Smash Balls = New Play Style, Second Tourney Ruling?

[ShortAssassin]

Seems like everyone is angry all around actually. Yuna over here isn't going to win over anyone with his attitude, and all you Melee Players seem to consider even the thought of an alternate tournament with Smash stupid and dumb, despite the fact you can play in your own little "No Items" world. I actually agree with Kenryoku_Maxis in that you guys take 99% of the fun out of Smash... I mean I don't particularly mind tournament rules, but you don't have to be jerks and say their can't be two tournament rules.

Did you read the thread past page 4? People are rejecting Smash Balls in the highest form of competitive play but many are advocating tournaments with alternative rules for "competitive casuals." Here are some quotes:

Jack, I respect your ideas and your position on competitive smash but you have to understand something. We are not preventing anyone from playing their way, casual or not. If people seek to become competitive in an environment where items and wacky stages are allowed, they need to work to develop that type of competitive scene because currently, it does not exist. This is not due to exclusion however, it is due to those types of players not taking the initiative to start their own scene. Yes, we may flame someone who comes here and tells us items aren't so bad, but we don't tell them they HAVE to play our way. Nothing is preventing them from starting a new forum or holding their own tournaments.

Based on the current points that have been made, I think we can conclude these things:

1. We all like to play smash, and we all enjoy playing it with items both on and off

2. However, the competitive people are not interested in placing money on an item match (which I think makes sense)

3. There are some people (like Kieser) who would enjoy seeing item tournaments, and smash ball tournaments, and the like.

Based on these things, I think you, Kieser, need to organize some smash tourney's that include the things your talking about and see how they go over. And if you don't have the means to host tourney's, then start PMing some Smash Directors and see if any are willing to listen to you.

Thanks, that's exactly what I was trying to get across.
If you have a way that you like playing and you ask us to try it, chances are we will (or at lest I know I would).
But, ask us to a serious match and we’ll play by our standards because that what he have built on and what we feel is best.

However, if your style gets a good enough group of people to try it and like it enough to adopt it as their standard then that’s great.
Then you guys can start building on that standard and have fun betting or whatever you want.
Who am I to say how you or anyone should play?

 

[Yuna]

Seems like everyone is angry all around actually. Yuna over here isn't going to win over anyone with his attitude, and all you Melee Players seem to consider even the thought of an alternate tournament with Smash stupid and dumb, despite the fact you can play in your own little "No Items" world. I actually agree with Kenryoku_Maxis in that you guys take 99% of the fun out of Smash... I mean I don't particularly mind tournament rules, but you don't have to be jerks and say their can't be two tournament rules.

My attitude is just fine against anyone who bothers to read what's already been done to death in this and other threads.

I've already had to repeat the same things again and again. Despite this, some people ignore these points even though some of the posts I wrote were directed at them. It's at this point that I stop being curteous because they apparently see no reason to be curteous), but only to people who deserve it (who ignore my posts directed at them despite having read them because they reply to portions of them, who argue the same points over and over despite their arguments being inane and largely refuted by a large group of people, competitive or not, and then just people who are plain rude to me first.

Also, I'm not saying you can't have "Low Tier"-esque FS-tournies. I'm warning against them never working out becuse they will devolve into Marth-only Tournies once enough competitive people decide to compete in them. If not Only Marth then possibly Marth and These 3 Other Characters Who Are The Only Ones That Stand a Chance.

It's not comparable to anything in Melee because Brawl with FS:es make some characters so broken they almost can't be beat if the characters playing them are worth their salt.

Saying "we" take the fun out of Smash is like saying if that guy you don't like like the same music as you, then you can't like it anymore. No one's forcing you to go to our tournaments and confirming to our tournament rules. No one's forcing you to play according to our rules unless you choose to play us.

What I am doing is warning you against things that are obvious to anyone who's played any game competitively. If you haven't, maybe you can't understand it. But don't come and act like you do despite having no clue of half of what I'm talking about, act superior, refuse to see reason and repeat the catchphrases "Because I say so", "You're competitive, so I won't listen to you", "I haven't played the game yet. I'm assuming what I'm saying is right, though.", "Give it two years" or something equally inane (it's at these points that I stop being curteous as well).

If you have no insight into competitive play, then why do you assume I'm (or all of the other competitive players who've voiced their opinions against FS:es) wrong? I mean, how could you possibly know more than me about competitive play if you've never played a game competitively (You = Not you specifically, people in general)?

Sure, it won't be All Marth All the Time at first. But it will devolve into All Marth All the Time at least in time (and quite fast, I believe). And it'll be boring. And random (spawning, flight patterns) and no one will care. No one will enter. The few who enter will play Marth or so really badly.

And there'll be people grumpy about precious TVs occupied for a useless tournament.

 

[Kenryoku_Maxis]

Thank you for demonstrating the behavior of a typical casual. Can you see why sometimes we get angry Jack ?

Oh I know. But hey, you cannot deny the fact that Brawl is coming and we've just had 4-5 years of the 'best' people playing the same exact characters, with the same exact setup. Something has to give. It either has to be the mindset of those of you who have been setting all these tournaments up or

But now there's alternate variables. Millions more people are going to be buying this game. That's millions of others who are going to be getting into this game. Some are going to get into it and undoubtedly idolize that traditional 'tourney' spirit trying to latch onto the new wave of whatever you guys come up with or trying to be like the Melee players of old or something new is going to happen. They are going to start their own tournaments and perhaps new kinds of tournaments might start up.

Eventhough Melee was vastly popular, it was still mostly a strong internet community who all fed off similar rules and strategies that kept it going. This game is going to be MUCH broader and will the same thing happen or will you have multiple different types of tournaments and multiple different groups going?

And then there's the even larger variable. The Wi-Fi community. And I'm sure many in the tournament scene might even shrug these people off as 'casuals' and some might even dismiss the Wi-Fi option altogether as not to taint their reputation or 'skill'. But these people are the ones who are going to put some much needed life blood (see: verity of gameplay) into the game. If the tournament players are going to remain stagnant with three select players on one level and no items, then it'll be up to Wi-Fi play to allow for veriety. This time we won't be stuck, wherever you go to a Shash Bros get together, playing nothing but Fox's, Falco's, Sheik's and Marths on pre-approved levels.

 

[ShortAssassin]

Oh I know. But hey, you cannot deny the fact that Brawl is coming and we've just had 4-5 years of the 'best' people playing the same exact characters, with the same exact setup. Something has to give. It either has to be the mindset of those of you who have been setting all these tournaments up or

But now there's alternate variables. Millions more people are going to be buying this game. That's millions of others who are going to be getting into this game. Some are going to get into it and undoubtedly idolize that traditional 'tourney' spirit trying to latch onto the new wave of whatever you guys come up with or trying to be like the Melee players of old or something new is going to happen. They are going to start their own tournaments and perhaps new kinds of tournaments might start up.

