Melee =/= Brawl

[|RK|]

I don't mean to inspire any hatred between Melee and Brawl, rather to balance respects for either community. So if you are looking for a Melee vs Brawl topic, this isn't it. After reading this topic:

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=225831

I realized that the poster had somethings right (and I do not see why the topic was locked. It was well written, concise, and was actually the definition of a blog. Just because his opinions won't be praised doesn't mean it was in the wrong place. Whether it stirs up hate or not, it's still a blog) and I realize that Brawl isn't getting further is because of a Melee mentality. We are still, even despite current knowledge, treating Brawl in the same mindset as Melee. We are looking for AT's in the same way as Melee, and bringing Melee practices over. What we really should do is erase everything up until the first time we played Melee, then replace it with Brawl. What we have effectively done now is advanced our minds. Brawl is obviously a different game. We think of items the same way as we did in Melee. I realize that the people working on ISP has tested items, but that was far after Brawl was released. We banned Smash Balls because they were unfair, yet the lower tiers, the ones that need them, get the better ones, and the higher ups get the worse ones. Have you noticed that? That is the epitome of balance. But as soon as we played Brawl, we turned off the items (most of you anyway) why? Because they were unfair in Melee. We tried everything that we could do in Melee, noticed half of it didn't work, and wrote Brawl off as the worse game.

My friends, such is the definition of a close minded community. Why can't we think outside the box? I recently read in a topic "What is a noob?" one of the posts that said "Anyone who thinks Final Smashes should be incorporated into the tier list." First, I think that we should compare the characters position on the tier list to the amount that they have to gain on the tier list. Then compare how hard that character must work to break the Smash Ball open. While we think that Smash Balls are broken, they are the only saving grace for most characters. We now have Brawl+ to balance the game. Apparently, Melee was too perfect to need balancing. Yet Brawl has made an attempt to fix that. Smash Balls. We must remember that Brawl is not Melee. Why do we keep comparing them? Melee is a crazy awesome game, yes, but Brawl is also a crazy awesome game. Most of the players who dislike Brawl are people with brilliant reflexes who found their skills eschewed in the slower pace of Brawl. M2K is one of the exceptions because he has both quick fingers and a quick mind for trickery/mindgames. We should not expect Melee to be Brawl, or vice versa. I mean, how many of you were disappointed when Melee wasn't 64? Like Melee to Brawl, 64 to Melee got a plethora of new tactics, but did still lose some. Characters were made less broken, etc. Melee to Brawl also lost things. But then again, there is a lot of 64 left undiscovered. Remember, Melee came out a meager 2 years after 64. After 7 years of Melee, many don;t give much thought to Brawl.

Brawl is another game. We can't let nostalgia cloud our minds. Melee was and still is awesome. But after 7 years, many aren't ready to make the jump. There is plenty of skill needed for Brawl. There are plenty of options available from Brawl. If we are truly ready to establish ourselves as a fighting game community, we must rise to the occasion, with new minds ready to be filled, and new tactics to learn. We must accept new things. After but a month or two, we banned all items. Actually, we have banned the Smash Balls, because the other items? We thought the same as we did in Melee. But once again, like 64 to Melee, there are some things kept. Thinking in the same Melee mindset will therefore discover a few things, but not much more than that. When will we stop treating Brawl as what we wanted it to be like, instead of what it truly is? Like Melee, and possibly 64 (we wouldn't know, would we), Brawl is a deep game, with much is waiting to be found within it. But the question is, when will we be ready to find it.

This reminds me of lyrics from one of my favorite Linkin Park songs:

When I pretend that everything is what I want it to be
I look exactly like what you always wanted to see

We must go forward and treat Brawl as a separate game and explore ALL of it's options, even normal stock matches, and maybe even coin matches. Let's explore and expand the metagame in Brawl. This time from scratch.

 

[IxxI]

I'm sorry.

10appologies

 

[ToxiCrow]

EDIT: my bad RK Joker
i'll read before posting next time =]

 

[|RK|]

You obviously did not read the topic. Please refrain from posting opinion until after reading the topic. Do not judge a topic by it's title. This is NOT a Melee vs. Brawl topic.

