Character Variation in Teams

[Omni]

Idea taken from other competitive fighting games.

Most teams do not allow two of the same character to be on a team. This prevents players from choosing the best character and forming a 3-man powerhouse crew, and instead creates more depth in terms of character variation and combinations.

This is not a solution to a problem. This is introducing a new concept to teams that may or may not produce favorable results.

I'll ask Ankoku to set-up a poll for this later but for now:

How do you guys feel about character variation in teams? Mainly, would you support a rule that disallows a team using the same character twice, or would you be against this rule?

 

[Remzi]

Eh, I'm personally against that idea. Doubling up on one character is simply another strategy that can be used in doubles. It usually isn't even a good idea, considering the characters can't cover each others tougher matchups...

 

[demonictoonlink]

I don't even believe double MK is the best team, so probably not from me.

I think for MK some better teammates are D3 (stock tank), Snake (Snake), and GaW (Amazing KOer in teams)

 

[Dekar173]

D3 isn't that good of a stock tank

 

[san.]

I usually enjoy seeing two of the same character in doubles. A character's strength may compliment itself, although, weaknesses may be exploited pretty well (with possibly stage counterpicks, too).

 

[PhantomX]

Honestly, double of whatever in this game is weaker than mixes.

The best teams are any variation of MK, GW, and Wario, maybe some Snake. Never both of the same.

 

[Omni]

Just to reiterate:

This is not a solution to a problem. This is introducing a new concept to teams that may or may not produce favorable results.

Do not think in terms of this idea as an attempt to fix a problem.

Think of it as an alternative to the current ruleset. Completely preference oriented.

 

[Browny]

why would this even be considered?

if theres no problem, what is the purpose of this? to add variety by banning something?

lol I hope not. I think were being trolled here.

 

[LuigiKing]

I would support the idea because it creates diversity, but I'm sure the double MK teams would baww about it .

 

[Jem.]

Let people play who they want to play as. It's a GAME.

 

[Crow!]

Idea taken from other competitive fighting games.

Most teams do not allow two of the same character to be on a team. This prevents players from choosing the best character and forming a 3-man powerhouse crew, and instead creates more depth in terms of character variation and combinations.

This is not a solution to a problem. This is introducing a new concept to teams that may or may not produce favorable results.

I'll ask Ankoku to set-up a poll for this later but for now:
...
[later]
Think of it as an alternative to the current ruleset.

So... Omni's proposing that we make a rule which specifically targets MK/MK teams? Do we really want a fourth rule targeting that character? I mean, I like increasing diversity in a tourney as much as the next guy, but there's an obvious, better solution if that's what you want to accomplish.

No other character in the game compliments him/her - self nearly as well as MK, to the point that I believe every non-MK character is better off with a doubles partner which can either shore up weaknesses or enhance strengths (... such as MK.)

In game theory, if an option is stupid to do / is just not as good as another, it isn't really an option at all. So except for MK doubles, the proposed rule supposedly has no effect unless there's some popular and effective character to double up on that's escaping my analysis.

Also, if this idea seriously gets a poll when the MK debate doesn't, I'm calling foul. When it comes to "introducing a new concept... that may or may not produce favorable results," there's a very obvious rule that the community has spent well over a year now clamoring for which should have widespread testing much sooner than this joke.


Oh, for clarification... These other fighting games' doubles Omni's talking about, are these the "tag team" style doubles matches, where only one fighter of a particular character is actually on the (comical rectangular featureless but with invisible walls) stage at a given moment? If so, that explains why this sort of a rule might make sense those games: without it, "doubles" is really just "twice as many stocks of singles." But Brawl is better than that... or at least it is when MK isn't involved, anyway.

 

[Tristan_win]

I likely should have no right talking about this since I don't do doubles but I think that's a very interesting idea. Although if a rule like this is made in any double event it should be null for the characters Sheik/Zelda, and pokamon trainer.

 

[Master Raven]

I'm not really for the idea of disallowing same character teams. It'd especially be bad for people who are only good with one character.

 

[UltiMario]

In Brawl, doubling up is one of the worst ideas you could do.


