smash Bros. since the original Smash Bros. title on the 64. Just because it's getting more attention now, doesn't mean we all just decided to play Brawl, and it's our first Smash title.

[lamewadd]

did i say brawl, god what is with people and selectively reading what they want to read so that i look like an asshole, read the fucking statement is all i ask, don't just quickly glance at it, and make assumptions based on your own disposition.

You look like an asshole on your own, don't worry. Fact is, SRK has had as much time with the game. The difference is that we're saying the proper approach be taken with the game. The "well, it's close enough!" method of the smashers is simply moronic.

[Shaman]

again did i say it was your first brawl, i said, this is the first time the SRK community has taken on a smash game as a competitive title (excluding evo last year, since it used the already determined rule set from swf)

a statement about an entity is about said entity, but does not necessarily encompass all of its constituent parts. yet again people jump to the most offensive possible meaning that can possibly be attributed to my words

EDIT:

You look like an asshole on your own, don't worry. Fact is, SRK has had as much time with the game. The difference is that we're saying the proper approach be taken with the game. The "well, it's close enough!" method of the smashers is simply moronic.

no, your being elitist, your doing the same thing your bitching about swf doing "our way is the right way, and the reality is, there is no right way."

thats why i proposed the sensible thing to do, which is stick to the old rule set, since the changes to items are pretty minimal, until we can do the proper testing, i know it sounds like a major concession, especially since you know you do it the proper way, and all others are morons. but really, does appeasing those moronic smashers for a little while, while we determine whats what really for the peace it would give to the community i think its a worthwhile concession, but then i guess I'm biased against items anyways.

here's where i suggested a good course of action for determining which items are in or not, not that u probably care to read it, but if u do its right here (http://forums.shoryuken.com/showpost.php?p=4993831&postcount=1785)

[subt-L]

again did i say it was your first brawl, i said, this is the first time the SRK community has taken on a smash game as a competitive title (excluding evo last year, since it used the already determined rule set from swf)
but the first tournament go! was items on. everything except healing items. edit: so was the second one.

it seems like way too much for people to follow suit with a new game.

[nasir]

Guys, knock off the personal attacks and arguing.

This is the EVO BRAWLS RULES DISCUSSIONS thread, keep it that way.

I'm getting rather sick of all the cross name callings.
Make your points and defend them or debate against other people's views.



For what it's worth, what's wrong with having a new game that's not fully explored or fully defined yet?

Even if EVO had items, and it ended up horribly, that doesn't mean it won't get another shot next year with a more refined ruleset. Major tournaments have had new games in their lineups plenty of times, there has to be a first time for everything.

Another game in the EVO lineup is Super Turbo HD Remix. That game isn't even OUT yet, but it's still going to be in EVO. I don't see any mass hysteria worrying about the balancing issues or its viability. Don't give me crap that it's based on ST which is a tournament staple. It's still a new game in its own right with its own tweaks and modifcations, and no matter how hard Sirlin (with all due respect to him of course) tries to balance it perfectly, stuff may slip through the cracks and it may end up with some broken stuff. But, why worry about that?

Give Brawl a chance to evolve and show support for it. Who's to say it won't be back next year with all items off/on with a completey different rule set than this years? I'm pretty sure one way to make sure Smash isn't back is to make it such a bad experience for this years organizers that they won't want to have it, like a certain other unnamed EVO game.

[mastermind]

snip

Like a majority of the stuff said in this thread, what I'm about to say is totally out of context:

HAHA you put BAN WAVEJERKING as your user title :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[lamewadd]

no, your being elitist, your doing the same thing your bitching about swf doing "our way is the right way, and the reality is, there is no right way."

thats why i proposed the sensible thing to do, which is stick to the old rule set, since the changes to items are pretty minimal, until we can do the proper testing, i know it sounds like a major concession, especially since you know you do it the proper way, and all others are morons. but really, does appeasing those moronic smashers for a little while, while we determine whats what really for the peace it would give to the community i think its a worthwhile concession, but then i guess I'm biased against items anyways.