Eventhough Melee was vastly popular, it was still mostly a strong internet community who all fed off similar rules and strategies that kept it going. This game is going to be MUCH broader and will the same thing happen or will you have multiple different types of tournaments and multiple different groups going?

And then there's the even larger variable. The Wi-Fi community. And I'm sure many in the tournament scene might even shrug these people off as 'casuals' and some might even dismiss the Wi-Fi option altogether as not to taint their reputation or 'skill'. But these people are the ones who are going to put some much needed life blood (see: verity of gameplay) into the game. If the tournament players are going to remain stagnant with three select players on one level and no items, then it'll be up to Wi-Fi play to allow for veriety. This time we won't be stuck, wherever you go to a Shash Bros get together, playing nothing but Fox's, Falco's, Sheik's and Marths on pre-approved levels.

And we have nothing against various gameplay types and tournaments. Smashboards is not preventing anyone from playing the game the way they want to play it.

 

[SAMaine]

My attitude is just fine against anyone who bothers to read what's already been done to death in this and other threads.

I've already had to repeat the same things again and again. Despite this, some people ignore these points even though some of the posts I wrote were directed at them. It's at this point that I stop being curteous because they apparently see no reason to be curteous), but only to people who deserve it (who ignore my posts directed at them despite having read them because they reply to portions of them, who argue the same points over and over despite their arguments being inane and largely refuted by a large group of people, competitive or not, and then just people who are plain rude to me first.

Also, I'm not saying you can't have "Low Tier"-esque FS-tournies. I'm warning against them never working out becuse they will devolve into Marth-only Tournies once enough competitive people decide to compete in them. If not Only Marth then possibly Marth and These 3 Other Characters Who Are The Only Ones That Stand a Chance.

It's not comparable to anything in Melee because Brawl with FS:es make some characters so broken they almost can't be beat if the characters playing them are worth their salt.

Why warn them if you are SO confident that Smash Balls are going to suck? If they honestly want Smash Balls on, let them have their fun, and then you can have your fun with all items off. I only accept tournament rules because they are rules honed by 7 years with Super Smash Bros. Melee. They tested everything under the sun, and the tournament rules are what worked. Also, the tournament rules appear just to be a guideline as I think the two competitors can agree to have a fight under any rules they want. In a year or two, we will have tournament rules for Brawl, and I suspect by then all possiblities including Smash Balls only would have been tested to their fullest extent. People want Smash Balls in because they consider them a technique and not your usual item.

 

[ShortAssassin]

Why warn them if you are SO confident that Smash Balls are going to suck? If they honestly want Smash Balls on, let them have their fun, and then you can have your fun with all items off. I only accept tournament rules because they are rules honed by 7 years with Super Smash Bros. Melee. They tested everything under the sun, and the tournament rules are what worked. Also, the tournament rules appear just to be a guideline as I think the two competitors can agree to have a fight under any rules they want. In a year or two, we will have tournament rules for Brawl, and I suspect by then all possiblities including Smash Balls only would have been tested to their fullest extent. People want Smash Balls in because they consider them a technique and not your usual item.

Items add a factor of luck and randomness to the game that detract from the pure test of skill that are competitive smash tournaments.

 

[Yuna]

Oh I know. But hey, you cannot deny the fact that Brawl is coming and we've just had 4-5 years of the 'best' people playing the same exact characters, with the same exact setup. Something has to give. It either has to be the mindset of those of you who have been setting all these tournaments up or

What is this myth about competitive Smashers being rigid and unyielding, unable to learn new tricks and set new rules?

I've been a part of many competitive gaming scenes throughout the years. Each time a new game comes out, new rules and strategies are worked out. Brawl will be no different!

But now there's alternate variables. Millions more people are going to be buying this game. That's millions of others who are going to be getting into this game. Some are going to get into it and undoubtedly idolize that traditional 'tourney' spirit trying to latch onto the new wave of whatever you guys come up with or trying to be like the Melee players of old or something new is going to happen. They are going to start their own tournaments and perhaps new kinds of tournaments might start up.

* As opposed to the millions of people who bought Melee?
* As opposed to the millions of mostly casual gamers who got into Melee=
* As opposed to the many casual gamers who tried to host failed mini-tournament with bad rules because no one besides their friends and some random people showed up with the Finals being played on quite a low skill level?

Eventhough Melee was vastly popular, it was still mostly a strong internet community who all fed off similar rules and strategies that kept it going. This game is going to be MUCH broader and will the same thing happen or will you have multiple different types of tournaments and multiple different groups going?

There is no chatting option in Brawl, neither voice-based or text-based. Unless you're playing With Friends, for which you need people's Brawl Codes, you will not know who you're playing and have no way of finding it out.

So you will need a strong Internet Community to keep Brawl's tournament scene going. You will need it to exchange friend codes, work out new strategies and announce tournaments!

And then there's the even larger variable. The Wi-Fi community. And I'm sure many in the tournament scene might even shrug these people off as 'casuals' and some might even dismiss the Wi-Fi option altogether as not to taint their reputation or 'skill'.

What Wi-Fi community? You cannot chat with people over the Wi-Fi. There isn't even a Wii-compatible mic as far as I know. You will still need to chat with them through other means. Like MSN or, gasp, forums.

But these people are the ones who are going to put some much needed life blood (see: verity of gameplay) into the game. If the tournament players are going to remain stagnant with three select players on one level and no items, then it'll be up to Wi-Fi play to allow for veriety. This time we won't be stuck, wherever you go to a Shash Bros get together, playing nothing but Fox's, Falco's, Sheik's and Marths on pre-approved levels.

* Variety isn't necessarily good.
* Final Smash tournaments will be much worse than tournaments with mostly Fox, Falco, Sheik and Marth players.
* No one's keeping you from playing any other characters. The rules are there to ensure balanced gameplay. Banning items doesn't automatically make Bowser worse. In fact, it makes him better because he's pretty crappy with items on, anyway, as opposed to, say, Marth.

Have your little tournaments with broken items and FS:es. But don't come crying to me when even the most casual of players eventually wise up and start playing only Marth in FS-tournaments. It's that broken.

 

[Kenryoku_Maxis]

Why warn them if you are SO confident that Smash Balls are going to suck? If they honestly want Smash Balls on, let them have their fun, and then you can have your fun with all items off. I only accept tournament rules because they are rules honed by 7 years with Super Smash Bros. Melee. They tested everything under the sun, and the tournament rules are what worked. Also, the tournament rules appear just to be a guideline as I think the two competitors can agree to have a fight under any rules they want. In a year or two, we will have tournament rules for Brawl, and I suspect by then all possiblities including Smash Balls only would have been tested to their fullest extent. People want Smash Balls in because they consider them a technique and not your usual item.

