Auto L Cancelling Item

[ferioku]

It seems people want to use this for tournament play.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=LLiZ0g_dKZJxxTNwk0lGZVPQ&v=OhPFTineCY4

 

[Gawain]

I didn't even know there was equipment for reduced landing lag. That actually sounds pretty neat.

 

[Loki]

Now here's an equipment most people will really consider and debate upon.

 

[DoctorDub]

Hmm.
This is really interesting, actually. Nice find.

 

[QWA]

Oh man, Smash 4 might be worth picking up after all.

 

[MatrixNexus]

Interesting

 

[GameWatching]

ooo sakuraii

 

[Wegenbarth]

Thats a hell of an evil idea, Samurai.
This and maybe a damageration from 1.1 or 1.2 and people will no longer complain.

 

[ferioku]

I really think it should be allowed in tournaments. Not trying to be a melee drone or anything, but this is really big! It will allow more combo's and quicker matches. I for one say we should allow this!

 

[Alondite]

You wrongly assume that "more combos" makes the game better, or improves competition. Combos in general are bad for gameplay because they reduce player engagement; engaging with an opponent who is locked in hitstun is less engaging and requires far less skill because it's essentially free damage. Approaching an opponent who is in neutral and has all of their options available yields far better gameplay, and rewards skillful play far more then combo-centric gameplay.

Not only that, but combos skew the risk:reward ratio by giving players massive rewards in the form of long combos by landing low-risk moves. Limited combos can help promote and reward player interaction, rather than campy and defensive play. Melee took it far overboard, whereas Brawl was the polar opposite, discouraging interaction because it was so difficult to safely approach, and the reward for doing so was so minimal.

 

[D-idara]

Oh man, Smash 4 might be worth picking up after all.

Or you can commit to your damn moves and not expect Captain Falcon's Knee of Justice to be lagless?
Seriously, people, this game has plenty of autocanceled aerials and the ones that have a lot of lag SHOULD have a lot of lag because they're really strong.

 

[Second Power]

Making equipment legal is suddenly becoming more attractive.

 

[QWA]

Or you can commit to your damn moves and not expect Captain Falcon's Knee of Justice to be lagless?
Seriously, people, this game has plenty of autocanceled aerials and the ones that have a lot of lag SHOULD have a lot of lag because they're really strong.

Chill, buddy, you don't need to be so hostile. I don't expect it to be lag-less, I just don't want to sit there for a full second after using it.

 

[Dr. Giygas]

From what I understand (Correct me if I'm wrong) this piece of equipment also affects character stats. Which are random when you get the item.

 

[D-idara]

Chill, buddy, you don't need to be so hostile. I don't expect it to be lag-less, I just don't want to sit there for a full second after using it.

I guess you might have a point, it does have a little too much lag, but we should be careful with equipment, allowing equipment, no matter the effect, might turn the game into a broken mess if used wrong, and allowing only certain pieces of equipment to be used could subdivide the Smash4 community

 

[ferioku]

You wrongly assume that "more combos" makes the game better, or improves competition. Combos in general are bad for gameplay because they reduce player engagement; engaging with an opponent who is locked in hitstun is less engaging and requires far less skill because it's essentially free damage. Approaching an opponent who is in neutral and has all of their options available yields far better gameplay, and rewards skillful play far more then combo-centric gameplay.

Not only that, but combos skew the risk:reward ratio by giving players massive rewards in the form of long combos by landing low-risk moves. Limited combos can help promote and reward player interaction, rather than campy and defensive play. Melee took it far overboard, whereas Brawl was the polar opposite, discouraging interaction because it was so difficult to safely approach, and the reward for doing so was so minimal.

The combo's in this game isn't close to as much as melee's. I didn't say combos make the game any better. I can't let what you just said slide though, combo's are difficult to perform to begin with, especially in Smash 4. Having a hit and run game is way too boring to watch and is one of the reasons why brawl isn't in EVO anymore.

I think the game needs combos, but not to the extent of melee obviously. I think the l canceling items will offer a more offensive meta as well.

 

[Sedda]

You wrongly assume that "more combos" makes the game better, or improves competition. Combos in general are bad for gameplay because they reduce player engagement; engaging with an opponent who is locked in hitstun is less engaging and requires far less skill because it's essentially free damage. Approaching an opponent who is in neutral and has all of their options available yields far better gameplay, and rewards skillful play far more then combo-centric gameplay.