If someone wants to double up, let them do it. Its not benefitting their game, its hurting it. There is no reason to ban bad decisions, this is like theres some guy behind each player telling them what Counterpick stage they should choose next so the players don't make a bad counterpick.

 

[Delvro]

There's no way this can be a serious post.

If there isn't a problem, why should we purposefully limit player choices?

Why should we stop a team of Ganons, Links, Luigis, or Metaknights (assuming the character himself isn't banned) if there's nothing detrimental to the game or the competitive community from them doing so?

 

[Omni]

Too many people thinking from a problematic viewpoint i.e. Metaknight.

Everyone's responses are being noted.

 

[*Tyson*]

I would not mind this at all. It is always cool and encouraging to see different and unorthodox teams

 

[Master Raven]

I'm in partial agreement that doubling up one character is usually not the best idea, but I think it's ideal if the character being doubled up hard counters the opposing team's characters (like say, double MK vs ROB/GW, just as an example).

And I'm going to rephrase my previous post and say that I think that this would be an interesting idea to explore, but I think it would be very impractical for a lot of people who only play one character, which is the main reason I'm against it.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I see no reason to force people to not make choices that are detrimental to them, and if it's just an asthetic thing, why is it worth limiting player choice?


Honestly, I can't think of any good reason to do this.

 

[CRASHiC]

But then no Double DDD Its the funnest thing ever. DOWN THROW INTO DOWN THROW INTO DOWN THROW INTO DOWN THROW

then alternate waddle throws

then inhale your team mate and spit him at the opponent

then down throw again!

fun fun :3

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

the only team that this seems to effect is double mk why would anyone look at it from another point?


Maybe double wario but i hardly see that happen, Phantom are people trying to ban you + vex for low tiers?!!?!

 

[adumbrodeus]

the only team that this seems to effect is double mk why would anyone look at it from another point?


Maybe double wario but i hardly see that happen, Phantom are people trying to ban you + vex for low tiers?!!?!

Because double mk is far from the best team.

 

[OverLade]

Imo there is still a bit to be explored with doubles concerning character viability, but due to counter pick strength, double MK is still the strongest team (overall). Double MK on Brinstar/Cruise/Delphino with combinations of planking and spamming should do in just about any other combination that doesn't include MK as well.

 

[AvaricePanda]

I see no reason to force people to not make choices that are detrimental to them, and if it's just an asthetic thing, why is it worth limiting player choice?


Honestly, I can't think of any good reason to do this.

Exactly what he said.

 

[D. Disciple]

So... Omni's proposing that we make a rule which specifically targets MK/MK teams? Do we really want a fourth rule targeting that character? I mean, I like increasing diversity in a tourney as much as the next guy, but there's an obvious, better solution if that's what you want to accomplish.

No other character in the game compliments him/her - self nearly as well as MK, to the point that I believe every non-MK character is better off with a doubles partner which can either shore up weaknesses or enhance strengths (... such as MK.)

In game theory, if an option is stupid to do / is just not as good as another, it isn't really an option at all. So except for MK doubles, the proposed rule supposedly has no effect unless there's some popular and effective character to double up on that's escaping my analysis.

Also, if this idea seriously gets a poll when the MK debate doesn't, I'm calling foul. When it comes to "introducing a new concept... that may or may not produce favorable results," there's a very obvious rule that the community has spent well over a year now clamoring for which should have widespread testing much sooner than this joke.


Oh, for clarification... These other fighting games' doubles Omni's talking about, are these the "tag team" style doubles matches, where only one fighter of a particular character is actually on the (comical rectangular featureless but with invisible walls) stage at a given moment? If so, that explains why this sort of a rule might make sense those games: without it, "doubles" is really just "twice as many stocks of singles." But Brawl is better than that... or at least it is when MK isn't involved, anyway.

This post made me laugh really, really hard.

 

[demonictoonlink]

I understand the point of this thread is not to deal with a problem, but I say no. This element is unnecessary to introduce, especially as teams is already and interesting, fun to watch/fun to play aspect of this game.

 

[Omni]

I see no reason to force people to not make choices that are detrimental to them, and if it's just an asthetic thing, why is it worth limiting player choice?