See, this is what I've been wondering this whole time ever since Brawl was announced. Smash Balls are an item, but it gives you one of your characters skills. Regardless if that skill is overpowered or not, if the smash ball wasn't there, you would be banning the character, not the smash ball from the tournament. So its not really the Smash Ball that's the problem, just the characters (ie Marths) skill? And why is it that you reject items, rules etc all the way until the highest characters become godly, leaving the weakest characters unplayable? Why not just ban the few godly characters from tournament play and let people play the rest of the 20+ characters of their choice if Fox/Falco/Sheik are the problem causing you to break 90% of the game.

Likewise this brings up the problem of other items that have been created for the game. Assist Trophies. These items are COMPLETELY random and I'm sure you all have since day one just said 'no way no they're out no NO!' But hey, this is what I'm saying, Brawl has been made specifically from the ground up to show you that Melee had problems and Brawl is fixing all those problems. Its clear with all these new item (note the word item) creations, plus the fixing of the barrels and etc, Sakurai is clearly trying to TELL people to play with items on. Just like I always told people, it hurt specific characters to play with items off in Melee (while yes I acknowledge that it also aided Fox/Falco). But in this game, its going to entirely CRIPPLE entire characters if you go about your normal extremist practices of all or nothing items on or off, smash balls on or off, etc. And we're not even going to go into the question of Samus, who you've just killed as a playable character by turning off Smash Balls.

I really question if originally Melee hadn't had been rushed and had its additional features, if the tournament scene would have even turned out the way it has.

 

[SAMaine]

Items add a factor of luck and randomness to the game that detract from the pure test of skill that are competitive smash tournaments.

And did I say anything about items not adding luck and randomness? I don't think I did, and if you think about it, Smash Bros is all about randomness and luck... I mean tripping, well, there you go. You might try to minimize the luck and randomness, but it's going to be there. You guys talk about competitive 1vs1 matches with hitboxes and no items, but Smash Bros. is popular merely because it is not just about that... it is not your normal fighting game.

 

[Yuna]

Why warn them if you are SO confident that Smash Balls are going to suck?

Because "they" are so adamant about it. They claim it will work hands down without even having played the game. They call "us" rigid, unresponsive, old-fashioned, stuck in a rut and other names for not "realizing" how much better tournaments would be "their way". A majority of them are also arguing implementing FS:es into all tournaments.

Very few actually argue simply having a side-tournament using FS:es, which I have already stated that I see no problem with. I just won't host them or attend them and very few other competitive players will.

If they honestly want Smash Balls on, let them have their fun, and then you can have your fun with all items off.

Let them. But why argue against "us" about it and calling us names for not wanting it on=

I only accept tournament rules because they are rules honed by 7 years with Super Smash Bros. Melee.

Yeah, the tournament rules have stayed pretty much the same in the past 4 years with only a few changes. It doesn't take 7 years to get a good ruleset going. We ban whatever we find is broken until such a time (if there is one) we find workarounds around them.

Why is that so hard to understand?! As far as we know so far, FS:es are broken and imbalanced (not to mention random). There is no logical way to work around them. Unless we find some new gamebreaking glitches and exploits. As such, we'll just ban them until such a time (if such a time ever comes) we find a workaround around them.

They tested everything under the sun, and the tournament rules are what worked.

Yeah, you see, certain things are immediately obvious. We didn't have to test Brinstar Depths for two years to realize it would never be viable in tournaments.

Also, the tournament rules appear just to be a guideline as I think the two competitors can agree to have a fight under any rules they want.

No, no they can't. Ever.

In a year or two, we will have tournament rules for Brawl, and I suspect by then all possiblities including Smash Balls only would have been tested to their fullest extent. People want Smash Balls in because they consider them a technique and not your usual item.

They want them in because they consider them "fun". It's not a technique because it requires an item. I mean, most characters have individual animations and attacks when using bludgeoning items. Do you call those techniques as well?

It's also random and thus not viable.

It's imbalanced and everyone will start playing Marth or one of 3 other characters if they want to stand even the most remote chance of doing well.

Unless we find gamebreaking glitches and exploits, these factors cannot possibly change. It's that obvious and broken! And all rulesets have to start somewhere.

So we'll start with FS:es unbanned and if we ever find stuff that makes them less broken, we might unban them. Why is that so hard to understand and accept?

And did I say anything about items not adding luck and randomness? I don't think I did, and if you think about it, Smash Bros is all about randomness and luck... I mean tripping, well, there you go. You might try to minimize the luck and randomness, but it's going to be there. You guys talk about competitive 1vs1 matches with hitboxes and no items, but Smash Bros. is popular merely because it is not just about that... it is not your normal fighting game.

Yes, Brawl added Tripping, which worsens the depth even more. It limits what we can do even more and we hate it. Doesn't mean it's now a license to add even more randomness. In competitive play, it's imperative to limit randomness.

You know, those millions of casuals who don't want to play the game on a competitive level, they can host their own tournaments if they want to. They don't have to go to competitive level tournaments. But if they do, they have no right to whine about "our" rules or whine on our forums about it, creating countless threads despite them all repeating the same inane arguments and being shot down time and again. I mean, most casuals just want items, more stages, more randomness and broken stuff like FS:es on because "it's more fun". "More fun" is never OK if it means "Less skill-based" and "Less competitive". If they don't like "our" rules, they can host their own tournaments.

I wonder why tournaments with items and broken stuff allowed haven't done well with Melee in the past despite there being vastly more casual gamers than competitive ones...

 

[ShortAssassin]

Kenryoku, please read this thread because you don't seem to understand competitive smash.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=144942

 

[Yuna]

See, this is what I've been wondering this whole time ever since Brawl was announced. Smash Balls are an item, but it gives you one of your characters skills. Regardless if that skill is overpowered or not, if the smash ball wasn't there, you would be banning the character, not the smash ball from the tournament. So its not really the Smash Ball that's the problem, just the characters (ie Marths) skill? And why is it that you reject items, rules etc all the way until the highest characters become godly, leaving the weakest characters unplayable? Why not just ban the few godly characters from tournament play and let people play the rest of the 20+ characters of their choice if Fox/Falco/Sheik are the problem causing you to break 90% of the game.

No we wouldn't. Because that character would not have that skill without the Smash Ball.

Because Fox, Falco, Sheik and Marth didn't break the game. People could still win against them. Even lower tiers stood a chance. In Brawl, they don't.