Not only that, but combos skew the risk:reward ratio by giving players massive rewards in the form of long combos by landing low-risk moves. Limited combos can help promote and reward player interaction, rather than campy and defensive play. Melee took it far overboard, whereas Brawl was the polar opposite, discouraging interaction because it was so difficult to safely approach, and the reward for doing so was so minimal.

I agree with this to a certain extent, but imo, having the ability to combo rewards the players to be aggressive and actually ENGAGE.
If a game only encourages defensive play and it lacks a system where you're able to punish an opponent (like comboing), you won't see much "engagement."

Melee didn't take it "far overboard" imo. It could be toned down from there, but as someone who plays 64, the term engagement i'd say is really subjective anyway.

I actually enjoy that, in certain cases, high level 64 becomes defensive, but that's only because the offensive options are so strong. I like the kinda tension that that creates in a match.

Not saying that this game needs combos... Just saying that your definition of engagement is kinda flawed. Having combos is way better than having weak offensive options.

 

[MetaGiduo]

I main little mac so I ever want to be airborne, but this could come i handy for some other things.

 

[Manny Toons]

The combo's in this game isn't close to as much as melee's. I didn't say combos make the game any better. I can't let what you just said slide though, combo's are difficult to perform to begin with, especially in Smash 4. Having a hit and run game is way too boring to watch and is one of the reasons why brawl isn't in EVO anymore.

I think the game needs combos, but not to the extent of melee obviously. I think the l canceling items will offer a more offensive meta as well.

I feel that being able to airdodge out of a tumble is what causes combos to be harder to perform. I hope this equipment does make it a bit more likely to pull off.

 

[yahooda]

I would consider this if it didn't also change your stats.

 

[Alondite]

The combo's in this game isn't close to as much as melee's. I didn't say combos make the game any better. I can't let what you just said slide though, combo's are difficult to perform to begin with, especially in Smash 4. Having a hit and run game is way too boring to watch and is one of the reasons why brawl isn't in EVO anymore.

I think the game needs combos, but not to the extent of melee obviously. I think the l canceling items will offer a more offensive meta as well.

Combos are not more difficult to perform than approaching a skilled player in neutral. And there is far less interplay in the combo game. Less interplay = less gameplay potential.

And whether or not a game is interesting to watch has little to do with how well it plays competitively. Chess is dull to watch, but is as good a competitive game as games get.

I agree with this to a certain extent, but imo, having the ability to combo rewards the players to be aggressive and actually ENGAGE.
If a game only encourages defensive play and it lacks a system where you're able to punish an opponent (like comboing), you won't see much "engagement."

Melee didn't take it "far overboard" imo. It could be toned down from there, but as someone who plays 64, the term engagement i'd say is really subjective anyway.

I actually enjoy that, in certain cases, high level 64 becomes defensive, but that's only because the offensive options are so strong. I like the kinda tension that that creates in a match.

Not saying that this game needs combos... Just saying that your definition of engagement is kinda flawed. Having combos is way better than having weak offensive options.

The initial approach is an engagement with the other player, but once the combo string begins, the engagement drops off almost entirely because one player has lost virtually all of their options. Limited combos are good because they promote engagement, but extended combos (such as in Melee) cause engagement to drop, and give players massive rewards for landing combo-starters that are generally safe and easy to land. That's poor gameplay balancing.

Smash 4's gameplay balance (note: NOT character balance) is vastly superior to both Brawl and Melee. Yes, some defensive options are slightly too powerful, but rolls and air dodges can still be punished, and there are still combos to reward players for offensive engagement.

What you said about 64's powerful offensive game turning defensive works the other way around, too: if the defensive game is powerful, than players are going to want to press their advantages aggressively, promoting offensive play. A very slight nerf to Smash 4's defensive options, and maybe removing the ability to air-dodge out of tumble would probably bring the game into perfect balance. I'd like to see smaller blast zones as well (they, and the rage mechanic, favor some of the the already-powerful heavyweights like Bowser), but that's less of an issue.

