"Official" 'Item Standard Play' Thread UPDATE 8/21

1235

Comments

  • KeitsKeits OneTrueGame.com Joined: Posts: 8,765 mod
    I dont see how you could ever put hammers in the same sentence as hearts. Most of the high level players playing with items would actively avoid picking up hammers due to how easy they are to counter and badly they can backfire.
    Visit OneTrueGame.com for information on DIVEKICK, Tunnel, and future projects.
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    There is no standard play for items, and high level players never play with them seriously because no legitimate tournament ever runs their shit with items. In other words, this thread is for noobs who know nothing about the real tournament Brawl scene.

    SRK already wised up and realized how ridiculous their rule set was last year. They hired AllisBrawl to run their Brawl tournament at EVO this year, and they're using TRUE standard rules (no items). You guys should get with the times, because this idea of "standard play with items" is a total joke for anyone takes this game seriously.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    There is no standard play for items, and high level players never play with them seriously because no legitimate tournament ever runs their shit with items. In other words, this thread is for noobs who know nothing about the real tournament Brawl scene.

    SRK already wised up and realized how ridiculous their rule set was last year. They hired AllisBrawl to run their Brawl tournament at EVO this year, and they're using TRUE standard rules (no items). You guys should get with the times, because this idea of "standard play with items" is a total joke for anyone takes this game seriously.

    More like SRK realized that the community is stubborn as a mule and would rather play a game that's admittedly garbage the way they're playing it than actually take time to learn something. Evo got AiB to do it 'cause it isn't worth their time anymore. Damn shame that other, well designed fighters that this community enjoys, all came out and nuked all interest for this game, 'cause competent people were finally coming to the reality that the shit's not broke, you're just too lazy and unwilling to change games (basically moving from Melee to, well, anything else) to even realize it. Now kindly return to Smashboards. :wink:
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    The only items I truly think are bad are heart tomato, and curry, the star doesn't last that long its easy to run away from for a few seconds and the fan just SDI/TDI out of it, its not very hard. Most other items may be really good but they can backfire p. hard read hammer/bumper.

    Plus I have played a few no cash tournies with some people ranked in the state in smashboards, guess what they played it and had fun. Guess which people whined and complained the most, that is right the people who lost in round 1-2. Then when we went to the non-item tourney they came for, guess when they lost that is right round 1-2. I'm not saying this is a better way of playing just that its also pretty fun, and if you want to put some money on the table for it, that is fine too, but if you play these tournaments you will find out it tends to be the same people who win both the item and non-item tourneys. Though they may use different characters.
  • FlugaFluga ???WHAT GOES HERE??? Joined: Posts: 358
    There is no standard play for items, and high level players never play with them seriously because no legitimate tournament ever runs their shit with items. In other words, this thread is for noobs who know nothing about the real tournament Brawl scene.

    SRK already wised up and realized how ridiculous their rule set was last year. They hired AllisBrawl to run their Brawl tournament at EVO this year, and they're using TRUE standard rules (no items). You guys should get with the times, because this idea of "standard play with items" is a total joke for anyone takes this game seriously.

    Holy shit. Please don't tell me you were serious. There are plenty of ISP tournaments out there.
  • InuInu Joined: Posts: 3
    Just my personal thoughts on how brawl with items might ought to be played.

    I know they're entirely different games but I like to view brawl with items, similar to Marvel vs Capcom 2. My saying in this first of all is the character selection. Both of the games have a huge amount of character's to choose from in order to make your team. And in your team for MVC2 you also have assists, which will play the role of items in ssbb.

    An item is key in order to set up an attack against your enemy, just as an assist would. once you have the set up, it turns into you taking over the battle for the time. But once your enemy counters with his assist, it becomes his turn to attack. Once you obtain the specific item you want, your setup begins.

    The way MVC2 is setup, it's best 2 out of 3 with 99 time limit. And after seeing it played out at Evo, I can tell you that the match timed out just as often as someone k.o.'d the opponent. The point I'm trying to bring up is that I think less items should be banned, and more stock should be added.

    In 1vs1 for brawl, more stock might be added and fewer items should be banned. The time limit should still be same, but make it best 2 out of 3 matches. If more stock is added, that means that K.O. items such as smash ball, pokeballs, golden hammer, might not be as vital as first thought. The reason I think this is due to the multi supers combo in MVC2. If used successfully, you can take out an entire character, in this case being a stock. So the supers combo turns into the golden hammer taking out one of your opponent's stock. Granted that a golden hammer is almost always an instant kill where as a pokeball might have an instant kill possibility. This turns into the 2 players taking turns and looking for an advantage in the k.o. items.

    If it does come down to time, the winner should be the player with the most stock obviously. But if stock is tied, it should go down to percentage. Obvious reasons should apply again.