Likewise this brings up the problem of other items that have been created for the game. Assist Trophies. These items are COMPLETELY random and I'm sure you all have since day one just said 'no way no they're out no NO!' But hey, this is what I'm saying, Brawl has been made specifically from the ground up to show you that Melee had problems and Brawl is fixing all those problems. Its clear with all these new item (note the word item) creations, plus the fixing of the barrels and etc, Sakurai is clearly trying to TELL people to play with items on. Just like I always told people, it hurt specific characters to play with items off in Melee (while yes I acknowledge that it also aided Fox/Falco). But in this game, its going to entirely CRIPPLE entire characters if you go about your normal extremist practices of all or nothing items on or off, smash balls on or off, etc. And we're not even going to go into the question of Samus, who you've just killed as a playable character by turning off Smash Balls.

Yeah, because competitive gaming never bans anything ever. They just play the game "like the developer intended them to". I mean, Sakurai should have the right to dictate competitive gaming rules, right?

If he truly wanted to force us into playing with items, then he'd have removed the Item Switch. Samus and Zamus can be played just fine without the Final Smash. In fact, there two ways of changing into Zamus from Samus. You just can't change back. But they are separate characters.

Also, no character get entirely crippled without items or Final Smashes. Name 5 and motivate your choices.

I really question if originally Melee hadn't had been rushed and had its additional features, if the tournament scene would have even turned out the way it has.

If we'd been forced to play with items on and with all stages on and other ****, trust me, the Melee scene would've been tiny compared to what it is today.

 

[Kenryoku_Maxis]

Kenryoku, please read this thread because you don't seem to understand competitive smash.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=144942

I understand it. I've experienced it first hand. I’ve even been in tournaments and won a couple earlier smaller ones before everything turned into Wavedashing and Fox vs Sheik. And I was in tournaments after that.

Now, everywhere I go and everyone I play wants to be a part of the 'tournament scene'. The thing is, I find its geared not towards limiting luck or balancing the game, but it has just made the select best characters who were already too strong even stronger and made 20 characters non-viable to be played. Not only in tournaments but almost anywhere I want to go because everyone just wants to play Fox/Falco/Sheik/Marth/Peach and practice the moves they saw their idols do online. And this comes from someone who plays Marth.

Call me a casual, scrub or whatever you want for not just going with the program and being like everyone else but frankly, the 'tournament setup' has gone beyond just the tournaments and its mostly how I see most casuals want to play the game 24/7. Some of you might take a break and play Link/Ganondorf/Pichu or what have you from time to time but I don't have that luxury. Every time I go to a Smash Bros get together or a LAN center, its nothing but Fox vs Sheik on Final Destination for 4-8 hours.

And I'm just looking for some kind of hope that Brawl is going to change that, either by implementing forced use of Smash Balls and Assist Trophies or more level variety or better character selection. Or better still, that the game is shown to have so much variety and character selection and etc that the tournament scene is forced to implement at least half of these things. I feel so saddened that it even has to come down to a fact that people, before the game even comes out, are looking more to what they are going to have to take out, what they are afraid of being 'overpowered' and 'too luck based' and what they don't like instead of what can be used, if some items actually can be turned on this time and what they actually do like about the game.

 

[Yuna]

I understand it. I've experienced it first hand. I’ve even been in tournaments and won a couple earlier smaller ones before everything turned into Wavedashing and Fox vs Sheik. And I was in tournaments after that.

Now, everywhere I go and everyone I play wants to be a part of the 'tournament scene'. The thing is, I find its geared not towards limiting luck or balancing the game, but it has just made the select best characters who were already too strong even stronger and made 20 characters non-viable to be played. Not only in tournaments but almost anywhere I want to go because everyone just wants to play Fox/Falco/Sheik/Marth/Peach and practice the moves they saw their idols do online. And this comes from someone who plays Marth.

Call me a casual, scrub or whatever you want for not just going with the program and being like everyone else but frankly, the 'tournament setup' has gone beyond just the tournaments and its mostly how I see most casuals want to play the game 24/7. Some of you might take a break and play Link/Ganondorf/Pichu or what have you from time to time but I don't have that luxury. Every time I go to a Smash Bros get together or a LAN center, its nothing but Fox vs Sheik on Final Destination for 4-8 hours.

And I'm just looking for some kind of hope that Brawl is going to change that, either by implementing forced use of Smash Balls and Assist Trophies or more level variety or better character selection. Or better still, that the game is shown to have so much variety and character selection and etc that the tournament scene is forced to implement at least half of these things. I feel so saddened that it even has to come down to a fact that people, before the game even comes out, are looking more to what they are going to have to take out, what they are afraid of being 'overpowered' and 'too luck based' and what they don't like instead of what can be used, if some items actually can be turned on this time and what they actually do like about the game.

How is turning items and FS:es on going to allow for more variety in characters?! They will limit the character selection even more.

If you cannot understand that by now, you haven't been reading my posts. Please come back when you have.

In Melee, there were tiers and only certain characters ever won tournaments. In Brawl with FS, only certain characters will even stand a chance of winning a set. That's the truth. Read up on my posts on why before you reply with unsubstantiated posts repeating "Blah, blah, the old rules made the Top Tiers Top Tiers". Guess what, they would all have remained Top Tiers even with all stages and all items on.

In fact, Marth would've been even better because he'd gain the ability to maybe have a projectile, something he was unique among the Top Tiers to lack.

 

[flyinfilipino]

Wow, you never get tired, do you, Yuna?

 

[peachori]

if you've ever been to a big tournament, then you'll know that finishing singles, doubles, and crews is often hard enough. there are sometimes side ssb64/pokemon tournaments but most who enter them do so just for kicks and the payouts are small at best. this thread was originally about a second smash ball on tourney but thats not really viable in large tourney settings.

i love it when people complain about how melee was all marth/spacies when a jigglypuff just won pound.
/shameless mango plug
really though, melee's metagame is still changing. if you think its all spacies on fd, you're wrong.

 

[NES n00b]

A Jigglypuff won Pound 3 and Chu Dat regularly places high in most high level tournies. Captain Falcon and Samus doesn't do that bad either.

If you banned lets say, Fox, Sheik, Marth, Peach, and Falco in Melee. Then, everyone would just play as Falcon, ICs, Jiggs, and Samus after they were banned. Then if you banned those characters, then the mario bros and Ganon would be the most viable. You see where this is going? Banning those characters wouldn't change much. When you ban a character, he has to be so much better than other characters that he cannot be beaten by someone using another character who is much better than guy using that character (or is just unbeatable at the highest level of play where only one character is viable). Akuma in Street Fighter 2 (forgot the edition) was entirely broken because he had the highest stats in the game bar none and he had moves that shut down almost everyone's game. He was made to be an impossibly hard boss character and he did that job well. So he was banned. If Gigabowser was a selectable character, he would be banned, too.