 

[Collective of Bears]

*huggles RK Joker*

You, sir, are awesome.

 

[|RK|]

Thank you! :D

 

[MoblinMan]

Excluding the possibility of adding items into competitive play, for what other aspects of the game do you think we must shift the paradigm? edit: (from melee?)

 

[8BitRevolver]

This reminds me of lyrics from one of my favorite Linkin Park songs

i dont think ive ever seen these words grouped together like that before

 

[Corigames]

What we really should do is erase everything up until the first time we played Melee, then replace it with Brawl. What we have effectively done now is advanced our minds.

You don't erase in order to advance. You look back on your experiences and knowledge to have a better understanding of the present. Think, what would it be like if you "advanced" like that at anything else? What if you picked up Mario Sunshine and completely wiped everything you knew about Mario 64? You aren't any better off and you are probably worse. Then, even outside the context of video games that notion holds no merit. If you learn a martial art, should you forget everything you know about one you previously learned and does that give you significant help in advancing?

You also speak as if you were here during the time that the Melee, and Brawl to that extent, rules were being made. The SBR isn't a super secret ring of shadowy figures that murmur la le lu le lo as they conjure up BS rules about the games. Have you actually tried to play a tournament with items? These people knew what they were doing when they made the rules. IF you don't trust them, then you don't have to conform to their rules. Go make your own and run your own tournament how you want. No one is forcing you to do anything :/

If people like it, then so be it. You now have your own luck oriented competitive scene to run.

 

[ph00tbag]

Coin matches are basically the best way to never know why you're winning. Time matches would basically be what we currently have, but without the option of beating your opponent quickly; If I can win in two minutes, why should I fight for five? The stages that we play already are considered in the context of Brawl for whether or not they should be banned.

Items are off because they really do have an impact on the outcome of the match which is randomly determined. And Smash Balls, while entertaining, aren't balanced if they show up even every 20 seconds after a given one is used. It overcentralizes the game on getting Smash Balls and avoiding Final Smashes, and makes all fundamentals nearly useless. You'd have to pad the game with low-impact items, but there aren't enough of those to beat down the odds.

People do, in fact think of Brawl in terms of Brawl, and they have reasons for playing the game the way they do. You're fooling yourself if you think they dont.

 

[|RK|]

@corey: Mario 64 to Sunshine is much closer to each other than Melee and Brawl. How do you expect to understand how to play Life by using your experience from Trouble? What I said is entirely true. We generally took what we knew about Melee and stuffed it into Brawl. Did we try a BRAWL tournament with items? Even just Beam Swords? No, we didn't. I am not trying to separate from the Smash Community but make them think. Yes we have to erase all we knew about Melee (well most of it) to progress in Brawl. We didn't try item tournaments because they didn't work in Melee. We didn't try changing up rules, no, we played in stock and time, just like Melee. When Brawl first came out, we expected it to have the same AT's as Melee. It's not the SBR's fault that we aren't discovering AT's, it's ours. We keep thinking in the same way we did in Melee, which to an effect had a pattern. Brawl shares part of this pattern, much like 64 to Melee, but has its own. That is why we must treat Brawl as a separate game to Melee. If we keep taking everything from Melee, then we won't get far with Brawl. That is why we must erase our knowledge of Melee.

We are shifting the paradigm from Melee to expand Brawl. SBR is mostly composed of Melee players anyway, so this topic is for them too. We must test, expand and grow. Because people like you who don't see what I'm talking about and shift my words aren't helping. I didn't say play with items, I said give them a chance! To test them! To see how Smash Balls are! Compare Link, considered one of the worst in the game, compare the sheer broken power of his Final Smash. Now compare how good Meta-Knight's is in comparison. Smash Balls, for one thing aren't luck based. Secondly, they ironically give less power to the higher tiers, well, a bit of them anyway, but they can be beaten easier than Meta-Knight. Thirdly, this is NOT a debate to use items/Smash Balls. This is a topic to show you all that it is imperative to think properly when judging, from Melee to Brawl. I think that the SBR should be separate. One for Melee and another for Brawl. Because their rules are obviously based on Melee, and despite the fact that Brawl is a separate game to Melee, and some of the SBR still doesn't play Brawl, they weren't removed. That means that most of the SBR is Melee focused and thinks in a Melee style. Why is some of the best advice for moving forward "don't look back?" It's because you looking back hinders progress. Use that as food for thought. And please don't twist my words to what they aren't. I obviously don't want a luck based tournament, and Brawl is obviously unbalanced. Final Smashes really did balance it, but those weren't tested long, because Smash Balls are items, and items weren't use in Melee tournaments. I'm going to try coin tournaments tomorrow. Oh, and for those saying that removing the timer would increase tournament length, I don't think it would. After all, there'd be no point in stalling, and planking would be worthless.