Are you serious?

Is he serious?

The sensible thing to do to find out how "broken" items are is to NOT play them? Yeah, yeah, that's perfectly sound logic right there. The ONLY way to do testing is to do tournies with them. Period. End of story. That's how it has been and how it should be and it's the only way that makes sense.

[Shaman]

i'm not really arguing with you on that last point,
but if there is any point that this discussion has highlighted it is that
just because its the way things have been done, doesn't mean its the way they are done.

matter of fact if we did things the old way, we would play smash with no items just like before, which is the exact opposite of your point. so playing the old is best card isn't acceptable, unless you apply it to all situations.

and i think many people myself included would argue that using an experiment approach like i previous outlined, would give us the best possible results for what kind of affects items have on Brawl outcomes.

also just because you say its the only way, doesn't make it so... sorry.

oh and i suppose its superfluous at this point but yes, i'm deadly serious, or at least as serious as you are.

[CyntalanMaelstrom]

but the first tournament go! was items on. everything except healing items. edit: so was the second one.

it seems like way too much for people to follow suit with a new game.

All the TG's but 6 were, really. In fact, most of the WC tourneys were items tourneys 'til around 2k4. After enough testing and experience, they were deemed unsuitable. Why exactly should we treat Brawl any different?

[Corner-Trap]

If most of the smash players who actually attend tournaments prefer items off, then wouldn't it make sense to go that route? It would be much wiser to choose the rule set that pleases the majority, not the minority.

[lamewadd]

i'm not really arguing with you on that last point,
but if there is any point that this discussion has highlighted it is that
just because its the way things have been done, doesn't mean its the way they are done.It's the way things should, and hopefully will, be done.

matter of fact if we did things the old way, we would play smash with no items just like before, which is the exact opposite of your point. so playing the old is best card isn't acceptable, unless you apply it to all situations....you didn't think this one out very much, did you?

[Shaman]

lol ok granted i suppose the oldest way would be all settings default, but u got my point did u lamewadd?

[Keits]

Any experimental approch that tries to compare results to samples with different rulels is autofail.

THe argument for consistancy is that the top items on players wll win with the same frequency as the top items off players win those events. Not that they are the same people.

[KMD]

If most of the smash players who actually attend tournaments prefer items off, then wouldn't it make sense to go that route? It would be much wiser to choose the rule set that pleases the majority, not the minority.

Exactly. It isn't going to do much good if we have this drama and if/when we come to a decision, most players balk due to items. See what the general preference is, then develop a ruleset from there. Consider both SRK and SWF in this, we da best, but we aren't the only competitive Brawl players.

[Daemonk]

I don't expect the best items-on player to beat the best items-off player. Vice versa. The playstyles are different enough where that won't happen.

There are situations in items-on games where you don't want to chase because you want to control territory or situations where you need to come back as fast as possible so your opponent can't get to an item. In items-off games you are allowed edging techniques where you jump off the stage purposely and come back with a kick. You pretty much have free reign over where you want to go in item off games because you don't have to worry about items spawning. Both requires different enough strategy.

[Septimus Prime]

If most of the smash players who actually attend tournaments prefer items off, then wouldn't it make sense to go that route? It would be much wiser to choose the rule set that pleases the majority, not the minority.
CO2 emissions from cars damage the ozone layer, and we should probably try to slowly replace gas powered cars. But most people drive gas-powered cars. Wouldn't it make sense to just keep driving them?

Think about it. Your red herring sucks.

[Galactic]

CO2 emissions from cars damage the ozone layer, and we should probably try to slowly replace gas powered cars. But most people drive gas-powered cars. Wouldn't it make sense to just keep driving them?

Think about it. Your red herring sucks.


Aaaaand with that, I'm leaving this thread. See you fuckers at Evo if I can manage to go. I'll play you guys items on or off, whatever.

^_-;

[Keits]

I'm sick of the 'players who actually attend tournaments' statement.