Plus, I doubt you were in high level tournies and I could beat all your friends high tier characters with Link. (Assuming you you go to gamestop tourney or something)

 

[Jack Kieser]

Ok, I'm going to post the link to this again, so that people who are interested in conversing about and working towards the original post and original message of this thread can have a meaningful and non-inflammatory conversation.

Yuna, I've had the most hellish morning known to man, so I'm not going to stoop to the level of being demeaning, not today... but this thread had almost an entire page of civility before you showed up again. No one was being condecending or inflammatory until you dissected a post by me as if I was arguing something, when the post wasn't even an argument to begin with. That post was not aimed at you; it was aimed at the people like Knight-errant who were willing (and trying) to have a deep, civil discussion to work towards an endpoint.

I'm not talking to you with this post about possible tournaments configurations including items. I was talking to the people who play Smash competitively, but still enjoy an item match, who would like to see a serious competition that may or may not include items. I know that's not you; we ALL know that's not you. So stop belittling and picking apart posts that have nothing to do with you.

For the record, the whole reason I posted that hypothetical was because people in this very thread said that I should look more into the possibilities myself, and so I obliged.

If you see an item tournament in the future at a Smash Fest you happen to be at, you don't have to play, so stop trying to make it so that people who might possibly want to in the future can't even talk about it.

I'm still asking that people who are interested in the possibility of serious item tournament styles in the future give me valid criticisms so that I can fix the flaws in my preliminary, and by no means final ideas.

And, Yuna... if you want me to show you all the ways your latest dissection of my words is wrong... then PM me and I'll do it there, because I'm not going to clutter this thread with anymore needless banter. This thread (one can assume from the OP) was made for a discussion.

 

[peachori]

i think its unclear whether you're advocating a second set of tournament rules to be used at standalone FS-on tournaments or a second set of tournament rules to be used at FS-on side tournaments.

people seem to be arguing whether either of those scenarios should even exist and its starting to get convoluted.

 

[Jack Kieser]

i think its unclear whether you're advocating a second set of tournament rules to be used at standalone FS-on tournaments or a second set of tournament rules to be used at FS-on side tournaments.

people seem to be arguing whether either of those scenarios should even exist and its starting to get convoluted.

A second, completely separate set of rules, complementary but not a replacement.

The whole part in my link-to post about the two styles being mutually inclusive is for events like Smash Fests (that I've been told about), where large numbers of people get together to play; in that case, the two styles can be held together, at the same event, and cater to two different kinds of play at the same time in the same place.

EDIT: I'm going out for a walk (I KNOW... the sun, it burns the skin... ), so I'll be gone for a while. Just letting anyone who wanted to continue the discussion know I'll be gone for a little bit.

 

[Kenryoku_Maxis]

How is turning items and FS:es on going to allow for more variety in characters?! They will limit the character selection even more.

If you cannot understand that by now, you haven't been reading my posts. Please come back when you have.

In Melee, there were tiers and only certain characters ever won tournaments. In Brawl with FS, only certain characters will even stand a chance of winning a set. That's the truth. Read up on my posts on why before you reply with unsubstantiated posts repeating "Blah, blah, the old rules made the Top Tiers Top Tiers". Guess what, they would all have remained Top Tiers even with all stages and all items on.

In fact, Marth would've been even better because he'd gain the ability to maybe have a projectile, something he was unique among the Top Tiers to lack.

I already put to you the question of why don't you ban a character if one character is going to break the game so bad that you have to ban Smash Balls for every other character, limiting all of their Final Smashes and make them lose their abilities and possibly make some other characters not viable for torunament play. You seem to reject the idea as not viable because in the past, they gimped the entire game of Melee just to allow for the keeping of all the characters playable, even when that allowed for the characters selection to be limited to three of the top best characters, who were already the best, staying the best.

I don't see the logic. If Marth is seen as being one of the best characters pre-Brawl without his Final Smash along with Meta Knght and Peach and possibly King Dedede and Ike, what's the point of taking away Smash Balls and finding out he is still the best? Just ban him and allow Smash Balls to be there. Then *Shock* maybe we can have Smash Balls and OMG maybe some other characters can have a chance to be viable for tourney play.

Instead of just hacking away at the game until its 'perfect without any hint of luck or random variables'. Until you have a game that is nothing but three characters with every move memorized and a flat stage. You might as well just go play Tekken. The point is, instead of looking for stuff to take OUT of the game, look for things you can keep INTO it.

It all goes back to your fundamental rule that you believe items are the problem of Smash Bros tournament play. Trust me, I understand 100% where you are coming from. But, although you have heard it a million times, it is also the entire point of the game... Blah blah its like playing Mario Kart without Items. You'd just be driving around and really only be able to pass the other drivers by your own kart drivers speed and your ability to skid...and while that's possible, in effect, everyone would just pick Bowser (going off the 64 version). That's my same argument against Melee.

So really, we're probably not gonna get anywhere. I'm just expressing how I want Brawl to change things. It seems that you're already looking for the next set of tournament worthy characters but also weary of what can be broken in Brawl. I'm not oblivious of these things, but you have to come from my side of having 5+ years of seeing nothing but fox/falco/sheik players ANYWHERE I go. I'm desperate for a change, even as far as making it so such a setup as not ever allowing such a three character teir be created again.

Even if one character is super-god over all the others, everyone who plays that character just won't be held in such high esteem like a Ken or Aniki or Mikael or etc.

 

[TheRooster]

i think its unclear whether you're advocating a second set of tournament rules to be used at standalone FS-on tournaments or a second set of tournament rules to be used at FS-on side tournaments.

people seem to be arguing whether either of those scenarios should even exist and its starting to get convoluted.

I don't think its unclear. He says it in the first post. I even said in the second post.
The problem is that most people dont read anything thats not on the last page.

I tried to fix that too, a couple of times now by reminding everyone that this was about a SEPARATE tournament.

But no one cares.... everyone loves a fight.

Anyway, I am interested in this second tournament ruling, and so would a lot of people I know. So if we can somehow salvage the thread, I'd love to discuss possible rules and speculation based upon what we've played/seen.

Any takers?

 

[peachori]

well i think this has turned into more of an argument about whether such a tournament would be widely popular. it seems that you're discussing what rules would be in and out of a FS-on ruleset, but keep in mind we don't make the ruleset. thats why we have the fine people in the SBR.

of course, that shouldn't stop you from speculating.
i think it would be pretty cool, actually. you wouldnt really have to change the rules, just turn the FS on. wouldnt pay money to enter it though :/

 

[SiegKnight]

I don't like Yuna's condensensing style of speech in this thread though I agree with his points. I recall him mentioning some Third Strike analogies before as if he played it and being one of the best in UK at it I'd love to moneymatch him for 600£ (first to 10 vs my SA2 Chun) and eat him for breakfast at that. I do think he's speaking properly even if he'll scare young children off.