    I came to these conclusions on the base that MVC2 is a really fun game to play, possibly one of the funnest. The way regular Street fighter game tournaments are held is completely different from the way Marvel vs Capcom games are held. If you watch the games you'll notice that SSBB w/o items most closely resembles SF4. Again not saying they're anything close, but it's based on attack vs attack. A Marvel Vs. Capcom game is more...free than a traditional SF game, and so should SSBB w/items be. It should be about watching the insane combos, and the super finishers.

    In conclusion: (tl;dr)
    1: More stock should be added
    2: Less items should be banned

    Reasons why:
    1: It would make the game funner to play
    2: it would make the game funner to watch.
  • K!ng Of GreenK!ng Of Green Where the hoe's b Joined: Posts: 8
    1. No one cares about brawl
    2. Play marvel, any sf series, or if you're that gun hoe over smash play melee!!!!


    Just my two cents
    If life hands you lemons say fuck the lemons and bail.
  • SmashchuSmashchu Joined: Posts: 124
    There is no standard play for items, and high level players never play with them seriously because no legitimate tournament ever runs their shit with items. In other words, this thread is for noobs who know nothing about the real tournament Brawl scene.

    SRK already wised up and realized how ridiculous their rule set was last year. They hired AllisBrawl to run their Brawl tournament at EVO this year, and they're using TRUE standard rules (no items). You guys should get with the times, because this idea of "standard play with items" is a total joke for anyone takes this game seriously.

    This is why Smash as a community will never advance. Rather then get around it, you just complain and ban it. It's no excuse now since Keits has posted lots of videos on how to get though stuff.

    Also, seeing as EVO has done this for a long time, I think they knew what they were doing when they out items on. There had been no test for items and Brawl is different from Melee. Besides, the reason everyone gave for turning items off is you could not turn off explosive capsules, which you can turn off now. Now they say Glide tossing is broken despite I've never seen anyone do it at EVO or online (where items are common place). So, no, it's that your community is too wimpy to simply try to beat something, so they just ban them.

    As for this thread, I disagree that Smash balls and Home run bats should be banned. The Smash ball has to be broken before it can be used, and some characters have to set them up first. Also, it's just like a super or ultra in other fighting games, so it will help for overall balance, and help lower characters with good FS.

    As for Home Run Bats, while they are strong throwing items, they can be used just as well as battering items. Most characters have strong running attacks and forward tilts with the bat, so it may be better to just use them rather then throw them. Captain Falcon, for instance, has a really good running attack that has good killing potential. Also, if you throw it, you run the risk of your foe reflecting it or have them throw it at you. So, it really is a trade off and has it's risk despite it's power.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    No sense regurgitating what we've said since Brawl came out. Hell, since Melee came out. They don't listen.
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SmashchuSmashchu Joined: Posts: 124
    No sense regurgitating what we've said since Brawl came out. Hell, since Melee came out. They don't listen.

    True dat. Ehh, maybe one they they'd listen. Or I'll just listen to my self talk. Is is disheartening as Smash is the game I'm really good at, yet is bogged down by it's community. Oh well.

    Any comments on Home Run Bats and Smash Balls.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    True dat. Ehh, maybe one they they'd listen. Or I'll just listen to my self talk. Is is disheartening as Smash is the game I'm really good at, yet is bogged down by it's community. Oh well.

    Welcome to the club. Hi, I'm Cynt. Member of the "WTF Smash Community?" Club since 2004.
    Any comments on Home Run Bats and Smash Balls.

    Homerun Bats are incredibly overrated. They're items I'm far from afraid of. I'm more concerned of a Star Rod or Lips Stick than a bat.

    Smash Balls, on the other hand, I have a feeling they'd end up too broke for their own good, but not for the reasons people are currently bitching about. Warioman is fucking scary. The landmasters? Weaksauce. Against a competent opponent, they're probably the least frightening of the tranforms aside from Giga Bowser.

    Of course, we'll never know if even the small community of non-items items players don't use 'em...
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    Homerun bats are an issue because you throw them... they're insane edgeguarders.


    Star rods are worse though, their angle is perfect.





    Overall though, no items is a ruleset more conducive to competitive play, it's not that items are broken so much as they confer random advantages/blueshell effect, removing them makes skill more rewarding.



    There's nothing wrong with an items ruleset, but it's a side-ruleset, not the main event.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    Homerun bats are an issue because you throw them... they're insane edgeguarders.


    Star rods are worse though, their angle is perfect.





    Overall though, no items is a ruleset more conducive to competitive play, it's not that items are broken so much as they confer random advantages/blueshell effect, removing them makes skill more rewarding.



    There's nothing wrong with an items ruleset, but it's a side-ruleset, not the main event.

    :blah:
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • KeitsKeits OneTrueGame.com Joined: Posts: 8,765 mod
    Cynt thats EXACTLY what I was going to reply!

    "Blah blah blah doesnt know how to read blah blah blah believes everything he is told without questioning"
    Visit OneTrueGame.com for information on DIVEKICK, Tunnel, and future projects.
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    Cynt thats EXACTLY what I was going to reply!

    "Blah blah blah doesnt know how to read blah blah blah believes everything he is told without questioning"

    ...