Lots of us didnt attend melee tournaments because we thought it was a bad game. We like Brawl, though, and to assume we wont be attending is silly.

[Shaman]

how could anyone dislike melee *har har* :lol:

i still advocate testing before changing the old rule set, i can see where the testing mindset evolved from the fighting games that gave birth to the SRK community, but I'm not so sure that principle is necessary to uphold to a smash game, which is so unconventional that not only does it break all the rules, but depending how you play it, it can almost magically change genre.

[Keits]

There is no old brawl ruleset. Grandfathering rules is not an option.

Testing is being done. We have footage and experiences to recount. SWF has brought us nothing but babying and preference. Please show us the broken, or be prepared for the possibility that Evo will have items and stages available.

[Daemonk]

I haven't seen really any evidence/footage from either side. The closest thing I've seen are the youtube video of the teams items-on tournament. But then I am not really actively searching for them. We should compile all footage and evidence into the first post here or sticky a new thread with everything so we can discuss it here.

[Henaki]

I'm sick of the 'players who actually attend tournaments' statement.

Lots of us didnt attend melee tournaments because we thought it was a bad game. We like Brawl, though, and to assume we wont be attending is silly.

Okay?

You still didn't attend tournaments.CO2 emissions from cars damage the ozone layer, and we should probably try to slowly replace gas powered cars. But most people drive gas-powered cars. Wouldn't it make sense to just keep driving them?

Think about it. Your red herring sucks.
It's a VIDEO GAME TOURNAMENT, like what is chosen has any bearing on our lives whatsoever (besides one person possibly not winning a few hundred bucks).

[Septimus Prime]

It's FAULTY LOGIC, of which I simply provided another, more extreme example.

[WraithGadra]

Okay?

You still didn't attend tournaments.
snip


Melee tournaments. Different beast altogether.

[COUM]

I'm sick of the 'players who actually attend tournaments' statement.

Lots of us didnt attend melee tournaments because we thought it was a bad game. We like Brawl, though, and to assume we wont be attending is silly.

Evo has never included games based on the hypothetical people who would theoretically attend or A3 would've gotten a spot by now. I support your cause, but you really need to prove that your rule set can get people to attend.

Melee tournaments. Different beast altogether.

GGAC is a different beast from GG Slash too, but you didn't see anyone arguing that Slash community was a completely irrelevant factor in determining the direction of AC.

[alphazealot]

Sample: My stance hasn't changed at all. If you would have actually read the posts in this thread you would understand that. I don't view items as something that is broken or not (though this may also be the case) but rather as something that either adds or detracts from the game based on your view (preference).

---

There are positive and negative aspects to each side of the argument. Some say items are a part of the game, others (like me) believe them to be additions to the core game.

Looking at it from my perspective, where items are additions, it would make sense to test, individually, each item, one at a time, to prove that they should be on.

Looking at it from the other perspective, you have to use a subtractive approach, where you have everything on, then turn them off.

(Skill is obviously a subjective term but I think its understood here)
Positives to items:
Some spawns can be won based on skill
The application of the item takes skill
Avoiding the item takes skill

Negatives to items:
Some spawns can be won based on luck

Neutral (either way):
Kills more likely to come from items > games are shorter as a result

The question is whether those positives outweigh the negatives, and to determine this we would have to figure out the consequences of each.

One thing that I think needs to be pointed out it is much harder to avoid an item than it is to use it and the result is that the item holder is the one who will likely win an encounter. Lets stop exaggerating that everyone immediately has a super ability and stands an equal chance of avoiding an item as they do from getting hit by it, it is not equal at all, you will be hit by an item much more often than you will be able to avoid it.

[Reno K]

There is no old brawl ruleset. Grandfathering rules is not an option.

Testing is being done. We have footage and experiences to recount. SWF has brought us nothing but babying and preference. Please show us the broken, or be prepared for the possibility that Evo will have items and stages available.

To get tourney "evidence", you're going to have to get SWF TOs to actually consider the ruleset; and they're going to have to deal with the fact that their tourney won't be seen seriously, and that they could lose attendance.