Honestly, I can't think of any good reason to do this.

Well, it's not forcing anyone. It's an alternative that can be explored.

It changes the way teams are played by approaching teams from a different perspective. One perspective is to allow dittos in teams; the other is to only allow one character of its kind per team.

The character variation is not an attempt to "fix" the coexisting way that teams is played. It is an attempt to introduce a new way that teams is played without taking away from its core.

Think the introduction of items except its impact is not as significant.

The concept came from what I originally said. Researching into other fighting game communities I noticed that they do not typically allow two of the same character on one team regardless if both players are on the same screen or not.

It's a new idea with a new concept that is not attempting to take precedence over the original concept.

Unfortunately, I believe too many people are stuck on Metaknight and rules being made to keep or ban or restrict or limit him and so any other ideas that come into play that could potentially affect him take precedence over the centralizing idea.

Anyway, I appreciate the feedback so far.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

Because double mk is far from the best team.

I don't think its far from the best team but i know its not the best for sure.

Even so its far far far ahead of any other double team

 

[Mew2King]

mk snake is better than double mk. Double MK is only good cuz MK is good. It's like double fox in melee, they are good cuz fox is good, but fox+peach or fox+jiggs compliment each other a lot better. Snake MK have much better support for each other. MK aggro than Snake can camp and get free kills after MK damages. Snake hard puishes if MK gets hit. Torando to Nair. Down throw to footstool to jab lock to f smash!!!!!

 

[Throwback]

I can see it working if 'teams' means consecutive singles matches, a la SF4 and other games. I don't see the point for instituting it in doubles though, since no double character combination is overwhelmingly OP.

 

[llamapaste]

This is a terrible idea.

 

[Humpy Thrashabout]

I feel like this is a thinly veiled attempt to create an argument in favor of anti-ban. If people aren't willing to institute this rule (which you claim will diversify the doubles game) then you can use it as a case against people who want to ban MK to diversify the game.

You so tricky.

 

[Omni]

*facepalm*

I give up.

 

[Remzi]

It's just that it isn't really limiting at all. Not that many teams do it, and having two different characters doesn't add any real "depth" to the match anyways. MK and MK work together just as uniquely as Diddy and Kirby might.

 

[Spelt]

wow people, lay off.
i'm not really sure about the number of double mk teams compared to others, but variety can't hurt anything.
at least it's something to consider, and not something to just flat out go "you're dumb go away"
:/

 

[Limeee]

Don't fix what isn't broken.

 

[Ripple]

maybe you should have had someone else post this omni.

everyone is thinking youre somehow bringing MK into this or that you're seeing if people are hypocritical of their view of something being broken.

I think it'd be interesting but like everyone said, you don't really see this often because people know its not the best option

 

[Crow!]

I feel like this is a thinly veiled attempt to create an argument in favor of anti-ban. If people aren't willing to institute this rule (which you claim will diversify the doubles game) then you can use it as a case against people who want to ban MK to diversify the game.

You so tricky.

So someone actually came out and said it directly. I thought this was obvious but I figured my first post would be more effective if I kept my realization of this also thinly veiled.

*facepalm*

I give up.

Mind posting this in the main thread? It's long overdue.

 

[Karcist]

Anything to make the game more diverse.

 

[D. Disciple]

You guys, he isn't doing this to suggest a ban on double MK, or to even motion for anti-ban MK at all. This was just an idea that he came across.

He most likely researched fighting games rules such as MvC2, where they don't allow you have the same character on your team. Having 3 Cables on a team is just, beyond god like in all ways. All he wanted was what people think of that concept in smash?

There is no hidden message in his post or anything, so please stop assuming that's he trying to aim this at Metaknight. Him saying picking the best character possible, has really nothing to do with teams. Obviously MK is the best character in brawl, but double MK isn't the best team in Brawl. It's a good team, but it's not the best.

Edit - On topic, I've thought about this for a year or two, when I came across that rule in other games as well and wonder why it never came across in smash, but also realized that having double characters wasn't too bad and thought the concept wasn't necessary for us. So I decided against it.