Originally Posted by Relambrien (Post 1655229)

I don't think I'm going to post anything beyond this in this thread, so if you have responses to what I say, please try to explain your responses to those who regularly post in this thread. I really don't care if you pick my argument apart bit by bit, but just know that chances are I will not be able to respond to anything you say. Keep that in mind when responding.

Also, the reason I'm doing this is because I don't want to become embroiled in a massive argument like this; I just want to voice my opinion and leave it to the others here to discuss it. Now that that's out of the way, I'll get started.

The goal of any competitive gaming league, association, whatever should be to provide an environment in which player skill determines the outcome of the competition, by minimizing luck and emphasizing knowledge and skills of each facet of the game. I don't think anyone here disagrees with this. But now, with SSBM, we have a problem. One facet of the game is luck incarnate, in random spawns of items.

Having an item spawn near to you can completely change the flow of the game. You could be losing badly and a lucky Recovery Heart or Starman can appear next to you, allowing you to change the game in your favor. Likewise, a barrel could explode in your opponent's face, or a Party Ball could release a flurry of Bob-omb's right on top of him. This is a factor of randomness.

However, one could also argue that the ability to reach and obtain the items that appear is part of player skill. The question to the competitive gaming groups becomes, "Do these items necessitate more player skill than luck? Or is it the other way around?" Should the answer be the former, another question is introduced. "With this added amount of player skill, is there still sufficiently low interference by luck or randomness?" Thus, it must now be decided whether using items, and adding in a further level to player skill, is worth the amount of luck the inclusion of items also brings with it.

Of course, if the answer to the original question is "No, items add more luck than player skill," then it should be fairly obvious that items should not be permitted in competitive SSBM gaming. It just isn't worth it to make something negative more important, while increasing the importance of something positive less. That's a confusing sentence, I know, but that's the best way I can word it.

But Nintendo decided to make this problem even more complicated by allowing people to determine which items they want to be able to appear, and with what frequency. Then each individual item needs to be analyzed, as well as groups of items, to determine which set adds the most to necessary player skill and least to luck. There are massive amounts of item and frequency combinations, so the amount of work this would take is absolutely enormous. For the sake of simplicity and to avoid constant debates about which item set is imbalanced or unfair, the simple solution is to prohibit items altogether.

Although this sacrifices adding in another level of player skill, it also eliminates issues with determining which item set and frequency to use. Hosts of arguments and flame wars about which item set is the best or most fair, as well as the resulting confusion and chaos, are precluded.

But then one could argue that determining which stages are permissible is just as big of a problem. Competitive gaming groups resolve this by allowing only a select few, obviously "neutral" stages to be used. Thus, arguments about whether a permitted stage is in fact neutral or balanced, are prevented.

Essentially, for the good of the competition and the community, these groups enact rules which ensure a low level of luck and high level of necessary player skill. Even though by changing the rules, necessary player skill could be increased while luck remained sufficiently low, the resulting arguments, confusion, and constant revisions just aren't worth it.

Another way to look at it is this. Each individual facet of the game has merit (items, technical skill, stages, etc.). However, by allowing all of these facets to exist at once, there is too much luck and randomness involved for a competitive setting. Thus, one or more must be modified or taken out in order to ensure balance and fairness. So the competitive groups asked themselves, "Which of these hurts the game the most, and is least important in player skill?"

They determined that items in general, with their randomness, hurt the competitive aspect of the game more than the necessary player skill to effectively use them help it. A similar process occurred in stage selection, in which a few stages were determined as the "best" in terms of balance while others were banned or discouraged.

I seem to have lost my train of thought at this point...I had more I wished to say and elaborate on, but it appears that I've forgotten what it was that I wanted to discuss. I may or may not edit this post in the future, but I doubt I will be posting another message in here. Like I said, if I get too involved, I will end up embroiled in a dangerous argument, which I wish to avoid. So for your responses to this post, assume that I won't be around to respond to what you say, and formulate your responses as such. Thank you.

Originally Posted by slickskater29 (Post 1655529)

Well, im totally stumped on the Peach/Falco matchup. The lasers kill me. If I can get in the air and approach with a float im ok. But that's not always the case.

Originally Posted by ckj846 (Post 1655748)

Lawl reflector@turnips. Don't play projectile games with falco if you're using peach, it just gets in the way. Use turnips defensively ALWAYS. Any good peach player knows that. Have Falco come to you and if he spams lasers, float out of reach. Peach is all about frustrating the opponent and attacking when he/she makes a mistake. Peach has the best recovery so even if you make mistakes, she can still get back to the stage with ease. Spam dsmash and chaingrab and take advantage of falco's fast falling speed.

O_o

Originally Posted by Bloodhunger539 (Post 1656251)

Crazy stuff O_o

I was trying out some different characters today, trying to find a feel for a new character cuz its been awhile since ive played. I was trying out the wave dashing with different charcters. Some can do it rather easily with a nice dash, but i had trouble with characters like marth peach and falco/fox. But still, is it really that useful of a technique to use while playing?

Originally Posted by MarisaKirisame (Post 1656240)

Items are really, REALLY easy to always hit with. In fact, it's pretty bad if you miss.

There's really no skill in it at all. It's just a waste of time.

Originally Posted by Hylian (Post 1656727)

Well think about it. It allows you to move backwards while facing forwards and you can do so much out of it.

Out of a run you can only do so many things.

1. Dash attack.
2. Jump.
3. Crouch
4. Shield

Out of a wavedash you can do anything you could do while standing still. And some characters move faster (Samus/IC's/Luigi) by WDing then when they don't.

Originally Posted by masterhickle (Post 1657570)

Here's my take on it. Rolling is a lot easier to punish than a wavedash. How far each character can roll is set in stone; however, the length of a wavedash is variable. You can increase/decrease the length of the wavedash depending on how far down the control stick is held - if it's held close to straight down, you won't go very far, but if you hold it closer to horizontal, you will go farther.

Wavedashing adds a lot to the mind-game aspect, get as good with it as you can (Works really well if you can mix it in with dash-dancing).

Originally Posted by Bloodhunger539 (Post 1657712)

the l-cancel is pretty easy to do, it wouldnt take much practice. shffl is a lil harder, fox and falco definitely use it, but it seems other characters dont need to shffl to be amazing, who would need to shffl the most and least?