It's also not the 'brokeness' I'd say - it's the idea of an outside random factor determining the outcome of a high level match. A lot of SWF is not okay with that. Whether that's right or wrong, they're the ones going to the tournaments, and what are TOs to do besides alienate their tournament?

And how much evidence is good enough? I can imagine that the second an item determines the match between two top players, items will have lost the debate in the eyes of many.

[Keits]

How do you determine if the 'item' won the match, or if the player won the match (and just happened to get the last kill with items)?

Its going to be a lot of butthurt people saying they wouldnt have lost if the raygun didnt spawn. But really, they shouldnt have let themselves be an easy raygun target. Practicing the game with these items/stages would quickly show anyone with any potential for high level play that there are tons of ways to avoid every item in the game.

Joining an items on / stages on event should forfeit your right to bitch about a loss to 'items'. But we all know it wont, because the 'high level' melee players have an agenda. And its pretty obvious that its to continue winning money without learning a new skillset.

[Hogosha]

How do you determine if the 'item' won the match, or if the player won the match (and just happened to get the last kill with items)?

Its going to be a lot of butthurt people saying they wouldnt have lost if the raygun didnt spawn. But really, they shouldnt have let themselves be an easy raygun target. Practicing the game with these items/stages would quickly show anyone with any potential for high level play that there are tons of ways to avoid every item in the game.

Joining an items on / stages on event should forfeit your right to bitch about a loss to 'items'. But we all know it wont, because the 'high level' melee players have an agenda. And its pretty obvious that its to continue winning money without learning a new skillset.

If I go to forward+B someone with Zero Suit and, right when I do the command, a bob-omb or blast box shows up and kills me because of it, that's when the item won the match. Any "agenda" doesn't apply when dumb luck costs a match.

There are other examples, Keits, and you know it. Quit being a dick.



How about we get back to the discussion about what items shouldn't be in tourneys? Mr. Wizard's shuffling through the back room at SWF, gathering information and test results and such, so what happens in here will have little to no effect. I'd be opting for the "little" end of the spectrum more than the "no" end if I were most of you pro-item folk, so get talking about how to make the tourneys actually competitive WITH items rather than making the game Mario Party.

[Keits]

Oh I agree, Hogosha. And I've already posted that i wouldnt be butthurt if bob'ombs ended up going away.

And about what Wizard is doing in the backroom, I wouldnt assume so much. Last I asked, he said 'lol, they want to ban EVERYTHING'.

[Corner-Trap]

This backwards logic doesn't work on me. As I said before, we should choose the rule set that pleases the most players.

[Keits]

This backwards logic doesn't work on me. As I said before, we should choose the rule set that pleases the most players.

You ONLY say that because you are currently part of the majority. Mob mentality is what doesnt work on me.

[Corner-Trap]

You ONLY say that because you are currently part of the majority. Mob mentality is what doesnt work on me.

Just because I'm part of the majority doesn't erase the fact that it is the majority. Why wouldn't it make sense to go with the rule set that pleases the most and pisses off the least?

[subt-L]

Just because I'm part of the majority doesn't erase the fact that it is the majority. Why wouldn't it make sense to go with the rule set that pleases the most and pisses off the least?

maybe because as a community they are wrong with thier approach to the game?

they are trying to play the game they like to play it. cool.
did they explore any other avenues in depth before eliminating a large portion of the game? not likely.

just because more people like it one way doesn't make it right. it doesn't make it wrong either. people can enjoy whichever way they like to play. i played no items with a bunch of friends last night, because it was the way they liked to play.

but for tournament, something that is supposed to represent the game at its highest level, you have to think that the game would need to show gameplay at its highest level.

right now the debate is which one does that. do you think items off, random and troublesome stages off does that? maybe it does. do you think that items on, stages limited slightly does that? depends on your point of view.

regardless of your point of view, for future proofing this agenda, there really can only be one way of finding out the truth, and that is by playing with weapons on.