And despite what that guy who wrote the blog said, I think we'd get along fine with the TMNT Bash Up community. Fear not, SWF. We play a Strategic Party Fighting Game.

 

[|RK|]

Coin matches are basically the best way to never know why you're winning. Time matches would basically be what we currently have, but without the option of beating your opponent quickly; If I can win in two minutes, why should I fight for five? The stages that we play already are considered in the context of Brawl for whether or not they should be banned.

Items are off because they really do have an impact on the outcome of the match which is randomly determined. And Smash Balls, while entertaining, aren't balanced if they show up even every 20 seconds after a given one is used. It overcentralizes the game on getting Smash Balls and avoiding Final Smashes, and makes all fundamentals nearly useless. You'd have to pad the game with low-impact items, but there aren't enough of those to beat down the odds.

People do, in fact think of Brawl in terms of Brawl, and they have reasons for playing the game the way they do. You're fooling yourself if you think they dont.

Okay, so coin matches are out. I know the stages were tested. Okay, Smash Balls are out too. If only someone could have them appear less... Smoke Ball is a low impact item. And Screw attack can help those heavy characters do combos. You'd be surprised how many people don't, because if they did, there would be no Melee vs. Brawl arguments or comparisons of the game. We still haven't explored the option of time-less stock matches. They require actual skill, no fear of planking, stalling, a time limit, etc.

 

[lordhelmet]

Items are even more unfair in Brawl.

 

[Corigames]

They require actual skill, no fear of planking, stalling, a time limit, etc.

1) What's that suppose to mean?
2) Would you want to run a tournament where you don't know how long matches could run on? Or am I misunderstanding you?

 

[|RK|]

@ lordhelmet: Some of them. I mean, technically Banana's aren't unfair, Diddy has em'. Pitfalls allow you to do a ranged version of a close range attack, so technically, that's broken. Gooey Bomb? Again, a long range version of a close ranged attack, so that's broken... but this is NOT an items debate. It's just saying think differently. We are making Brawl+ because we are displeased with normal Brawl. But there are in game balances we don't use, and hidden ones we aren't thinking Brawl enough to find.

 

[:mad:]

This just inspired flaming. If you want this to even have a chance of being kept open, I suggest you guys stop.

 

[|RK|]

1) What's that suppose to mean?
2) Would you want to run a tournament where you don't know how long matches could run on? Or am I misunderstanding you?

1) Oh, it's not meant to offend anyone. It's preceding my other comments. Tactics like planking really don't take much skill. You could master everything about it in minutes depending on your character.

2) That, well... really, how many tournaments run past the time limit anyway? And to lose by death is far better than losing cause you were 1% above your opponent. Plus it discourages planking and stalling by making them useless. You don't have to come to your opponent anymore, and the stalling out the time won't work for obvious reasons. If anything, most of them will go up to 10 minutes. Also, we could unban lots of things. Firstly planking, secondly stuff like IDC. It'd be good for a surprise attack, but by using it long enough, the screen shifts to your position, and IDC would be a viable competitive tactic.

EDIT:
@Straked: What do you mean?

 

[Arty]

Falco would be in a tier of his own with smashballs on.
Just camp around for 30 seconds, get the smashball, and take off two stocks.

 

[|RK|]

@Arty, K, then, so the Smash Ball is sorta broken. You do realize that the other person has an equal opportunity to get the Smash Ball, right? But since the Smash Ball would give stalling/planking reason without the timer, then I suppose that's out. Anything else?

