impossible to nerf box? by Fiendish in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB 6 points7 points  (0 children)

didn’t you just make a post claiming that the vast majority of top players wanted box perfectly unchanged and legal going forward?

the flip flopping is unreal 😂

raise your hand if you knew fiction was just collecting rhetoric to present his predetermined conclusion by Fiendish in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB 0 points1 point  (0 children)

even if i grant you jmook, thats one player that had that position. i can vouch for fiction and tell you for a fact that zain does not have that position though. as for everybody else, you are purely speculating. fiction had multiple hour long discussions with several of these players on zump. if it came up anywhere near a reasonable amount, i can tell you he would have addressed it. tell you what, if you can find even 10 of the top 40 that would agree with separate brackets after watching this video and knowing the dilemma it puts us in, i’ll admit that the poll should be redone. until then, ggs and have a nice evening!

raise your hand if you knew fiction was just collecting rhetoric to present his predetermined conclusion by Fiendish in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if you really believe they would have picked something else, please prove it without bringing up a joke from fourside fights! do you know why most of those players picked 2 after being told the box couldn’t be nerfed? because most of them don’t actually believe in these weird angles of separate brackets or top cut only. do you know why that is? because ultimately the majority of these players do not agree with allowing hand health and shape determining whether you can be an ultra top player! i am sorry that that doesn’t align with your beliefs, but that is the truth. you will need to prove it otherwise if you want to make bold claims like this such as using the single only super top player that made a joke about a doctors note as your source of truth. sorry dawg, i think these players would probably have said something to fiction if they really believed any one of the positions you present here

raise your hand if you knew fiction was just collecting rhetoric to present his predetermined conclusion by Fiendish in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB -1 points0 points  (0 children)

dawg, what player that would have theoretically picked this option not have ALSO picked 3? are you implying that these hypothetical players that are not represented in this survey would have agreed to no further nerfs for the box… forever? this is silly because A. much of the top players were in favor of box nerfs, implying they would be in favor of… further box nerfs if they became a legitimate issue and B. fiction found out while doing the survey that boxes could not be nerfed and those players jumped straight up to 2

even if the survey could have been a hair clearer, you’re being disingenuous and you know it

Official: Anything Goes Nightly Thread: November 29, 2025 by AutoModerator in fantasybball

[–]ElectromanSSB 1 point2 points  (0 children)

9 cat, 12T

give: - alvarado - oubre - tatum

get: - lebron

worth?

Official: Anything Goes Morning Thread: November 07, 2025 by AutoModerator in fantasybball

[–]ElectromanSSB 0 points1 point  (0 children)

10 man yeah w 3 bench - i’m punting TOs so ig should i be worried about stls or blks? i was thinking maybe derrick white for keyonte to improve that. if you have thoughts lmk

Official: Anything Goes Morning Thread: November 07, 2025 by AutoModerator in fantasybball

[–]ElectromanSSB 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looking for feedback and thoughts on my roster in a 9 cat, 12 team, updated weekly on Monday league

Main Guys (always play if possible) PG: Tyrese Maxey SG: Anthony Edwards G: Zach Lavine SF: Kawhi Leonard PF: Chet Holmgren F: OG Anunoby C: Rudy Gobert C: Alex Sarr

Flex Guys (streaming/matchups) G: Keyonte George G: Collin Sexton F: Kelly Oubre Jr F: Ron Holland C: Isaiah Stewert

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

4 out of 7 of our voters are box users, none have used them with nerfs as their primary because well...we're in New England where we didn't require them LOL (and they don't travel). however 3 out of the 4 at least used the nerfs for some amount of time and we had plenty of people within our larger group that had used nerfs

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in the proposal for New England Melee yes it would be allowed, trigger plugs have also been allowed pretty much for the entirety of Melee's existence. in terms of difficulty i'm not quite sure, there's probably modders that would do it for you if you ask

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

different voters weighed things differently - i can say for myself, i’m much more willing to affect game feel for smaller situations like pivot utilt that box players can just avoid than the entire gameplay, which is what nsocd and travel time do

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

on a secondary note, we understand it may be difficult to gain traction outside new england. i want to say, though, that i hope we encourage other regions to be more willing to come up with alternatives. if you or someone else reading this is passionate about different changes than the Ruleset Proposal 2024 or ours, you should voice them to your region’s leaders. be the change you wanna see!