As for my definition, an engagement is simply a state of being involved. Neutral combat is more engaging than combos because there is far more to consider. That doesn't mean I'd like to see no combos, because that creates a situation like Brawl where offense (and thus engagement) is discouraged, but I'd like to see the gameplay favoring neutral play over a heavy combo game like Melee.

 

[QWA]

That doesn't mean I'd like to see no combos, because that creates a situation like Brawl where offense (and thus engagement) is discouraged, but I'd like to see the gameplay favoring neutral play over a heavy combo game like Melee.

You act like one hit leads to a guaranteed zero to death in Melee, which isn't true 99.9% of the time. In theory, yes. In practice, no.

 

[Delzethin]

You act like one hit leads to a guaranteed zero to death in Melee, which isn't true 99.9% of the time. In theory, yes. In practice, no.

Well, no, but there's something to say when you can be on the receiving end of a single attack, get comboed halfway to kill range, and be completely helpless to stop it.

There's a level of risk and reward involved in SSB4's aerials, from what I've seen. Some have little to no landing lag, others have more significant amounts. It's on a move-by-move basis, designed to make some attacks easier to punish than others. If you're trying to catch someone off guard with a Knee, you have to think about the consequences, because if you whiff it you could end up getting it because of your poor planning. Maybe it'd be better to use a n-air instead, keeping your options open...or maybe if you feel like you know what your opponent's about to do, you can Knee and feel confident it'll connect.

Taking away selective landing lag eliminates that whole risk-reward interplay.

Sure, having there be a bunch of now-low-risk high-reward moves may lead to a more aggressive game overall and may seem flashier to a less aware audience. But if there's no longer a way to punish those moves...they become overcentralized.

You know how so much talk about Melee's metagame is about combos? It's because due to a combination of factors (one being L-canceling removing the risk from some moves), they're so overcentralized that any character who cannot perform them well is inherently worse and is disadvantaged at high levels without other exploits to try to even the odds.

Sure, it's a deep metagame...but it's also narrow to the point of claustrophobia.

So my question is...why does something that contributed to Melee's overcentralized metagame need so badly to return in SSB4 that we should require players to either grind for hours on end to find the equipment necessary to make it work, or bend over backwards to hack their systems to stick a specifically-statted version of it in their games?

 

[Legend Vermillion]

Or you can commit to your damn moves and not expect Captain Falcon's Knee of Justice to be lagless?
Seriously, people, this game has plenty of autocanceled aerials and the ones that have a lot of lag SHOULD have a lot of lag because they're really strong.

Everytime I see Falco doing a Fair and then I wait 2 minutes for him to stand up I think "Oh man, this move is so broken! Thanks God, it has this landing lag!"

Just joking

 

[ChronoPenguin]

I don't see the desire. There's tons of crap in ssb4 with pretty much no lag.

 

[QWA]

any character who cannot perform them well is inherently worse and is disadvantaged at high levels without other exploits to try to even the odds.

I choose to play as Roy in Melee not because it is easy, but because it is hard.

So my question is...why does something that contributed to Melee's overcentralized metagame need so badly to return in SSB4 that we should require players to either grind for hours on end to find the equipment necessary to make it work, or bend over backwards to hack their systems to stick a specifically-statted version of it in their games?

It's not like this brings back wavedashing, moon walking, and dash dancing (R.I.P. Falcon ). This just cuts the ridiculous lag time on aerial attacks, and speeds the game up a bit. I'd rather have a game that emphasizes aerial attacks and short combo strings than a game that emphasizes hiding in shield, rolling, and slowly chipping away at an opponent (There's a reason that the Melee and Project M scene in my region is thriving, while Brawl has slowly withered away). I'd happily go through all of the grinding for equipment just so my friends and I can play with the faster aerials. A game that's more fun (at least for me) is worth the extra effort.

Also, if you don't have to use the equipment set if you don't want to, and this probably won't even be used in tournaments. It just makes the game more fun for long time fans of the Smash games.

 

[Rakurai]

I've yet to get a single item that has that ability on it, despite having over 500 custom items.

It's definitely one of the better ones, so perhaps it's just rarer...

 

[Alondite]

Everytime I see Falco doing a Fair and then I wait 2 minutes for him to stand up I think "Oh man, this move is so broken! Thanks God, it has this landing lag!"