 

[Corigames]

It's preceding my other comments. Tactics like planking really don't take much skill. You could master everything about it in minutes depending on your character.

I'm not offended, I'm just wondering what differences in skill there are between timed matches and un-timed ones. What is "actual" skill in comparison?

2) That, well... really, how many tournaments run past the time limit anyway?

In Brawl alone I've seen matches go to time from people trying to avoid the ridiculous chain grabs, avoiding Snake's stage control, out spacing metaknight, etc. You become so entrenched in the defense aspects of the game that it becomes very difficult to also play within the time limit. Does this apply to every match? Of course not. Good players are going to destroy worse ones (granted no luck is brought into play) relatively quickly. However, people on the same level of skill and ability can really drag out a fight. Then include the possibility that they are playing a ditto or characters that are relatively weak or heavy, and you can EASILY reach the time limit.

And to lose by death is far better than losing cause you were 1% above your opponent.

Having to stay in a match for an extra 5 minutes, fatiguing you for the rest of the tournament more than a limited match would have, is a much worse scenario in my opinion. Also, if someone does have the percent advantage, do they not rightfully win? Is that some kind of robbed match or something?

Plus it discourages planking and stalling by making them useless. You don't have to come to your opponent anymore, and the stalling out the time won't work for obvious reasons.

Not entirely, you are forgetting about the game outside of the game. Players get worn out. People who are trying to chase down a faster character for minute after minute will, most likely, get tired, frustrated, and may make a grave mistake. By not putting a time limit on it, you allow for someone to abuse levels to escape for long periods of time in excess of what they should to wait for an opportunity to strike that would have never presented itself in the game otherwise. Then, to compound with that,m if you include items, then you could have two people stall out a match until they get a certain item they need to win that gives them or their character some extreme advantage. That's not a very good set-up.

If anything, most of them will go up to 10 minutes. Also, we could unban lots of things. Firstly planking, secondly stuff like IDC. It'd be good for a surprise attack, but by using it long enough, the screen shifts to your position, and IDC would be a viable competitive tactic.

For the same reason as the above, making stall tactics legal will not only wear out competitors and make them angry, it will make tournaments drag on for unmeasurable amounts of time making it difficult to reserve time slots ahead of time.

@Straked: What do you mean?

I think he means I'm in the thread, so there's obviously going to be trolling or something. It follows me when I try to do anything other than post on the Melee Samus boards.

Spoiler

Because, evidently, if you disagree with someone, no matter how clear, calm, and articulate you are, you are trolling.

 

[ph00tbag]

We still haven't explored the option of time-less stock matches. They require actual skill, no fear of planking, stalling, a time limit, etc.

The timed stock match is a logistical necessity. If it weren't for that, there's no telling how long matches would last. Tournaments already frequently encounter time issues (often running well into the wee hours). It would be prohibitively expensive, time-wise, to remove the time limit. If we could ensure that stock matches would all be done in seven minutes or less without the time limit, well, then by gum we'd get rid of the time limit, but that is impossible. You're not the only one to think this way, trust me.

I can think of maybe five items with a low enough impact to warrant being in the game: Smoke Ball, Sandbag, Food, maybe Bunny Hood and maybe Freezie. The issue is, with these items, you only have five, so you basically end up spamming the stage with these five useless items (even on the lowest setting) and the occasional Smash Ball. Ultimately, that way of playing is annoying to both parties (especially if there are a lot of smoke balls out).

 

[BentoBox]

I don't get your point. ISP already incorporates all that you push forth, and you know that (since you post in said thread), so why disguise an assimilation attempt into this big rant? You already know which way to head if you're not satisfied with the way most play; how is their metagame evolving? Is the roster seemingly more balanced in ISP tournaments? What ATs have they found themselves with a mindset free from Melee? Some people are already seeking new ways of playing the game (either by changing rulesets or modifying the game itself; B+), why act like their efforts are in vain if the SBR doesn't acknowledge said efforts as standard?