with weapons on, there is still a majority of normal fighting, and it isn't like everyone has a weapon at all times. when the troublesome weapons get found out, they are eliminated, and the game becomes refocused. and along that line, you will see defenses to items and ways around items, and really good usage of items that may or may not add to the game.

if in the end, this is unsuccessful, then it will turn to no items, which is fine. because at that point, the game would have at least tried to advance itself.

if items are off, there is no going back to items. if people get set with no items, there's really no incentive to try items. we're taking off smashballs, which may add a great change of pace for the game. we're taking off throwable weapons, which may be the answer to 90% of the game current problems with items off. we're taking off projectiles which may be some characters only answer to get in safely against a shdl falco.

if this were any other game out side of the smash brothers line of games, it would be treated much differently, don't you think? if no one knew anything about the game, we'd have 95% of the people playing the game with everything on, with alot of varying views on whats good and whats not.

but now, we have a bunch of people who played the previous game saying that thier preference is to play the same as the previous game played.

tell me that is a good reason to follow the status quo on this one.

[Shade]

This backwards logic doesn't work on me. As I said before, we should choose the rule set that pleases the most players.

That's not how it works, and it never will. Stop saying this over and over again.

[Daemonk]

okay let's start compiling some footage/evidence pro/con items instead of bitching about SWF or SRK because thats not going anywhere.

[Corner-Trap]

snip.

Like I said before, I don't have too much of a problem with items on tourneys. It's just that this the Evo Brawl Rules Discussion thread, and I would like to see Evo get as much attendance as possible. So thats why I'm suggesting to go with the tier list that draws in the larger crowd. We could have majors with items on and go your route, but for Evo I would like them off.

That's not how it works, and it never will. Stop saying this over and over again.

I've only said this like twice.

[COUM]

That's not how it works, and it never will. Stop saying this over and over again.

Uh, isn't that how it's always worked with Evo? Aren't the games with the largest followings shoo-ins for inclusion? :confused:

[subt-L]

Uh, isn't that how it's always worked with Evo? Aren't the games with the largest followings shoo-ins for inclusion? :confused:
i agree. this isn't as invalid as people make it seem. its probably the only real reason to consider items-off right now.

its not that its invalid, its more of what it says for the community and the game.

i'd really like if people took this game for what it is, a new game, and played it like its a new game. just like the round count, game speed, and damage ratios/life bars for certain games in a series must be evaluated on a case by case basis, i feel items and stages must be evaluated for this game and this game only.

[Pimp Willy]

okay let's start compiling some footage/evidence pro/con items instead of bitching about SWF or SRK because thats not going anywhere.

I would point you to The Games II's recent postings of a SEVERLY limited items on tourney. In that, I never saw any situations arise which degraded the game, and yet I keep hearing how items on were bad for that tourney.

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=getyourtournament

I saw some players use items skillfully and advance (Rechipherus, for instance) and I saw some players make bad choices and get outplayed, and other players who simply dont seem aware enough about items nor have experience with them (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M07iAnONlPc Kouryu, who gets owned with a turtle shell while his opponent dies. HYPE moment).

[lamewadd]

LOL@that guy getting ruined by the shell :lol:

[Shaman]

FFA Brawl items finals R5 - DSF vs. Lucky (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1XNesCoOhY)
This obviously doesn't demonstrate how all items are bad, but at the end of the match 4:40
D3 has the advantage, the camera is zoomed in on the action, and D3 has control, he combos marth back, and when the camera pans, it turns out a hot head had spawned, immediately D3 has lost the advantage, even though he made no errors. D3 then continues to pressure Marth, and knocks him of the stage, actually the item knocks the D3 with advantage off, befor he gets ko'd by it he goes to recover after failing to KO marth, and the Hothead marth gained by pure luck spikes him... hot heads should be out. And I think it nicely frames the problems with other items, the player can be doing everything right, and still lose advantage due to items, I mean whats he supposed to do, control the camera?