    Who said I believe everything that I'm told without questioning?



    I posed legitimate reasoning, I've supported the Items Standard Play Project on Smashboards since basically day one, including defending it.



    Furthermore, prior to the release of Brawl, I supported a select few items in the competitive ruleset which SEEMED to be usable (basically the items that didn't get the advantage to the people that they spawned nearby), but when I tested myself, their attributes turned out to be broken. I actually argued quite tenaciously for final smashes in particular because my understanding was that they were once per match.


    http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=115126



    Same name, second post in the thread onwards (when I realized that hey, maybe the designers could throw in items that deserve to be legal).




    Add to that the fact that I in general tend to be extremely critical of the community in a variety of ways (the general sentiment towards banning DDD's infinites and planking being perfect examples). I think there's a tendancy to be immature in the community








    It seems to me that you're the people who support without questioning because you seem unwilling to respond to the fact that they DO increase randomness and they have a strong Blue Shell effect.




    I fulfilled my part, I was completely intellectually honest and more then willing to consider alternatives, and if you're willing to debate instead of throwing inane insults around and -reps then I'd be willing to do the same.





    TL;DR: Yes, I did consider them and rejected them independently, if you wanna try to convince me otherwise then do, but do it maturely.
  • KeitsKeits OneTrueGame.com Joined: Posts: 8,765 mod
    ...





    It seems to me that you're the people who support without questioning because you seem unwilling to respond to the fact that they DO increase randomness and they have a strong Blue Shell effect.


    You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Do some reading, or do the experiments yourself, and then come back to us.

    How am I supposed to respect your argument when your statement prove that you dont know how the system in Brawl works?
    Visit OneTrueGame.com for information on DIVEKICK, Tunnel, and future projects.
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Do some reading, or do the experiments yourself, and then come back to us.

    How am I supposed to respect your argument when your statement prove that you dont know how the system in Brawl works?

    Incorrect, though understandable because it requires testing to understand why since it's not immediately obvious, but if you pay attention it IS noticeable over a large number of games.


    The location that they spawn takes into account the current players and which player is losing, they spawn with considerably greater frequency near the player that is losing.


    We tested this over on smashboards, I can cite this if you want.
  • KeitsKeits OneTrueGame.com Joined: Posts: 8,765 mod
    You are adorable, but no.

    http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=178254
    http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=156133

    Any difference you could find would be within the normal allowable variance for any randomized statistical trial. I dont know how far behind in stocks the losing mario was in Wobble's test, but All-Brawl uses only 2 stocks. You can never be more than 1 stock behind in these rules, so if any difference existed, it would be negligible. On top of this, if items did actually favor the losing player to the degree that you suggest, that should just make it easier to predict where they are coming in from.

    I challenge you to prove this yourself in a similar fashion, by sticking a Mario with 1 stock on one side of final destination, and a mario with 2 stocks on the other side, and catalog at least 10 runs of 1000 item drops and which mario they were closer to. Statistically speaking, the more items you let drop, the closer you should get to 50/50.

    You are grasping at straws in an age old argument in which the side that is wrong is also the majority.

    The items crowd's line was always "people should be able to play how they want", while the anti-items people were always saying "we boycott this and that and condemn items play". In the end, what you got was a boring game, and a community that split again trying to hack to "make better"... the only really sad part is still the insane association of the word "random" with "anti-competitive". In the last 100+ years of gaming in all its forms, there is no evidence at all that having random elements makes a game bad for competition. Its competitive if people want to compete at it. The retarded concern with consistency of results was also put to rest in brawl+item's case a number of times, but the haters just found reasons to ignore the results.

    Remember, its not that the same players who won without items are winning with, its that the same players of any format are winning consistently.

    Anyway, I'm done with you. Go talk to AlphaZealot about it if you want it from someone in your own community. He is a smart fellow who argued feverishly against All-brawl for a while, but now totally gets it.

    You are totally 100% free to prefer no-items. Thats just an opinion, and a choice, and no one gives a shit if you like pepsi or coke better. But its when you come out saying that Pepsi has more fairness to your bloodstream than coke or some bullshit, that you are going to get laughed at by the people who had this discussion years ago.

    No items isnt better than items in any factual way. Nor is items-play better than no-items in any factual way.
    Visit OneTrueGame.com for information on DIVEKICK, Tunnel, and future projects.
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    You are adorable, but no.

    http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=178254
    http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=156133

    Any difference you could find would be within the normal allowable variance for any randomized statistical trial. I dont know how far behind in stocks the losing mario was in Wobble's test, but All-Brawl uses only 2 stocks. You can never be more than 1 stock behind in these rules, so if any difference existed, it would be negligible. On top of this, if items did actually favor the losing player to the degree that you suggest, that should just make it easier to predict where they are coming in from.

    None of that data actually supports your assertion, that said that fact that it favors center stage more then the losing player is a definate touche, so fair enough.

    I think you're misreading cake's data.