Oh and lookie here:

We have a request aimed at anyone with a USB Gecko and coding/Brawl+ knowledge. We need someone to figure out a way to control item spawns. As of now, we don't know exactly how the game spawns items. Some think it is closest to the loser, some think according to hard-coded spawn points, some think it is proceedurally determined, and some think that it's purely random. Someone please figure out a way to hack the game to do the following:

*spawn items as close to the horizontal center of each map as possible, about 2/3s the distance above the ground (possibly next to the spawn platforms?)
*spawn items every 25-30 sec., regardless of spawn rate

If you can figure it out, I'll, I don't know, send you some cookies or PayPal you 5$ or something. I'll figure out a good reward. Someone please get on this!

Even they are trying to fix an inherent flaw with ISP.

 

[|RK|]

I'm not offended, I'm just wondering what differences in skill there are between timed matches and un-timed ones. What is "actual" skill in comparison?

Well, in un-timed matches, you don't have to worry about planking or a time limit. You can bring out your full skill and possibly win a match that your awesome defense couldn't save you in due to a constant need to attack in order to keep the time limit down.

In Brawl alone I've seen matches go to time from people trying to avoid the ridiculous chain grabs, avoiding Snake's stage control, out spacing metaknight, etc. You become so entrenched in the defense aspects of the game that it becomes very difficult to also play within the time limit. Does this apply to every match? Of course not. Good players are going to destroy worse ones (granted no luck is brought into play) relatively quickly. However, people on the same level of skill and ability can really drag out a fight. Then include the possibility that they are playing a ditto or characters that are relatively weak or heavy, and you can EASILY reach the time limit.

Well, that gives the good players a better chance. After all, without rushing, you can take time to overcome stage control or outspace. You'd be able to keep track of a Snake's mines and C4, etc.

Having to stay in a match for an extra 5 minutes, fatiguing you for the rest of the tournament more than a limited match would have, is a much worse scenario in my opinion. Also, if someone does have the percent advantage, do they not rightfully win? Is that some kind of robbed match or something?

Practice playing longer . It can be a robbed match. If your opponent spends the time evading, then shoots you once to win, or didn't even try to kill you. Remember, Smash isn't a traditional fighting game with a life bar, The goal is to get them off the stage and past the blast lines.

Not entirely, you are forgetting about the game outside of the game. Players get worn out. People who are trying to chase down a faster character for minute after minute will, most likely, get tired, frustrated, and may make a grave mistake. By not putting a time limit on it, you allow for someone to abuse levels to escape for long periods of time in excess of what they should to wait for an opportunity to strike that would have never presented itself in the game otherwise. Then, to compound with that,m if you include items, then you could have two people stall out a match until they get a certain item they need to win that gives them or their character some extreme advantage. That's not a very good set-up.

Well, let's pretend this doesn't have items. Besides, outspeeding and wearing down the opponent has proved a wise and skillful tactic throughout history to wear people down then attack. If they do that, you can easily counter by looking worse and mistimed early to trick them. Besides, on legal stages you can't out run the opponent forever.

For the same reason as the above, making stall tactics legal will not only wear out competitors and make them angry, it will make tournaments drag on for unmeasurable amounts of time making it difficult to reserve time slots ahead of time.

Well competitors should keep calm and mindgame their opponent, as described above. Both would be playing with skill. As for the reserving time slots... well, not everyone planks/stalls, right? I figure most people wouldn't stall and a lot of the matches would be under 8 minutes.

I think he means I'm in the thread, so there's obviously going to be trolling or something. It follows me when I try to do anything other than post on the Melee Samus boards.

Spoiler

Because, evidently, if you disagree with someone, no matter how clear, calm, and articulate you are, you are trolling.

There are articulate, clear, calm, trolls But that would be mean. Please don't attack mah buddy


EDIT: Bento, I am once again not pushing items. I'm saying we should try certain things. I mean, what item could be allowed in standard competitive play without giving character advantage? Probably Bananas set on low (ISP is set on Mid), because they work the same for Diddy, etc. Deku Nuts are broken, Smoke Balls make dealing with Snakes near impossible, etc. But yeah, this isn't expressly about items. If there is a good, solid reason for us taking away a part of the game (read: each item), then I'm fine with it.

According to the blogger, SWF is disliked by other fighting communities because we randomly take away parts of the game, or items.