Just joking

It's actually a pretty powerful KO move if you can connect with the final hit. Giving it less lag would essentially make his FSmash redundant because Fair has good KO power, faster start-up, and because it's an aerial, gives the player horizontal control so you can space WHILE the hitbox is active.

I choose to play as Roy in Melee not because it is easy, but because it is hard.



It's not like this brings back wavedashing, moon walking, and dash dancing (R.I.P. Falcon ). This just cuts the ridiculous lag time on aerial attacks, and speeds the game up a bit. I'd rather have a game that emphasizes aerial attacks and short combo strings than a game that emphasizes hiding in shield, rolling, and slowly chipping away at an opponent (There's a reason that the Melee and Project M scene in my region is thriving, while Brawl has slowly withered away). I'd happily go through all of the grinding for equipment just so my friends and I can play with the faster aerials. A game that's more fun (at least for me) is worth the extra effort.

Also, if you don't have to use the equipment set if you don't want to, and this probably won't even be used in tournaments. It just makes the game more fun for long time fans of the Smash games.

The lag on aerials isn't ridiculous. Some aerials auto-cancel on a short-hop and are lag-free. Other aerials have more pay-off and are thus laggier. Choice and consequence are two of the largest elements of competition in general. When you remove lag you limit consequence and create a diffuse decision-making process where any decision you make is as good as another. In SSB, this hurts defensive play too because rather than game-planning against specific strategies you end up adopting generic defensive tactics.

An aerial-centric game really hurts competitive depth because it's so limiting. Aerials are inherently better than grounded moves because you retain mobility while attacking, and because the attacks can move so far through space. What happens is that grounded moves become redundant, and with a smaller pool of viable moves comes a bottle-necking of decision-making to a single end-all best option, rather than a risk-reward scenario where the player must use their knowledge to determine the best action amidst a number of ambiguous potential outcomes.

I know that people like the finger-acrobatics of Melee because they make them FEEL skilled, and people like to feel skilled. However, video games are an almost entirely mental contest and should test a player's knowledge, adaptability, and decision-making abilities over their abilities to make quick controller inputs. But what is fun for one particular player has absolutely no influence on what is more competitively rich. The reason people don't like competitive Brawl is because it is HARD. It takes so much work to approach safely, and for little reward. The game often becomes feigning vulnerability to go on the defensive because defensive play is so powerful. Every single approach is a battle, and it's very draining.

 

[Papapaint]

Alondite, I think all of your arguments thus far are based on some seriously faulty assumptions.

Combos in fighting games don't "limit player interaction," they're an integral part of it. Because players in defensive positions often have the advantage over an aggressor, there needs to be a form of "payoff" when you successfully create an opening. The reason for Brawl's overall dislike is NOT that it's "hard," so I'm not entirely sure where you're coming from on that point.

Reducing landing lag won't create an aerial-centric game, it opens up a new avenue of approach. Aside from Fox and Falco, most characters in melee are still at a significant disadvantage in the air; short hop approaches over and over will end up with you getting your butt whooped against a mediocre player. It is, in fact, the ability to choose between aerial or grounded approaches that gives melee an enormous amount of its mix-up depth.

Just because you write long posts doesn't mean your ideas are well-thought out.

 

[Papapaint]

There's a level of risk and reward involved in SSB4's aerials, from what I've seen. Some have little to no landing lag, others have more significant amounts. It's on a move-by-move basis, designed to make some attacks easier to punish than others. If you're trying to catch someone off guard with a Knee, you have to think about the consequences, because if you whiff it you could end up getting it because of your poor planning. Maybe it'd be better to use a n-air instead, keeping your options open...or maybe if you feel like you know what your opponent's about to do, you can Knee and feel confident it'll connect.

This isn't how gameplay works at higher levels, though. Going for hard-reads with laggy moves is a recipe for disaster; it's like saying that ganon's warlock punch adds depth to his gameplay, when it's really something that won't see much legitimate use outside of silly moments.

 

[Delzethin]

This isn't how gameplay works at higher levels, though. Going for hard-reads with laggy moves is a recipe for disaster; it's like saying that ganon's warlock punch adds depth to his gameplay, when it's really something that won't see much legitimate use outside of silly moments.