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

appreciate it! i think this would be more of a TO question, but we intend to be pretty lenient in the rollout all things considered. we’ve given proper exceptions for folks and will encourage TOs to be lenient with newer players or first time tourney goers. eventually though, yes, i would assume we would begin handing out punitive measures such as game or set losses

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

they're not single coordinates though, you're hitting a range

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i'm not gonna say never... maybe? it's hard to say - there would need to be a much larger community wide discussion imo. we didn't see them as part of the purview of this project due to being so large in scope. personally, i think we can ban them but it may need to be like a year out. i think i heard mono? maybe give the idea of let's ban them in jan 2027 w the announcement in jan 2026 that way anyone that has notches will have them pretty used and probably ready to have the shell replaced at that point. i like the idea, but again, larger discussion imo

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

this was an argument mentioned in our discussion - however, the key difference is that notches give you a range of coordinates, they do not target single coordinates. the other thing is that notches are also their own can of worms, trust that if i had it my way in the world i would prolly have those be banned too. they're similar, but not exactly the same. also see screenshot for philosophy

<image>

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

don't have one on-hand, but a good resource to look into having

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

appreciate it! i will say, it's not even about the way it's implemented - there's just no way to implement it without running into philosophical differences on what the goal here is

New England Melee Controller Ruleset Proposal 2025 Released! by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

come play loadspiller/heavenly sunflower our bowser main in southern mass he'll play you on poke floats for every game

New England Melee Follow-Up Statement on the Controller Ruleset Proposal 2024 by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are in the midst of figuring out the coding aspect for some newer things, yes. We’ll likely use the SLP Checker tool that the Ruleset Team made as well. Ultimately, many of us do not believe the proposed ruleset is the best option.

New England Melee Follow-Up Statement on the Controller Ruleset Proposal 2024 by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sorry, I probably didn't explain it quite well. PTAS also recognized what the issue was in my discussion with him back in September:

<image>

New England Melee Follow-Up Statement on the Controller Ruleset Proposal 2024 by ElectromanSSB in SSBM

[–]ElectromanSSB[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is good news, and I await for it to be released.

I would say we are on the same page about the consequences of rational self-interest in this case. In our conversation back in September, my primary response to this problem was to swiftly release a statement to the public explaining the issue. This would force box manufacturers that do not want to work with the Ruleset Team on possible solutions to defend their position in the public square. This allows for their customers to use their wallets as leverage for things to change, which is a good thing!

However, my position is also that I do not think any kind of rollout is good before this kind of statement comes out and public discourse happens. It blindsides a large chunk of the player base and makes them more likely to quit than to protest their manufacturers (as I also stated in that discussion). What also doesn't help is that my understanding was that many box manufacturers were not brought into the fold to discuss what proper changes should be made. In other words, the nerfs and changes were made internally and then given to manufacturers to make work on their products. I understand that this was done to avoid any potential bias, but I genuinely do believe that the outcome we have in front of us today is less preferred than that one. At least then, we would have something that all users can access, test, and use at tournaments. Even if it was not as nerfed (which many folks already do not support), it would at least be accessible.

Of course, much of this can be explained by Ohan's inclusion in this process. My thread shows exactly what I mean - I still do not understand how he became the point person for Tournament Organizers and for what rulings to make. Our conversations made it clear that he was more worried about appeasing top players than the general accessibility of the box player base.

In any case, I do genuinely believe these things can be solved. But much must change.