 

[BentoBox]

You go host tournaments with no time limit and tell us if it runs smoothly...

 

[Falconv1.0]

The idea that we just decided that Brawl isn't like Melee=Brawl is worse is is ludicrous.

And I'm sorry but I thought the majority of competitive players agreed they didn't want **** popping up randomly in the game. If they added this to fighters like Guilty Gear or Street Fighter no one would even try to argue why they should be in, no matter how 'fair' they might be.

We have a general consensus on the rules for a reason.

/thread

 

[|RK|]

This isn't about items... items were used as an example... I'm saying, some items could be fair and equal, but whatever. I'd say food is good. No maxim tomatoes, no hearts, food. But never mind, for the spawning of such items would be unhelpful. Tell me, though... If you turn items to none, and Smash Ball on, do you still get the Pity Final Smash?

As for the no time limit... I have no means of being a tournament director. However, I would like someone to try it and tell me how it goes.

 

[Ich Bin Awesome]

The idea that we just decided that Brawl isn't like Melee=Brawl is worse is is ludicrous.

And I'm sorry but I thought the majority of competitive players agreed they didn't want **** popping up randomly in the game. If they added this to fighters like Guilty Gear or Street Fighter no one would even try to argue why they should be in, no matter how 'fair' they might be.

We have a general consensus on the rules for a reason.

/thread

LOL you are the perfect example of the close-mindedness the OP talks about.


Anyway, @ the more civil debate that RK Joker and coreygames are having:
I think this is getting besides the point of your OP joker. It seems like you guys are now getting bogged down in the specifics of the rules. RK suggests some ideas and corey presents a counter-argument then RK has his rebuttal. Repeat.

I don't think RK joker is saying he personally wants to come up with a new way of playing, but rather wants to get the ball rolling and have others start thinking of new things that might make the game more competitive. It doesn't have to be the items, or the time, or whatever. We just have to re-evaluate the possibilities and, though we can take what we learned from melee, kind of start from the ground up.

On a more specific note, maybe we can change characteristics like the gravity, or speed. Flowers on characters heads throughout the whole match?

*keeps ball rolling*

(correct me if i'm wrong on your purpose here RK)

 

[Falconv1.0]

My opinions on that matter are those held by most of the community, and it's a valid opinion. Dont call me close minded like some prick because I dont like the idea of us ****ing around with rules more. All I really touched on was the concept of items in competitive play, and that we aren't just being lazy and approaching it like Melee, which is a stupid ****ing claim. Wow, I dont like random stuff popping out of nowhere to add to the fight, and I dont like bs claims about how we make the rules/other stuff. I'm soooooo close minded.

 

[Corigames]

All I'm saying is that the powers at be that decided on these Melee-centric rules and boundaries have their reasons. If you think or feel that a different way is better, then go host a tournament and report how it goes. Post videos, tweak your rules, find ways to better your scheme. When you have finalized it, present it to the community and see if anyone adopts it. If you get a few people to try it out, have them report back their findings and have them post videos.

I trust the rules because, as my title suggests, I host tournaments. I play in tournaments. I know what it's like to play and run smash events. Having these rules best supports luckless skill, a reasonable play time for organizers to work in, and an environment players enjoy participating in. IF your way works out better, more power to you. Get it going.

 

[|RK|]

@ Ich:
Mmmm... Gravity and Speed to tell the truth are better for practice. Like if I want to practice DI or curving Extremespeed, I'd practice till I get it in Fast speed. Then I'd feel as if everything is in slow motion and it's easy to do both. In fact, it's easier to Brawl period after practicing in Fast mode.

"I don't think RK joker is saying he personally wants to come up with a new way of playing, but rather wants to get the ball rolling and have others start thinking of new things that might make the game more competitive. It doesn't have to be the items, or the time, or whatever. We just have to re-evaluate the possibilities and, though we can take what we learned from melee, kind of start from the ground up."

Yep, bingo!

And Falcon, if we can make the game more competitive, and more fun to play, why wouldn't we? Let's toss around ideas. Brawl's making is different from that of Melee's, so there is obviously difference between what rules we should have. If anyone thinks of any good rules, suggest them to the SBR. Oh, and present them elegantly, so they have reason for the topic's discussion.