At the same time, though, taking away much of the lag on all aerials creates more problems than it solves. If you remove too much risk from the situation, you get a situation like how Meta Knight in Brawl had so many attacks that were safe to use that he could throw them out almost haphazardly. Put that in the hands of characters that already have lesser lag overall, and they get so many safe attacks that the only reliable way to counter their attacks is...by hitting them with an attack of your own that has higher priority.

It'd likely lend toward a metagame where aggressive playstyles are heavily favored to the expense of any others.

You have a fair point about using laggier moves in high level play. But while "cut the landing lag from everything in half" makes those moves a little more useable, it gives a disproportionate advantage to the characters best able to abuse the lower lag and cuts down on everyone else's viability.

 

[Alondite]

Alondite, I think all of your arguments thus far are based on some seriously faulty assumptions.

Combos in fighting games don't "limit player interaction," they're an integral part of it. Because players in defensive positions often have the advantage over an aggressor, there needs to be a form of "payoff" when you successfully create an opening. The reason for Brawl's overall dislike is NOT that it's "hard," so I'm not entirely sure where you're coming from on that point.

Reducing landing lag won't create an aerial-centric game, it opens up a new avenue of approach. Aside from Fox and Falco, most characters in melee are still at a significant disadvantage in the air; short hop approaches over and over will end up with you getting your butt whooped against a mediocre player. It is, in fact, the ability to choose between aerial or grounded approaches that gives melee an enormous amount of its mix-up depth.

Just because you write long posts doesn't mean your ideas are well-thought out.

"Because players in defensive positions often have the advantage over an aggressor, there needs to be a form of "payoff"

You obviously didn't read my posts very well:

" Limited combos are good because they promote engagement, but extended combos (such as in Melee) cause engagement to drop, and give players massive rewards for landing combo-starters that are generally safe and easy to land. That's poor gameplay balancing. "

And yes, the reason that people don't like Brawl is because it's difficult to approach and doesn't make players feel skilled because it doesn't look flashy or have inflated APM numbers, so they cannot profess how "technical" the game is or how advanced their "tech skill" is (both incorrect use of the term "technique").

This isn't how gameplay works at higher levels, though. Going for hard-reads with laggy moves is a recipe for disaster; it's like saying that ganon's warlock punch adds depth to his gameplay, when it's really something that won't see much legitimate use outside of silly moments.

Gameplay only works differently at "higher levels" because people exploit flaws in the game's design to eliminate one side of the push-pull interplay to gain an advantage. Such a practice limits competitive potential because it limits gameplay potential. If the risk:reward of Ganon's Warlock Punch was properly balanced, it wouldn't be an issue and the game would be better because it introduces options while still operating in the realm of proper gameplay balancing.

At the same time, though, taking away much of the lag on all aerials creates more problems than it solves. If you remove too much risk from the situation, you get a situation like how Meta Knight in Brawl had so many attacks that were safe to use that he could throw them out almost haphazardly. Put that in the hands of characters that already have lesser lag overall, and they get so many safe attacks that the only reliable way to counter their attacks is...by hitting them with an attack of your own that has higher priority.

It'd likely lend toward a metagame where aggressive playstyles are heavily favored to the expense of any others.

You have a fair point about using laggier moves in high level play. But while "cut the landing lag from everything in half" makes those moves a little more useable, it gives a disproportionate advantage to the characters best able to abuse the lower lag and cuts down on everyone else's viability.

Quoting for truth. Meta Knight is a perfect example to use in this case, and how having too many options is a bad thing because it not only decreases the value of each individual move, but it makes developing specific counters impossible because there are too many options to account for, instead forcing player to adapt general defensive tactics that, while not a hard counter to any particular move, provide some measure of defense against all options.

The most effective design is the one that properly balances risk and reward for each move while slightly favoring offense, rather than simply cutting down lag in general to artificially speed up gameplay and create difficulty by stressing dexterity, which is only one skill in the DKART spectrum. Proper design should stress ALL skills for maximum competitive potential.