[UltraDavid]

That's not what happens at all. The Dedede player fails to see the hothead coming and gets launched by it, he recovers and goes to knock Marth out but Marth dodges, and then for some reason he just falls to his death. He didn't get hit by the hothead again; if he had he would have been launched, and you can see that he just continues to fall at the same rate.

[Daemonk]

FFA Brawl items finals R5 - DSF vs. Lucky (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1XNesCoOhY)
This obviously doesn't demonstrate how all items are bad, but at the end of the match 4:40
D3 has the advantage, the camera is zoomed in on the action, and D3 has control, he combos marth back, and when the camera pans, it turns out a hot head had spawned, immediately D3 has lost the advantage, even though he made no errors. D3 then continues to pressure Marth, and knocks him of the stage, actually the item knocks the D3 with advantage off, befor he gets ko'd by it he goes to recover after failing to KO marth, and the Hothead marth gained by pure luck spikes him... hot heads should be out. And I think it nicely frames the problems with other items, the player can be doing everything right, and still lose advantage due to items, I mean whats he supposed to do, control the camera?

The hothead spawn definately disrupted D3's flow. Marth was lucky in getting that spawned right near him. Its pretty much a free interrupt. But not a free kill.

On the other hand, the hothead could have been dodged. Instead of keep going offensive, D3 could have played defensive for a while until the hothead makes its rounds.

It really sucks for the D3 player. I probably would be pissed if it happened to me during a finals match or something. I guess it depends on people's threshold on how luck influence the match.

[Pimp Willy]

Yeah I have to agree, that match both players use and evade items fine. Each used items they wanted, neutralized those they dont (d3 eating the hothead, for example), and continuing to fight fine. D3 was losing the match, at high %'s, and is knocked way off the stage, giving marth stage control. In the amount of time that was spent that far off the stage, it was nearly guaranteed that SOME item would spawn on that side, since neither saw one spawn near them (remember, 25 seconds on low). Marth gets the hothead, and throw it. D3 continues to play like it doesn't exist (short hop attack, for instance) and gets hit by it.

He could have recovered here fine, but decides to put pressure on marth instead and go for a ko (valid strategic choice, seeing as he was behind in % and wanted to go for a KO). Marth is able to air dodge this, and D3 falls to his death of his own accord. It doesn't look like the hothead even hits him as he falls, honestly. and if the pulse from the hothead somehow DID hit him, he knew it was on the stage when he took the calculated risk to chase instead of going back to the stage, eat the hothead, and put the match back to neutral.

[AzN_Skater]

Yeah I have to agree, that match both players use and evade items fine. Each used items they wanted, neutralized those they dont (d3 eating the hothead, for example), and continuing to fight fine. D3 was losing the match, at high %'s, and is knocked way off the stage, giving marth stage control. In the amount of time that was spent that far off the stage, it was nearly guaranteed that SOME item would spawn on that side, since neither saw one spawn near them (remember, 25 seconds on low). Marth gets the hothead, and throw it. D3 continues to play like it doesn't exist (short hop attack, for instance) and gets hit by it.

He could have recovered here fine, but decides to put pressure on marth instead and go for a ko (valid strategic choice, seeing as he was behind in % and wanted to go for a KO). Marth is able to air dodge this, and D3 falls to his death of his own accord. It doesn't look like the hothead even hits him as he falls, honestly. and if the pulse from the hothead somehow DID hit him, he knew it was on the stage when he took the calculated risk to chase instead of going back to the stage, eat the hothead, and put the match back to neutral.

Really good analysis. Also, this video shows a lot of how items affect the game in a positive way. At :50, Marth decides to go for the freezie instead of edgeguarding. Same thing happens at 1:20 when Dedede goes for the green shell.

[Daemonk]

Yeah I have to agree, that match both players use and evade items fine. Each used items they wanted, neutralized those they dont (d3 eating the hothead, for example), and continuing to fight fine. D3 was losing the match, at high %'s, and is knocked way off the stage, giving marth stage control. In the amount of time that was spent that far off the stage, it was nearly guaranteed that SOME item would spawn on that side, since neither saw one spawn near them (remember, 25 seconds on low). Marth gets the hothead, and throw it. D3 continues to play like it doesn't exist (short hop attack, for instance) and gets hit by it.

