English mothafugga!!
Do you speak it?!
Technique is being used here in this context as “Technical Skills”. Chess does not have these.
Read up on Pins, Forks, Absolute Pin, Break, Discovered Attack, Discovered Check, Gambit, Greek Gift Sacrifice, Queen Sacrifice etc etc etc.
Those are techniques in Chess. Not strategies.
And you can’t change the definition of a word just to fit your argument.
Technique is the action (or series of actions), strategy is the implementation of said action. I don’t see anyone here changing a definition here at all. It’s an interpretation problem. The series of movements are the technique, but it is derived from a strategy. It is no different than calling the magic series in Marvel a technique (note, A technique, not technique). The button presses are all there and ready, you just perform them when it’s applicable. When is it applicable? That’s the strategy.
My GOD this has gone off on a tangent.
I don’t think removing items will completely shift the focus from strategy to technique. That would be true if you assume there is no or very little strategy without items. Smash brother is a mix of fighting and items, not only items. I don’t think it would be very popular if its only about item-usage and item-dodging. The core fighting system still lends itself to tons of strategy.
Removing items will just focus the strategy to individual character movesets. However, I do agree that with items, there might be more quantity of strategy; but maybe not greater exploration of either item-usage or individual combat.
Keits, just out of curiosity… I keep seeing you advocating having on all items, yet at the same time you say “all items except tomato/heart.” I just want to know: what about those two items have you have deemed broken enough to ban?
Uh… What? Spot dodging being abusable? Oh god, I wish it was. I love spot dodging. But its so damned risky and easy to punish that I had to tone it done quite a bit.
Its not so much that they are broken, the heart/tomato, its that they are fundamentally different from all other items in that you pick them up and the effect is instantly over. No input, no counters, no evading, no stopping it. Its just, poof, your health is back. Now maybe if you had to stand there and mash A to eat it while your opponent could hit you…
But, at the same time, in a game where its so easy to lose 50-80% from even normal attacks, im not so sure that I wont add them back in a while from now. For now though, those are the two items that most people just cannot cope with the idea of.
The only execution Chess has is seeing and doing things FAST (when needed, of course, like when you’re on a clock). Not entirely unlike seeing and doing things fast in a fighter or any other game. How many posts did you guys go through for this?
Watched the vids. CPU played better in that format, but it’d be a pretty difficult argument to win if you were to say that CPU could win in a no-item match or even a match with less items. He’d probably play a bit differently, but the fact that he couldn’t kill Ken’s Marth until roughly 250% a couple times…well, there you have it. Huge props to the guy for running through that whole tourney undefeated, though. I don’t care what format you got, that’s not something easy to do. From what I saw, Ken’s lack of experience with items killed him, and that’s his own fault in this tourney.
I also think that the Smash Ball wasn’t a good thing in this setting. (Hear me out.) It made the Smash Ball a VERY powerful item when compared to the remainder of the item list. If I were to make a ruleset for items, it’d be “all” items (fan and high-health gone, maybe curry and star) or there’d be a good amount more gone than what were in Evo’s rules. If there’s a pretty even match and you snag a ray gun, a super scope, and a star rod and I snag two smoke balls and a party ball filled with bread, then yeah fortune favored you. But it’s not so unbalanced that I feel like I completely lost the match because of it. I DO have to work harder and that’s because of nothing but randomness, but it’s doable. If, however, I get the same items and you get a Smash Ball and two bumpers…well, fuck. It’s situations like those that make me think that a LOT of thought needs to go into partial items lists like Evo’s.
I think this will be the first time I’ve said this, but I fully agree. If it weren’t for the fact the massive loud voices of SWF were heard at all, I’m sure the ruleset would’ve been closer to everything on than what it is we got. However, that wasn’t the case, and we got the compromise which inflated the importance of Smash Balls. 'tis a shame that the chances of a ruleset like that coming into play next Evo as an official event are slim to none unless this community starts making up ground.
With all items on, damage can be racked up extremely easily. If someone can pick up a fan and rack up 0-80% damage, even with the opponent smash DI’ing out of it, then there really shouldn’t be anything wrong with being able to pick up an item to restore that damage. But I think its more important that if you’re advocating items-on Brawl because things haven’t been proven to be broken, then you should probably go all the way with your stance, IMO.
Ok people, please stop using chess as an example for something when you obviously don’t play it (no offense).
Technique in chess means to convert the advantage into a win (for example once you’re pawn-up at some point of the game) and this has nothing to do with strategy because a strategy in chess is a long-term plan in your game, like your major concept you follow (e.g. playing positional). And when people say Kramnik has the best technique it does not mean that he is good at moving the pieces across the board or that he knows how to play under time pressure. 
The problem if you had turned on even the seemingly broken items would have been that CPU’s victory would have been even clearer. This would have caused an even bigger uproar on SWF and it would be even harder for you to establish item play than it is now.
… thats pretty much what I’ve said and have been saying.
So I assume your are closer to on-the-fence, now, and would be willing to pay to enter some items-on events?
TheDude- They are using the word ‘technique’ in place of what we usually call ‘execution’ or ‘technical skill’. This was explained multiple times. The the context of this conversation, adding the the multiple times their use of the word was explained, it really wasnt wrong.
Uproar? Most people on SWF didn’t even pay attention to Evo. Good amount of people know and laugh, but I didn’t see uproar (I saw uproar on rules though in the beginning of course). I bet most Brawl people do not know what SRK is. lol
But I’m not talking about the scrubs there but actually about the people who followed the tournament, already had a bad attitude towards items and felt themselves proven when Ken lost to CPU.
Keits: Doesn’t change the fact that chess is not 100% about strategy and people actually ARE in a disadvantage in terms of “techical skill” when they become older. In this case “technical skill” stands for flashy combinations or sacrifices and it’s a proven fact that kids/teens/young adults are superior to older people in this area. Thus old players mostly rely on the strategic part and play positional.
Oh absolutely not. I completely loathe items-on play, personally. But if you’ve ever noticed, I’ve never been against it either. Hell, I was the one who stickied the Items Standard Play thread on SmashBoards. Doesn’t mean I actually have to like it ^_^’’
why dont you copy pasta and sticky my ruleset on swf too, then, good sir. 
This is going to make little to no sense, so bear with me.
Smashers mostly play using the no items/neutral stages ruleset. This is how 98% of tourneys are run.
SRK wants to add items and more stages to the mix. Can it work? Probably not (Did the majority of the Smash scene even care about Evo? I mean, they closed their Evo 2008 thread like a day after CPU won), but I guess it’s worth a try.
Smashers are actually considering putting a hacked Brawl (w/ no tripping, among other things) as the tourney standard.
Smasher are also considering banning Meta Knight.
etc.
In conclusion: What the hell is going on with Brawl?
It sucks?
Actually the consensus seems to be that he shouldn’t be banned at this early stage in the game’s lifetime: http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=190540