 

[BeastKiller6ixx]

"Because players in defensive positions often have the advantage over an aggressor, there needs to be a form of "payoff"

You obviously didn't read my posts very well:

" Limited combos are good because they promote engagement, but extended combos (such as in Melee) cause engagement to drop, and give players massive rewards for landing combo-starters that are generally safe and easy to land. That's poor gameplay balancing. "

And yes, the reason that people don't like Brawl is because it's difficult to approach and doesn't make players feel skilled because it doesn't look flashy or have inflated APM numbers, so they cannot profess how "technical" the game is or how advanced their "tech skill" is (both incorrect use of the term "technique").




Gameplay only works differently at "higher levels" because people exploit flaws in the game's design to eliminate one side of the push-pull interplay to gain an advantage. Such a practice limits competitive potential because it limits gameplay potential. If the risk:reward of Ganon's Warlock Punch was properly balanced, it wouldn't be an issue and the game would be better because it introduces options while still operating in the realm of proper gameplay balancing.


Quoting for truth. Meta Knight is a perfect example to use in this case, and how having too many options is a bad thing because it not only decreases the value of each individual move, but it makes developing specific counters impossible because there are too many options to account for, instead forcing player to adapt general defensive tactics that, while not a hard counter to any particular move, provide some measure of defense against all options.

The most effective design is the one that properly balances risk and reward for each move while slightly favoring offense, rather than simply cutting down lag in general to artificially speed up gameplay and create difficulty by stressing dexterity, which is only one skill in the DKART spectrum. Proper design should stress ALL skills for maximum competitive potential.

Everything you said about Melee is wrong. There's nothing garunteed if you properly DI. You can play perfectly fine defensively or offensively depending on your character in Melee. Everyone benefits from reduced landing lag from aerials. If anything, it gives people who prefer to play the game the way it's supposed to be played a fighting chance. If I wanted to play pong, I wouldn't be playing smash 4

 

[Delzethin]

Everyone benefits from reduced landing lag from aerials. If anything, it gives people who prefer to play the game the way it's supposed to be played a fighting chance.

And how are you so sure it's "supposed" to favor aggression?

And how are you sure Smash 4 doesn't reward aggressive play? Last I've heard, Sheik and Zero Suit Samus--among other fragile speedster characters--look pretty damn good and have a lot of supporters...

Gameplay only works differently at "higher levels" because people exploit flaws in the game's design to eliminate one side of the push-pull interplay to gain an advantage. Such a practice limits competitive potential because it limits gameplay potential. If the risk:reward of Ganon's Warlock Punch was properly balanced, it wouldn't be an issue and the game would be better because it introduces options while still operating in the realm of proper gameplay balancing.

Careful. I'd say those exploits are more an inevitable part of high level play. People want to find an advantage, and eventually one gets found. We can't very well stop that. It only becomes a problem if those exploits heavily favor one type of playstyle to the detriment of all others.

And for what it's worth, Warlock Punch wasn't ever meant to be fully viable in 1v1 matches. It's more of a crowd clearing move for free-for-alls and wasn't designed to be anything else. It has its merits, just not in the style of gameplay we mostly discuss around here.

The most effective design is the one that properly balances risk and reward for each move while slightly favoring offense, rather than simply cutting down lag in general to artificially speed up gameplay and create difficulty by stressing dexterity, which is only one skill in the DKART spectrum. Proper design should stress ALL skills for maximum competitive potential.

I'd argue that it emphasizes both dexterity and reflexes, but you're on the mark about how misguided it'd be. What do we have to gain from artificially strengthening only two of the five parts of the spectrum to begin with when we have no proof they actually need strengthening? Just to match up with a previous game that had its own issues?

I'll ask again: Why in Arceus' name does such a vocal minority of people seem to think SSB4 can't succeed unless it's like Melee?

 

[BeastKiller6ixx]

And how are you so sure it's "supposed" to favor aggression?

And how are you sure Smash 4 doesn't reward aggressive play? Last I've heard, Sheik and Zero Suit Samus--among other fragile speedster characters--look pretty damn good and have a lot of supporters...

Rolling Abusable
Characters are still quite floaty
Fast Falling has a time/height requirement
Fast Falling is fairly slow
Stages have much further Death lines
Characters can survive smashes at 150%+ health
Projectiles are buffed considerably
Projectiles can spike you from a great distance (Robin, Megaman)
Ledge Guarding is gone
You can sweet spot recoveries
Playing defensive is High Reward low risk in comparison to previous smashes
Characters such as Link, Pac Man, Samus have ranged grabs that can be used instantly out of a shield
Sheild Grabbing
Multi Air Dodging

These are just a few things. Few are universal but overall this game is very defensive. It's not an argument, its a well known fact. The characters that you named that are offensive happen to be top or near the top of the food chain. Just about every character that has an abusable projectile (80% of the cast with projectiles) can be played extremely lame and have very high success playing in that fashion.