    But fair enough, I have no issue doing independent testing, once I get my disk back I'll run some tests and post the results.


    I challenge you to prove this yourself in a similar fashion, by sticking a Mario with 1 stock on one side of final destination, and a mario with 2 stocks on the other side, and catalog at least 10 runs of 1000 item drops and which mario they were closer to. Statistically speaking, the more items you let drop, the closer you should get to 50/50.

    You might wanna take a closer look at margin of error, you don't need a 1000 run to be statistically valid unless your tolerance is extremely high. Statistically valid differences will show up far earlier.

    The items crowd's line was always "people should be able to play how they want", while the anti-items people were always saying "we boycott this and that and condemn items play". In the end, what you got was a boring game, and a community that split again trying to hack to "make better"... the only really sad part is still the insane association of the word "random" with "anti-competitive". In the last 100+ years of gaming in all its forms, there is no evidence at all that having random elements makes a game bad for competition. Its competitive if people want to compete at it. The retarded concern with consistency of results was also put to rest in brawl+item's case a number of times, but the haters just found reasons to ignore the results.

    Frankly, I have no issue with people playing with items, which is why you'll find that I have a consistent record of supporting ISP on smashboards to the point where I was one of the people who convinced Keiser to start the format (the other person being Yuna, who was considerably more abrasive about it whereas I took the, "people deserve a choice" side).







    But I do take issue with "random", not so much that you're always incorrect, but instead that some game utilize it well, whereas in other games it's anti-competitive.


    Why is hold-em a better competitive game then 5 card stud? Because, while in 5 card stud your position is totally random and you have literally only your opponent's face to read, hold-em gives you the ability to make calculated risks based on the cards displayed and figure out the odds of getting a good hand step by step, and calculate your opponents odds as well.

    This means that you won't be reading in a vacuum (which is often useless, because without the reference to your position, your opponent doesn't know if his hand is strong). In other words, the game itself has a mechanism for incorporating randomness in a manner which results in players being essentially in an even position if they make proper allowances.


    Items just appear, and once acquired they give an advantage, in a game where everything is about controlling space, they provide a signifigant advantage. Especially when edge-guarding.

    Remember, its not that the same players who won without items are winning with, its that the same players of any format are winning consistently.

    Generally yes, but the rates vary.
    Anyway, I'm done with you. Go talk to AlphaZealot about it if you want it from someone in your own community. He is a smart fellow who argued feverishly against All-brawl for a while, but now totally gets it.

    Items standard play is FAR superior to All-brawl, and I'm not just saying that because I helped develop the ruleset.
    You are totally 100% free to prefer no-items. Thats just an opinion, and a choice, and no one gives a shit if you like pepsi or coke better. But its when you come out saying that Pepsi has more fairness to your bloodstream than coke or some bullshit, that you are going to get laughed at by the people who had this discussion years ago.

    You realize that this is exactly what people say on smashboards, right? Once you consider a discussion "solved", and leave no room for new insight, well, then you're doing exactly what you accuse smashboarders of.


    TL;DR: Play how you want, however non-items play is better at selecting for skill at higher rates then items play (how much depends on the format, with items standard play being the best). Still, nobody should be hating on people for preferring formats or games other then their preferred, no matter what it is.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    Seriously. Stop talking. You sound like a goddamn echo of the last two years and it's just as ignorant and retarded now as it was then. If you decide to actually stop being a closed minded sheep and regurgitating the smashboards creed, then you can come back and try to formulate a reply. Until then, please, for the sake of this board, shut the fuck up.
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    Seriously. Stop talking. You sound like a goddamn echo of the last two years and it's just as ignorant and retarded now as it was then. If you decide to actually stop being a closed minded sheep and regurgitating the smashboards creed, then you can come back and try to formulate a reply. Until then, please, for the sake of this board, shut the fuck up.

    *sigh*

    If my strong support for the Items Standard Play, my support for inclusion of ittems before it was known that they were conferred random advantage, and the fact that I frequently take positions in start opposition to the community at large (especially my region, see: Planking, DDD's infinite, understanding match-ups, etc.) don't convince you that I'm not being a sheep... well then I think you need to re-evaluate who's being the sheep here.





    My points have been well thought out, I have not been abrasive in the least, I never even condemned items play (I merely was trying to illustrate that non-items play is better from a competitive standpoint, though ISP comes very close).





    Remember, opposing the popular viewpoint doesn't make you not a sheep, it's just as easy to be a sheep in a sub-culture, you're only not a sheep when you think for yourself.
  • *P*L*U*R**P*L*U*R* Joined: Posts: 43
    Cynt, how come you guys always get so aggressive and resort to insulting so much?
    Super Smash Brothers- Apathy
    Blazblue- Litchi
    Street Fighter 4- Sakura
    Guilty Gear- Bridget
    Touhou- Marisa
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    *sigh*

    If my strong support for the Items Standard Play, my support for inclusion of ittems before it was known that they were conferred random advantage, and the fact that I frequently take positions in start opposition to the community at large (especially my region, see: Planking, DDD's infinite, understanding match-ups, etc.) don't convince you that I'm not being a sheep... well then I think you need to re-evaluate who's being the sheep here.