Regardless, Smash Balls are ****ing awesome, but a complete waste of potential on ninty's part. I also believe two competetive players should be able to neutrally agree on any rules they want like Kenryoku percieved that they could. Just, well, because. If one player disagrees, then back to tourney rules it should be, of course. Its your problem if you let it happen to begin with as you could disagree.

Also, I want to clarify to Yuna about luck. Alot of competetive scenes from Pokemon to Super Turbo keep luck pretty much unminimalized because strategically you have to consider whether the gamble is worth it or to go for a guarantied option. Not saying you don't have very ample and well tested reasons for banning luck related stuff; but you're still a minority in that way.

Man Brawl is the most limited ****ing game to play 1 v 1 though. You know that? Barely any good rock paper scissors with unequal rewards and the only thing I find skillful is Just Defending attacks with the new shield mechanism, and I'm not always sure its even giving me frame advantage. When people like, sucked Rukario's **** for his d air's versatility I had just gotten off discovering its crazyness myself and I didn't even find that impressive. Though its about the only move in the game I feel has any real strategy right now.

I do want 1 v 1 no items brawl to be fun though. I hope trying it more vs ok players shapes my view up a little.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I'm still asking that people who are interested in the possibility of serious item tournament styles in the future give me valid criticisms so that I can fix the flaws in my preliminary, and by no means final ideas.

One of the major flaws I'd like to point out is your swiss system. The swiss system takes an extremely long time, and coupled with a regular tournament, just wouldn't be feasible due to time restraints. I still feel a double elimination system, combine with pools, would still be the best base for this tournament. Perhaps you could just increase the number of matches each round consists of. You could possibly make each match 3 out of 5, and 4 out of 7 for semifinals and finals. It would still take a very long time, but it's much more reasonable than the swiss system.

 

[Jack Kieser]

One of the major flaws I'd like to point out is your swiss system. The swiss system takes an extremely long time, and coupled with a regular tournament, just wouldn't be feasible due to time restraints. I still feel a double elimination system, combine with pools, would still be the best base for this tournament. Perhaps you could just increase the number of matches each round consists of. You could possibly make each match 3 out of 5, and 4 out of 7 for semifinals and finals. It would still take a very long time, but it's much more reasonable than the swiss system.

That's one of the main reasons I put forth both the Swiss and the Round-Robin styles as possibilities; I don't know, in practice, either system down to a T, so I felt the flexibility of putting forth two systems instead of only one would help for a preliminary.

I managed to get enough people together to come to my place in March 16 to hold an entire day's worth of tournaments of varying playstyles so that I can see what works the best; I'm also trying to contact my fellow competitive Smashers up in Washington State who would be willing to help me experiment with all the different play combinations and styles so I can knock this testing out as efficiently as possible. Hopefully, in a month or so, I'll be able to get preliminary testing done so I can experiment with tournament rules and test for time constraints.

 

[PXG]

Then maybe you should start admitting that Smash Bros has always been a game that hasn't been balanced towards tournament play and the only way anyone has ever been able to get it anywhere near 'tournament worthy' has been to negate 90% of the games variables. Now that Brawl is coming, it looks like you all want to do even more, either making the whole game 'Marth vs Marth' or just a selection of a few set characters like Meta Knight/Peach/etc with your same bland no items + 3 stock + final destination.

Is their no hope to Smash Bros? Is Smash Bros just suppose to be doomed to be played by the pros as a game gimped where you can only select 3 characters with 90-95% of the rest of the game removed? If that's the case, count me out. I'll be playing 'scrubs' on Wi-Fi and my friends having some actual fun enjoying the rest of the characters and features of one of the most massive games ever made. Enjoy your next 7 years of X/X/X + no items + final destination + stock which half of you are already stating is how matches should be set up, despite how this game has obviously been made from the ground up to try to fix.

And if I hear one more person cry about 'luck' being the problem with why everything was made the way it was in Melee and subsaquently will ruin Brawl the same way...the ENTIRE point of Smash Bros from day one was characters bashing each other senseless and throwing items at each other. This game isn't Street fighter, Soul Calibur or Guilty Gear where you fight 1 on 1 with Skill vs Mind Games and one person keeps hitting another until the others life total goes down to 0. Its a game where anything goes, rough and tumble beat-em-up where you have to think instantly and destroy your opponent in any way possible before he destroys you. Be that way with items, your own skills, using the level to your advantage, or even throwing your opponents into each other, etc. You guys all want to turn it into a fricken game of Street Fighter. Sakurai has tried to make that clear, even moreso on his Dojo updates, and Brawl with all of its new items and techniques has just been even more that point.

Uh. No. If Sakurai wanted us to play with items so bad, and if that is the "true" essence of Smash, which you speak of, then he wouldn't have given us the OPTION to turn them off. Brawl is about doing what you want to do and playing the game how you want to play it. If you want to play with items, fine. If you don't want to play with items, fine. Your statement is a paradigm of why competitive Smashers get so annoyed with casuals. LISTEN!!!

WE ARE NOT TELLING YOU HOW TO PLAY THE GAME. WE ARE NOT SAYING YOU SUCK AT THE GAME. WE RESPECT YOUR WAY OF PLAYING THE GAME. WE HAVE SPECIFIC RULES THAT ENSURE FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY IN ORDER TO CREATE A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT PURELY BASED ON SKILL. WE DO NOT EXCLUDE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO JOIN. HOWEVER, YOU MUST ABIDE TO OUR RULES AND OUR WAY OF PLAYING THE GAME.

If the casuals continue to fail to understand these simple points, then YOU are the ones who are blind and closed minded. Again, if you want to hold tournaments with items/ FSes, go right ahead. We encourage more people to play this awesome game. But, we have specific rules for our community.

We do not exclude ANYONE. You can join our group at anytime. However, don't expect us to change our rules. EVERY single group, community, faction, guild, ect has rules and guidlines. Competitive Smash is no different.

 

[TheRooster]

of course, that shouldn't stop you from speculating.
i think it would be pretty cool, actually. you wouldnt really have to change the rules, just turn the FS on. wouldnt pay money to enter it though :/

I would'nt expect people to pay money. Maybe a little, but not as much as a regular tournament. Unless it caught on in a big way or something.

Either way, people say that the real compettetive players go for the money and thats in a standard brawl. But even around here we hold separate tournaments for pros and non-pros. It saves us all time and gives everyone a fair shot.

Either way, I think holding a tournament free (possibly with gimmie-prize for the winner) would draw a lot of players because there is nothing to lose .

Tournaments weren't always about the money...