@Corey:
Again, not trying to make a different scheme. Can you perhaps host a tournament to try the no time limit out? I have no means of hosting a tournament.

 

[Falconv1.0]

I saw less ideas and more claims that the SBR approached everything with a Melee attitude and that there's some magical rule out there that will make the game better. No one here is going to think of something the SBR didn't, I'm 99.999% sure of it.

 

[|RK|]

So suddenly, every SBR member (which isn't a think-tank) can think better than each of us? Not saying the SBR didn't think extensively, but give normal people some credit, Falcon

 

[:mad:]

I saw less ideas and more claims that the SBR approached everything with a Melee attitude and that there's some magical rule out there that will make the game better. No one here is going to think of something the SBR didn't, I'm 99.999% sure of it.

^This.
It's really not worth arguing about, guys. Exactly what are you accomplishing now?
Nothing's going to get changed.

Normal people like us just don't know as much about this game as they do.
Our opinions only matter to an extent, because they're the ones that make final decisions, and they're about 10 times smarter than you on this particular subject.

 

[|RK|]

Again, how? Each SBR member is NOT smarter than all of us regular members. That, specifically is close minded and subjective. There are many of us with the potential to be SBR members. And after "That Topic" many people believe that there are idiots in the SBR. People who believe low tiers shouldn't be played, Ness/Mario mainer.

 

[Corigames]

@Corey:
Again, not trying to make a different scheme. Can you perhaps host a tournament to try the no time limit out? I have no means of hosting a tournament.

1. I'm not inclined to do so. I see the current rules to be fitting.
2. I do not advocate Brawl as a competitive fighter game anyway. I would not host a tournament for it. Melee is a different story.
3. I live in West Virginia and still strive to set-up tournaments, how can you possibly be in a position where you cannot set up a tournament?

 

[|RK|]

Because:
1) I only have one Wii
2) I have no place to host the tournament

 

[:mad:]

Again, how? Each SBR member is NOT smarter than all of us regular members. That, specifically is close minded and subjective. There are many of us with the potential to be SBR members. And after "That Topic" many people believe that there are idiots in the SBR. People who believe low tiers shouldn't be played, Ness/Mario mainer.

They've dedicated more to smash than any of us have. There might be a select few that are smart enough, but when it comes down to it, we just don't matter. There might be idiots in the SBR, but we don't know how the people truly act. I actually don't care much for the back room, I enjoy playing Mario and Ness, so I just do. I attend tournaments, but don't place as high as I could because my characters have glaring weaknesses.

On another note, yes. There always needs to be a time limit for tournament play.

 

[Grunt]

Answers:
1) people bring their own Wiis
2) your house is good enough, or find a school that will rent out gyms/rooms.

 

[Corigames]

I only had one wii, tv, and melee disc and ran a 40 man tournament. You have people bring set ups >_> IF every tournament organizer had 5 TVs, 5 Wii/GCs, and the subsequent discs for all of those then there would hardly ever be a tournament.

Homes work fine. Apartments will do. Go to church? Set it up there. I'm doing one on the 4th at the local library for FREE. There is always a place to hold a tournament.

Trust me, in the sense of setting up a tournament, if there is a will there's a way. However, "Build it and they will come" is not always true. Attendance can be... shaky. RSVPs are good.

 

[:mad:]

I only had one wii, tv, and melee disc and ran a 40 man tournament. You have people bring set ups >_> IF every tournament organizer had 5 TVs, 5 Wii/GCs, and the subsequent discs for all of those then there would hardly ever be a tournament.

Homes work fine. Apartments will do. Go to church? Set it up there. I'm doing one on the 4th at the local library for FREE. There is always a place to hold a tournament.

Trust me, in the sense of setting up a tournament, if there is a will there's a way. However, "Build it and they will come" is not always true. Attendance can be... shaky. RSVPs are good.

Absolutely. It's really not that hard to set this up in advance and ask for people to bring their own setups. Charge admission for the venue, and if your bring a setup, you get in free. A lot of people use this system.

Public libraries tend to have seperate rooms that suffice, it doesn't cost much for a one day thing.