    My points have been well thought out, I have not been abrasive in the least, I never even condemned items play (I merely was trying to illustrate that non-items play is better from a competitive standpoint, though ISP comes very close).





    Remember, opposing the popular viewpoint doesn't make you not a sheep, it's just as easy to be a sheep in a sub-culture, you're only not a sheep when you think for yourself.

    Look, what I'm trying to get at is you're here, where the viewpoint is drastically different from what you're used to. You come from a place where items are trying to be introduced like if they were cooties. Here, ISP is considered NOT ENOUGH. It's the redheaded stepchild of what we came to discover as the proper way to play the game competitively. Giving props to ISP here is almost as insulting as claiming that no items play is "better competitively" as fact, because, quite frankly, that thought is ignorant as shit. AT BEST, it's a heavily biased opinion, and the core reason people stop listening to you here.

    ISP will never discover what we have because they're going about it backwards. It may be the only way for you people to ever even remotely consider items in any form, but it'll never go anywhere. The very idea that "well, once we've figured these out, we'll try this item and see how it meshes" is going to lock out the majority of them simply because there is a lot of counterbalance that won't be shown without other yet-to-be-added items. As one that's been in the trenches since 2002, I give Jack Keiser props simply trying to go into the lions den covered in t-bone steaks and slapping his ass, but I'd rather that community just not touch the shit to begin with.
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • *P*L*U*R**P*L*U*R* Joined: Posts: 43
    I was under the impression that ISP started with all the items on and then we slowly began to drop them in favor of more balanced ones.
    Super Smash Brothers- Apathy
    Blazblue- Litchi
    Street Fighter 4- Sakura
    Guilty Gear- Bridget
    Touhou- Marisa
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    I was under the impression that ISP started with all the items on and then we slowly began to drop them in favor of more balanced ones.

    Negative. Started with the "socially acceptable" items and worked up. The first list had, what, 15 items, tops?
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    Look, what I'm trying to get at is you're here, where the viewpoint is drastically different from what you're used to. You come from a place where items are trying to be introduced like if they were cooties. Here, ISP is considered NOT ENOUGH. It's the redheaded stepchild of what we came to discover as the proper way to play the game competitively. Giving props to ISP here is almost as insulting as claiming that no items play is "better competitively" as fact, because, quite frankly, that thought is ignorant as shit. AT BEST, it's a heavily biased opinion, and the core reason people stop listening to you here.

    ISP will never discover what we have because they're going about it backwards. It may be the only way for you people to ever even remotely consider items in any form, but it'll never go anywhere. The very idea that "well, once we've figured these out, we'll try this item and see how it meshes" is going to lock out the majority of them simply because there is a lot of counterbalance that won't be shown without other yet-to-be-added items. As one that's been in the trenches since 2002, I give Jack Keiser props simply trying to go into the lions den covered in t-bone steaks and slapping his ass, but I'd rather that community just not touch the shit to begin with.


    You don't know the history.


    It started with the presumption that all items should be legal and disqualified.



    That's the same way it started with smash back in the early melee days (and before anyone says different game, sure, but there are enough similarities that you can test based on the differences).



    Personally, I came into the scene as an anti-items player since I opposed them back in 64 and i didn't go competitive into well into melee's lifetime. At that point I already had a competitive mindset (people complain about my edge-hogging, my response, "you can do it too") but my recognition always was that they detracted from the competition because of their inherent issue of giving random advantage. Before that, I was playing Gundam Wing Endless Duel and camping with the best of them, no matter how much people complained.



    Yes, I'm biased, but so are you, everybody is biased in their own way. But bias does not mean you're incorrect, which brings me back to my core point which you have yet to respond to.




    My core point is that their inherit randomness detracts from competition (competition being defined as something to select for the most skilled player possible), care to respond?



    Remember, the game was designed with the ability to turn off items, so it isn't like we're banning something inside the game, it's the use of in-game options in the exact manner they're designed for.

    Negative. Started with the "socially acceptable" items and worked up. The first list had, what, 15 items, tops?

    That's because the list began based on internal testing, the first list was put forth after elimination process had begun, but everything was considered a candidate.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    I'm going to slightly alter the order of your post to show the contradiction now.
    You don't know the history.


    It started with the presumption that all items should be legal and disqualified.

    Incorrect, and you say so yourself here:
    That's because the list began based on internal testing, the first list was put forth after elimination process had begun, but everything was considered a candidate.

    This. This right here. This is why it's bullshit. No "go with everything, see what's broken, remove", just "let a few of us pick and choose what we think is broken after a little while of our own attempts and then let the public decide from what's left". This is the exact opposite of what we did. We actually left everything on. Everywhere we played. Every person that joined in. For months. We still don't see a problem yet.

    That's the same way it started with smash back in the early melee days (and before anyone says different game, sure, but there are enough similarities that you can test based on the differences).