 

[TheRooster]

Uh. No. If Sakurai wanted us to play with items so bad, and if that is the "true" essence of Smash, which you speak of, then he wouldn't have given us the OPTION to turn them off. Brawl is about doing what you want to do and playing the game how you want to play it. If you want to play with items, fine. If you don't want to play with items, fine. Your statement is a paradigm of why competitive Smashers get so annoyed with casuals. LISTEN!!!

WE ARE NOT TELLING YOU HOW TO PLAY THE GAME. WE ARE NOT SAYING YOU SUCK AT THE GAME. WE RESPECT YOUR WAY OF PLAYING THE GAME. WE HAVE SPECIFIC RULES THAT ENSURE FAIRNESS AND EQUALITY IN ORDER TO CREATE A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT PURELY BASED ON SKILL. WE DO NOT EXCLUDE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO JOIN. HOWEVER, YOU MUST ABIDE TO OUR RULES AND OUR WAY OF PLAYING THE GAME.

If the casuals continue to fail to understand these simple points, then YOU are the ones who are blind and closed minded. Again, if you want to hold tournaments with items/ FSes, go right ahead. We encourage more people to play this awesome game. But, we have specific rules for our community.

We do not exclude ANYONE. You can join our group at anytime. However, don't expect us to change our rules. EVERY single group, community, faction, guild, ect has rules and guidlines. Competitive Smash is no different.

I thought we were past the arguing.......

 

[Jack Kieser]

If the casuals continue to fail to understand these simple points, then YOU are the ones who are blind and closed minded. Again, if you want to hold tournaments with items/ FSes, go right ahead. We encourage more people to play this awesome game. But, we have specific rules for our community.

We do not exclude ANYONE. You can join our group at anytime. However, don't expect us to change our rules. EVERY single group, community, faction, guild, ect has rules and guidlines. Competitive Smash is no different.

I'm going to interject here just for the sake of keeping up appearances as Devil's Advocate.

The bolded section of the quotation says 'our community'. I would just like to make sure of something: by saying 'our community', do you mean the current tournament scene, or do you mean Smashboards? Because as I look at the top of the webpage, I see the banner saying "The Largest Smash Bros. Community", which does not specify anything about playstyles, tournaments, casual, competitive, or anything else. In all technicality, anyone trying to be exclusive at all on this forum is, by that definition, not going against the spirit of Smash, but instead against the spirit of Smashboards. Granted, I haven't been a member of this community for as long as most people have, but if I'm wrong and Smashboards is synonomous with only the current tournament scene, then that banner needs to be changed.

Casuals, competitives, item players, no-item players... all of these descriptors mean absolutely nothing, in the long run. If I have gathered the spirit of this forum correctly (and please correct me if I'm wrong), this place is a forum where people who love Smash in any style can come together to discuss and play a game they love.

Saying that 'we (Smashboards) do not exclude anyone who wishes to join' and then following up that statement with 'you must abide to our rules and our way of playing the game (current accepted tournament style)' is contradictory, as Smashboards, from what I've come to know, is simply about playing Smash, not about promoting one way of play above another, as you are clearly doing.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But, I'll need to see some proof from these boards before I concede that point.

And TheRooster, I entirely agree with you; that's why I put forth the potential concept of a 'low-stakes' alternative.

 

[PXG]

I thought we were past the arguing.......

Just wanted to sum up Yuna's points.

 

[Libomasus]

Then maybe you should start admitting that Smash Bros has always been a game that hasn't been balanced towards tournament play and the only way anyone has ever been able to get it anywhere near 'tournament worthy' has been to negate 90% of the games variables.

Smashbros has always been a tournament worthy game, and its blatantly obvious when you look at the game mechanics that Sakurai implemented. LVL 9 CPU's use some crazy advanced techniques, and a lot of intended techniques were also added that give the game depth. Smash DI, Ledgeteching, Powershielding, Lightshielding, Meteor Canceling, Crouch Canceling, Jump Canceling, Double Jump Canceling, L-Canceling, Trajectory DI, Chaingrabbing, Short-hopping, Dash Dancing, Tech Chasing, Wakeup games, and other techniques that took technical skill and were intended for mindgames...

Sorry, but its annoying for people to say Smash was never tournament worthy and that we are trying to "turn it into Street Fighter." Deep down Sakurai did want it to be a competitive fighter with technical depth. Even when the game began, back when 2D Fighters were all the rage, it was planned to be a more practical fighter(Look up the Iwata Asks Interview). If anything, Sakurai never intended for it to be the crazy popular, casual, free-for-all, Nintendo-fest it is now.

As for Melee only having 3 usable characters, I disagree.

 

[meko]

If you've played the game at all, it doesn't take much to realize how seriously broken some FSes are. It wouldn't allow for a wider selection of characters because most of the characters that are already good are the ones with the better FSes. If anything smash balls would limit the character selection even more.

 

[thesage]

I already put to you the question of why don't you ban a character if one character is going to break the game so bad that you have to ban Smash Balls for every other character, limiting all of their Final Smashes and make them lose their abilities and possibly make some other characters not viable for torunament play. You seem to reject the idea as not viable because in the past, they gimped the entire game of Melee just to allow for the keeping of all the characters playable, even when that allowed for the characters selection to be limited to three of the top best characters, who were already the best, staying the best.

I'd much rather ban techniques/stages instead of characters. The characters are much more important to the game than stages/ playing w/ items.

Even if you ban the "top tier" characters, then the next tier will be broken. Unless you want to play only with characters that have ****ty final smashes.... which kinda takes away the point of the tournament.

I don't see the logic. If Marth is seen as being one of the best characters pre-Brawl without his Final Smash along with Meta Knght and Peach and possibly King Dedede and Ike, what's the point of taking away Smash Balls and finding out he is still the best? Just ban him and allow Smash Balls to be there. Then *Shock* maybe we can have Smash Balls and OMG maybe some other characters can have a chance to be viable for tourney play.

Because the characters you mentioned are not that broken compared to the rest of the characters. Right now there aren't any extremely broken characters or bad characters. The game hasn't been out long enough.

Then we should ban Falco and Wolf because their fs takes away two stocks (not sure about Falco) and they have an easy time getting the smash ball. What about characters like Lucario, Ness, and Lucas who have final smashes that are worthless in singles? They would be practically unusable.

Instead of just hacking away at the game until its 'perfect without any hint of luck or random variables'. Until you have a game that is nothing but three characters with every move memorized and a flat stage. You might as well just go play Tekken. The point is, instead of looking for stuff to take OUT of the game, look for things you can keep INTO it.

Please stop saying that only the top tiers are used in tournaments. A jigglypuff player just won the last major tournament (Pound 3) and she is mid tier (well not anymore lol). Also, The "flat stages" you're talking about are considered neutral stages. Players are free to counterpick stages like Corneria, Jungle Japes, and Green Greens. Heck Kongo Jungle 64 is on random for teams.