He could have recovered here fine, but decides to put pressure on marth instead and go for a ko (valid strategic choice, seeing as he was behind in % and wanted to go for a KO). Marth is able to air dodge this, and D3 falls to his death of his own accord. It doesn't look like the hothead even hits him as he falls, honestly. and if the pulse from the hothead somehow DID hit him, he knew it was on the stage when he took the calculated risk to chase instead of going back to the stage, eat the hothead, and put the match back to neutral.

I agree with most of what you said. But I don't think Marth got that hothead because of stage control. D3 was actually gaining territory at the time the hothead spawned. It really was just dumb luck imo. But even with dumb luck, that D3 should still have had a chance. The hothead wasn't really that detrimental to his play. It certainly didn't directly cause him to fall at the end.

[Shaman]

yes, it looks like i misinterpreted, and the hothead did not spike him, however it still gave marth stage control that he gained through dumb luck, and that D3 lost by sheer dumb luck, certainly the D3 player may not have approached the item situation as best he could, but at his percentage, ignoring an opportunity for KO wasn't much of an option, especially against marth with his Disjointed Hitbox..

[Keits]

yes, it looks like i misinterpreted, and the hothead did not spike him, however it still gave marth stage control that he gained through dumb luck, and that D3 lost by sheer dumb luck, certainly the D3 player may not have approached the item situation as best he could, but at his percentage, ignoring an opportunity for KO wasn't much of an option, especially against marth with his Disjointed Hitbox..

1.) hothead is not 'stage control', nor are pokemon or assist trophies. They help you control space, but you dont own the stage in any way.

2.) hothead ONLY behaves this way on a few levels, so this is an example of the test group only testing select items on select stages, and not getting the big picture.

[subt-L]

I agree with most of what you said. But I don't think Marth got that hothead because of stage control. D3 was actually gaining territory at the time the hothead spawned. It really was just dumb luck imo. But even with dumb luck, that D3 should still have had a chance. The hothead wasn't really that detrimental to his play. It certainly didn't directly cause him to fall at the end.

but marth had his position already established before d3's pushed him backwards.

the fact that the item was random, the fact that it spawned behind him was because he had control of the stage prior to being pushed back. knocking someone off the stage pretty much gives you everything behind you.

if it spawned right next to him or on the opposite part of the stage, it was really d3's being off the platform that gave marth control of that item. if d3 hadn't caught the upB that resulted in him getting sent off the stage, he's the one who may have been in control of it.

and even then, as stated, it wasn't that bad of a mistake, and he could've recovered after being hit by the hothead, not to mention deal with it before that point. but it's interesting how much thought can be put into what he should and should've done as it concerns that specific situation. but what happened happened... i'm sure if given the chance, lucky might deal with it much differently the next time it comes up.

[UltraDavid]

gave marth stage control that he gained through dumb luck
The Marth player didn't gain it through dumb luck, he gained it because he controlled the left part of the stage and the Dedede player controlled the right part. It was luck that the item spawned in Marth's side of the stage, but that Marth controlled any part of the stage was a mistake by Dedede and a job well done by Marth. So, yes, it was luck in the most immediate sense, but that luck was the result of real decisions, successes, and failures on the part of the human players, and there's nothing dumb about that.

[Henaki]

The Marth player didn't gain it through dumb luck, he gained it because he controlled the left part of the stage and the Dedede player controlled the right part. It was luck that the item spawned in Marth's side of the stage, but that Marth controlled any part of the stage was a mistake by Dedede and a job well done by Marth. So, yes, it was luck in the most immediate sense, but that luck was the result of real decisions, successes, and failures on the part of the human players, and there's nothing dumb about that.

One has no foresight as to whether an item will spawn on the left or right side, there's no strategy involved by "control