    No, see, Melee had TWO YEARS of competitive play with items in play, only one of which removed only the freakin' maxims and hearts. That means originally, at competitive play, everything was on until decided to be a problem. It eventually, over the course of those two years, went from all, to 90%, to most, to half, then eventually to none due to no other choice, not because they were all broken due to them being "random". YOU, sir, don't know your smash history. I, on the other hand, was a part of that history.


    Personally, I came into the scene as an anti-items player since I opposed them back in 64 and i didn't go competitive into well into melee's lifetime. At that point I already had a competitive mindset (people complain about my edge-hogging, my response, "you can do it too") but my recognition always was that they detracted from the competition because of their inherent issue of giving random advantage. Before that, I was playing Gundam Wing Endless Duel and camping with the best of them, no matter how much people complained.

    And now you should see why you have no idea what you're talking about when you jump into the game well past its competitive prime and think you know what you're talking about. Also, must I now say the age old line said here a thousand times here since Brawl came out? Random != non-competitive. There's not a single random facet of items that don't get counterbalanced due to a disadvantage, or something that one can't do to turn said advantage INTO a disadvantage, aside from the 1 in 100,000 shot at random heart spawning in your face as you do an attack. And even then, that's only a problem because you're thinking in the mindset that the only thing different from the ruleset we've figured out is we used all items, you don't. This is part of the problem.
    Yes, I'm biased, but so are you, everybody is biased in their own way. But bias does not mean you're incorrect, which brings me back to my core point which you have yet to respond to.

    Here's the thing: be biased all you want. Just don't bring that shit here. You might as well be Bill O'Reilly doing an interview on MSNBC. It's going to go over that well.
    My core point is that their inherit randomness detracts from competition (competition being defined as something to select for the most skilled player possible), care to respond?

    Addressed above partially, but that's the problem. There is an inherit disagreement between us here and you guys. Random facets of competition occur. Random does not detract, and if anything, heightens competition through increased adaptation. The items "randomness" are influencial through several ways, most of which involving stage control, a key factor that should already be in one's gameplan, and rewards a more aggressive playstyle to maintain that control, as opposed to camping in order to control a smaller, positional advantage.


    Remember, the game was designed with the ability to turn off items, so it isn't like we're banning something inside the game, it's the use of in-game options in the exact manner they're designed for.

    And this right here is why I've labeled you as a goddamn sheep. You're literally saying the SAME SHIT THAT'S BEEN SAID BEFORE. Shall I go back to the many threads here, the many other smashboarders that have come in here and said this same line, damn near word for word? You're like a friggin' Xerox. And we shut this retarded statement, as well as the others you've made in here since this board was made here, time and time again. It's getting quite old.
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SmashchuSmashchu Joined: Posts: 124

    The location that they spawn takes into account the current players and which player is losing, they spawn with considerably greater frequency near the player that is losing.
    The guess what? Fight him for them. All it does is prevent the winning player from playing defensive, which is better as one player can't just run away for the match once he gets ahead. If you go offensive, you can get the items for yourself. This also allows the losing player some kind of strategy to his next move, he can turtle and beat out a weak offense. It just adds to the depth and skill of the game.

    And besides, the game does not look at damage for ranking. Items will spawn the same rate if both players have the same stock.
    We tested this over on smashboards, I can cite this if you want.
    Wrong. Smashboards has never tested any of them. The test they do is sit with a friend (or alone) and try different things and then report back to Smashboards. It doesn't help that a lot of these people probably hate items anyway and could just be doing to prove a point.

    Testing has to be in tournaments. The Smashboards test are flawed as they are in a very controlled setting. Tournaments have real people who are just trying to win, so you'll see lots of possible combination and tactics that you may not have done in a controlled environment. There is also a chance that something that seemed broken or not would appear to be the complete opposite when done in a tournament.

    This is why EVO didn't listen to any of Smashboard's "test." They were not done with other players.

    @Cyntalan:On Final Smashes, I can see what you mean. One thing Warioman can do is juggle foes off the stage with his air attacks, but it is hard to set up. But, then again, Warioman can do some crazy stuff in general. It would really take a lot of matches to see if Warioman just has some crazy tricks he can do.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    @Cyntalan:On Final Smashes, I can see what you mean. One thing Warioman can do is juggle foes off the stage with his air attacks, but it is hard to set up. But, then again, Warioman can do some crazy stuff in general. It would really take a lot of matches to see if Warioman just has some crazy tricks he can do.