It all goes back to your fundamental rule that you believe items are the problem of Smash Bros tournament play. Trust me, I understand 100% where you are coming from. But, although you have heard it a million times, it is also the entire point of the game... Blah blah its like playing Mario Kart without Items. You'd just be driving around and really only be able to pass the other drivers by your own kart drivers speed and your ability to skid...and while that's possible, in effect, everyone would just pick Bowser (going off the 64 version). That's my same argument against Melee.

Um... Bowser was only good in the snes mario kart...

Items are not the enitre point of the game, otherwise there wouldn't be an option to turn them off. How would you feel if you just lost 1000 dollars because an item spawned next to your opponent on your last stock and he edgeguarded you with it and killed you at very low percents, when he had 140 damage? You were clearly the better player, but he won by some stupid fluke.

So really, we're probably not gonna get anywhere. I'm just expressing how I want Brawl to change things. It seems that you're already looking for the next set of tournament worthy characters but also weary of what can be broken in Brawl. I'm not oblivious of these things, but you have to come from my side of having 5+ years of seeing nothing but fox/falco/sheik players ANYWHERE I go. I'm desperate for a change, even as far as making it so such a setup as not ever allowing such a three character teir be created again.

Um... there aren't any Marth players where you live? I wanna live thar lol. There is variety in the tournament scene. Every tournament I've been to I've seen at least everyone above and including pika on the tier list being played (except Yoshi).

So you're mad cause you desperately want items in brawl and think that if we ban the top tier then all the other characters would be used? If we banned fox, falco, sheik, Peach, and Marth, then Doc, Ic's, Samus, and Falcon would dominate as all of their counters were removed.

E

Even if one character is super-god over all the others, everyone who plays that character just won't be held in such high esteem like a Ken or Aniki or Mikael or etc.

Then why in the world are you refering to Marth, Samus (ex-link player), and Peach players? I was expecting you to say like Taj or Simna or someone else. I look up to Zelgladis and I'm a Ness mainer.

Edit: To stay on topic, I'm going to say that tournaments with final smashes on will just be like the tournaments with items on in melee.

@guyaskingquestionaboutwhatcommunitytheotherguyisreferingto: He means the competitive smash players who go to tournaments that you have to pay to enter and are at least mentioned on this site in the tournaments section. It's not like if you join swf you are instantly in the community. Heck some tournament players don't even have accounts on here. You have to go to tournaments or smashfest so that you meet people and be cool with them and stuff. It's not like a super clique thing though.

 

[Raikage]

Sometimes I wonder what a Poker tournament organised by smashers would be like, obviously nothing random can be played competitively...

 

[Dark Sonic]

I'm going to interject here just for the sake of keeping up appearances as Devil's Advocate.

The bolded section of the quotation says 'our community'. I would just like to make sure of something: by saying 'our community', do you mean the current tournament scene, or do you mean Smashboards?

He means the competative scene. When we say "our community" that is what we are talking about. It just so happens that smashboards acts as a server for an extremely large portion of "competative players" and thus is the location of the largest portion of our community.

"Smashboards" does not host tournaments or make tournament rules. "Our community" is the hoster of all these tournaments, the maker of all these rules, and is the group that we are trying to protect. You can feel free to create another community. You can feel free to have smashboards be the primary host of that community. You can feel free to join ours. But you have to recognize that we, as likeminded competative players, have already established our own community that we believe is best for us. When people talk about including items in tournament play, playing all of the stages, ect, it is often percived as them attacking our way of playing and trying to change it. That is why we get so defensive and why a few may even backlash at that person. You can feel free to get together and assemble your own community, but please don't try to change ours.

 

[NES n00b]

Sometimes I wonder what a Poker tournament organised by smashers would be like, obviously nothing random can be played competitively...

That's a really dumb analogy since Poker's metagame is all centered around the randomness of cards. If you knew what players had what cards, it wouldn't be very deep and all/unplayable literally and would be like war.

A better analogy would be in a Martial Arts tourney, people would threw random weapons, at random times, at random locations into the arena/mat and sometimes, a random person would just be handed the weapon between rounds (similar to between stocks in Smash). Also, these weapons and things will be taken away eventually. >_>

 

[PXG]

I'm going to interject here just for the sake of keeping up appearances as Devil's Advocate.

The bolded section of the quotation says 'our community'. I would just like to make sure of something: by saying 'our community', do you mean the current tournament scene, or do you mean Smashboards? Because as I look at the top of the webpage, I see the banner saying "The Largest Smash Bros. Community", which does not specify anything about playstyles, tournaments, casual, competitive, or anything else. In all technicality, anyone trying to be exclusive at all on this forum is, by that definition, not going against the spirit of Smash, but instead against the spirit of Smashboards. Granted, I haven't been a member of this community for as long as most people have, but if I'm wrong and Smashboards is synonomous with only the current tournament scene, then that banner needs to be changed.

Casuals, competitives, item players, no-item players... all of these descriptors mean absolutely nothing, in the long run. If I have gathered the spirit of this forum correctly (and please correct me if I'm wrong), this place is a forum where people who love Smash in any style can come together to discuss and play a game they love.

Saying that 'we (Smashboards) do not exclude anyone who wishes to join' and then following up that statement with 'you must abide to our rules and our way of playing the game (current accepted tournament style)' is contradictory, as Smashboards, from what I've come to know, is simply about playing Smash, not about promoting one way of play above another, as you are clearly doing.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But, I'll need to see some proof from these boards before I concede that point.

And TheRooster, I entirely agree with you; that's why I put forth the potential concept of a 'low-stakes' alternative.

"Our community = Competitive Smashers"

Smashboards.com is not exclusive for competitive Smash players. It is a forum dedicated to those who play Super Smash Bros. of all skill levels and playing styles.

 

[thesage]

Sometimes I wonder what a Poker tournament organised by smashers would be like, obviously nothing random can be played competitively...

Poker /=/ Smash in any way. It's a game based on luck and reading your opponents minds. Plus, even with the amount of luck in poker, the better player always wins.

What would happen if people from the chess tournaments scene played in poker tournaments?

The closest thing the smash tournament scene or any other fighter tournament scene can be compared to is professional sports. People can play it for fun, even if they aren't good at it. If the players are good enough, they are essentially paid to play.

 

[NES n00b]

Poker /=/ Smash in any way. It's a game based on luck and reading your opponents minds. Plus, even with the amount of luck in poker, the better player always wins.

Not true, relatively amateur players have won past Poker Tournies. They aren't consitent like the best pros, but they sometimes win. So. . . . . yeah.