    It's a lot easier to do than one would think. Especially for someone who's already a good Wario. Even Sonic has troubles avoiding Warioman. He's honestly the only one that has a guaranteed kill on getting a Smash Ball. Sonic is the only other one with that possibly under his belt, but since it's a guaranteed straight popup, some stages he's going to only get damage (which, depending on the timing, may be a "might as well be dead" scenario, but not necessarily). There's a slight possibility that a strong Wario could get a second kill, but I'd chalk that up to an awesome skilled play over "smash ball is cheap!". The guaranteed one kill could eventually be a problem, though. Never gonna know though, so it's kinda pointless to think about. :rolleyes:
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SmashchuSmashchu Joined: Posts: 124
    It's a lot easier to do than one would think. Especially for someone who's already a good Wario. Even Sonic has troubles avoiding Warioman. He's honestly the only one that has a guaranteed kill on getting a Smash Ball. Sonic is the only other one with that possibly under his belt, but since it's a guaranteed straight popup, some stages he's going to only get damage (which, depending on the timing, may be a "might as well be dead" scenario, but not necessarily). There's a slight possibility that a strong Wario could get a second kill, but I'd chalk that up to an awesome skilled play over "smash ball is cheap!". The guaranteed one kill could eventually be a problem, though. Never gonna know though, so it's kinda pointless to think about. :rolleyes:

    Well, from my experience, I have a hard time setting it up on human players. On CPUs, I can get it every time. But people tend to give me a problem, but it may be that I'm not use to Warioman's abilities (jumping and speed). I'd like to see a match where this plays out.
  • *P*L*U*R**P*L*U*R* Joined: Posts: 43
    okay, so you guys dislike isp because.....? like, i'm confused.
    Super Smash Brothers- Apathy
    Blazblue- Litchi
    Street Fighter 4- Sakura
    Guilty Gear- Bridget
    Touhou- Marisa
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    okay, so you guys dislike isp because.....? like, i'm confused.

    It's a bittersweet like, actually. It's great that you've got some in your group trying items... like a sideshow freak, and dumbed down to nearly pointless and WAY overcomplicated, but I digress. It's quite simply that ISP went about it the wrong way and the whole idea originally behind it was the theory that we as all-brawl players would end up meeting ISP in the middle over time. This is a little delusional. ISP may meet half way between all-brawl and no-brawl, but considering how things are figured out, we'll never meet. Chances are, if SRK still gave a rats ass about Smash at all and played All-Brawl since it was made, in 2-3 years time, we MIGHT have finally agreed to yank a stage or two, might have finally agreed to yank an item or two. And even THAT'S reaching. ISP isn't helping the cause in this respect, because all it does is perpetuate the problem by padding the players to the point where they can barely see anymore (think rugby vs. football).
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SaikyoBeastSaikyoBeast He Loues Catte Ears Joined: Posts: 1,046
    Just wanna say thanks for giving discussion a chance, cynt and keits. For someone who has avoided the smash community like the plague, it's been interesting to read an intelligent perspective. :tup:
    League IGN: CJPurple (retired), Rampaging Panda
    "Poly...tits? Awesome! Is that a new type of boobies!?" - Taokaka, on politics
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    I feel like this isn't going anywhere, but I guess I'll reiterate my main points.


    1. I'm a little confused by why you guys contend that randomness (unless properly contended with in the game mechanics). The idea of competitive gaming is to pick the player who is the best, and the strongest measure of what makes a competitive game good in my opinion (kudos to anyone who can figure out who I'm a devotee of by this comment) is how much the game rewards you for reading your opponent.

    Randomness generally knocks that for a loop, because great reads can easily be spoiled by the universe hating you (smash example, first game I played of 64, a bomb spawned into my f-smash). Granted, in some games it works, hold-em has no other mechanism for generating different conditions to read your opponent in for example, but smash already has a mechanism outside of randomness.



    2. Play how you like, definitely no hard feelings on my end towards item players, and I'd hope that you guys could feel the same way towards non-items players. Unfortunately, casual players and scrubs pretty much universally hate no items rulesets, and they're extremely evangelical about it (in the same way the, "all you can do is throw" crowd is), that cause no items players to be defensive, but honestly, no "no items" player is gonna oppose you playing with items. Probably just not interested in playing it and thinks his format is better.



    No hard feelings folks?




    *Goes back to lurking SF4 Sagat boards and practicing kara cancels while waiting for his christmas party to start*
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    I feel like this isn't going anywhere, but I guess I'll reiterate my main points.


    1. I'm a little confused by why you guys contend that randomness (unless properly contended with in the game mechanics). The idea of competitive gaming is to pick the player who is the best, and the strongest measure of what makes a competitive game good in my opinion (kudos to anyone who can figure out who I'm a devotee of by this comment) is how much the game rewards you for reading your opponent.

    I think the problem here is simply the fact that you overlook everything that comes beyond the word "random". The ONLY aspect that's truly 100% random is what item is coming next (and technically, that's not even true considering you know dragoon parts 2 and 3 are coming once part one spawns). Everything else has a lot of manipulative properties, to the point where it actually takes greater skill to keep the flow of battle going in your direction: adaptation.
    Randomness generally knocks that for a loop, because great reads can easily be spoiled by the universe hating you (smash example, first game I played of 64, a bomb spawned into my f-smash). Granted, in some games it works, hold-em has no other mechanism for generating different conditions to read your opponent in for example, but smash already has a mechanism outside of randomness.

    The concept you bring about here further illustrates what you're missing. The beauty of item spawn is that it forces people to MOVE. It also forces people to stop a wall of hate (see: Marth and MK for some of the more lucrative examples) and actually think on their toes. Then there's also the fact it'll puts the fear of continuing an infinite for longer than a small window. In the ruleset we came down to, it was 2 stock, 3 min, best of 5. The item spawn was set so that every 10-14 seconds, an item was going to spawn. Guaranteed. This means you have a good degree of predictability. You also have a 3 minute timer going on above you to assist in keeping track of time and thus being able to better prepare for the oncoming spawn any second and stop and think before mashing A like a monkey. It now becomes a risk to be overly aggressive by just keeping out a constant hitbox because there's always that good chance during that window... kablooey. It's not as though the game spawns it suddenly without warning and purposely while you're charging a smash or swinging an arial at head level, because the intervals are predictable enough that it really becomes your own damn fault.


    2. Play how you like, definitely no hard feelings on my end towards item players, and I'd hope that you guys could feel the same way towards non-items players. Unfortunately, casual players and scrubs pretty much universally hate no items rulesets, and they're extremely evangelical about it (in the same way the, "all you can do is throw" crowd is), that cause no items players to be defensive, but honestly, no "no items" player is gonna oppose you playing with items. Probably just not interested in playing it and thinks his format is better.

    This another thing that you may not understand why there is such animosity here to the majority of smash players. There is a VERY vocal majority both online and in real life that will do what it takes to get people that actually might want to play all-brawl away from "their damn game". It's pretty much this aspect of the community that almost entirely killed Smash at EVO ever returning, and it IS why they won't do anything more than just give the players a corner of the room. The whining, the rage, the boycotts... the overall evangelical attitude got so out of hand we frankly just got sick of the shit. Now whenever we see someone pop in and go "wtf random?", we shit on them, because 99% of the time, they don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

    EDIT: The irony of all of this is that one at a time, as we sit their asses down and point shit out, the item ragers stop raging and start relating and understanding. Not all of 'em go "oooh, that's much better", but they all end up going "yeah, I can see how this is just as skillful".
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • AlusAlus Starsauce Joined: Posts: 56
    And Cyn, I happen to be one of those people. I have been shown the possible competitive value items can influence on the smash community.

    I happen to be a smashboards user, and I can tell you that this WILL NOT WORK. Not because there is a problem with the items but because the players are not capable to give it any thought. This is a very very VERY strong argument, but the players will not see it.

    I will try to get some people I know to reach this.

    God I love this thread.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    Oh I know, I was an active smashboard member from 2k2 to 2k5. After that, I dropped out of it mostly 'cause the members are so goddamn retarded it makes me crave for GameFAQs. I know full well the stubbornness of that community and I've given up on them entirely.
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    Oh wow this is amazing. I love item battles. How can I get involved and play some matches with you guys?
    Ganon for top tier in items!
  • SystemSystem Joined: Posts: 508,676 admin
    I'd be in full support of this except for one thing.

    This would make the game completely revolve around avoiding/obtaining items. You can't zone properly because there's a risk of an item blowing up. So when your opponent approaches you, it's a gamble whether or not he'll succeed because of an item spawning. I feel that any sort of gamble not associated with reading the opponent doesn't belong. The same applies to chaingrabbing your opponent. When I get a grab, whether or not I get the next grab should be up to my abilities, not up to a gamble.

    If it were possible for items not to detonate or activate on contact, then I don't think there should be any argument over whether or not items belong. But unfortunately there is no such option.

    I actually really hope that this ruleset somehow works out, because Brawl is possibly the most boring fighting game I've ever watched or played.
  • CyntalanCyntalan The Metamoderator™ Is Here Joined: Posts: 8,355 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    I'd be in full support of this except for one thing.

    This would make the game completely revolve around avoiding/obtaining items. You can't zone properly because there's a risk of an item blowing up. So when your opponent approaches you, it's a gamble whether or not he'll succeed because of an item spawning. I feel that any sort of gamble not associated with reading the opponent doesn't belong. The same applies to chaingrabbing your opponent. When I get a grab, whether or not I get the next grab should be up to my abilities, not up to a gamble.

    If it were possible for items not to detonate or activate on contact, then I don't think there should be any argument over whether or not items belong. But unfortunately there is no such option.

    I actually really hope that this ruleset somehow works out, because Brawl is possibly the most boring fighting game I've ever watched or played.

    Except that the intervals of spawning are pretty damn predictable. You can zone, hell, you can zone at all times. It's just now a slight risk at certain times. That can only IMPROVE the game considering how stupid the game gets on the zoning front.
    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ PRAISE HELIX ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

    "NO! NOT LIKE THIS!" - Random audience member, Evo 2k9 SC4 finals. Go Hilde!
    "You are a weird, adorable little man, OZ." - Vynce
    "I violated marc but we definitely cool now." - dre37k
Sign In or Register to comment.