Example: Greninja

Greninja isn't inherently lame/Defensive. He looks like a very aggressive character, and he is. However, someone decided that because his forward B teleports you across the map and his projectiles gain properties depending on how long you charge it that they would play him defensively. Not only do I see every greninja player play hyper defensively but whenever they feel in danger they just mash his counter which hits very very very hard and it is almost no risk but if it hits you at over 100% you'll probably lose a stock.

Playing lame is a quality that I notice the new generation of smashers are doing. Like it's instinctive to that crowd. Campy would be the most appropriate word. It's like when you're playing COD and you go running around the map trying to look for people and shoot them and you turn the corner to die to a guy proned behind a bush waiting for someone to come around.

Like that becomes the mindset. The problem is that because all these newer players are imitating what they see online and follow suit. They all try to play the game and often times lose to someone who just sits in one spot, constantly rolls, throw projectiles, and strictly zones until they want to ko with a smash attack or in a lot of cases a counter or AAA

The game directly rewards players with defensive options. Every sort of offensive edge that was in previous titles were stripped and they've buffed defensive options considerably.

So now characters who are inherently offensive that have a single move that can be abused defensively turns into a strictly lame character.

For the record, offensive characters can be very lame as well.

Little Mac for example

Best AAA combo in the game
Has a 1 Hit KO
Has a solid counter
Side B is abusable

So they base his entire game off the 1 hit ko, aaa as much as possible and just KO you for free if they're in range. Most unmanly fight style ever. Completely lame. No one wants to watch that, and it requires no skill but gives instant success to players playing wifi battles.

 

[Neoleo21]

Rolling Abusable
Characters are still quite floaty
Fast Falling has a time/height requirement
Fast Falling is fairly slow
Stages have much further Death lines
Characters can survive smashes at 150%+ health
Projectiles are buffed considerably
Projectiles can spike you from a great distance (Robin, Megaman)
Ledge Guarding is gone
You can sweet spot recoveries
Playing defensive is High Reward low risk in comparison to previous smashes
Characters such as Link, Pac Man, Samus have ranged grabs that can be used instantly out of a shield
Sheild Grabbing
Multi Air Dodging

These are just a few things. Few are universal but overall this game is very defensive. It's not an argument, its a well known fact. The characters that you named that are offensive happen to be top or near the top of the food chain. Just about every character that has an abusable projectile (80% of the cast with projectiles) can be played extremely lame and have very high success playing in that fashion.

Example: Greninja

Greninja isn't inherently lame/Defensive. He looks like a very aggressive character, and he is. However, someone decided that because his forward B teleports you across the map and his projectiles gain properties depending on how long you charge it that they would play him defensively. Not only do I see every greninja player play hyper defensively but whenever they feel in danger they just mash his counter which hits very very very hard and it is almost no risk but if it hits you at over 100% you'll probably lose a stock.

Playing lame is a quality that I notice the new generation of smashers are doing. Like it's instinctive to that crowd. Campy would be the most appropriate word. It's like when you're playing COD and you go running around the map trying to look for people and shoot them and you turn the corner to die to a guy proned behind a bush waiting for someone to come around.

Like that becomes the mindset. The problem is that because all these newer players are imitating what they see online and follow suit. They all try to play the game and often times lose to someone who just sits in one spot, constantly rolls, throw projectiles, and strictly zones until they want to ko with a smash attack or in a lot of cases a counter or AAA

The game directly rewards players with defensive options. Every sort of offensive edge that was in previous titles were stripped and they've buffed defensive options considerably.

So now characters who are inherently offensive that have a single move that can be abused defensively turns into a strictly lame character.

For the record, offensive characters can be very lame as well.

Little Mac for example

Best AAA combo in the game
Has a 1 Hit KO
Has a solid counter
Side B is abusable

So they base his entire game off the 1 hit ko, aaa as much as possible and just KO you for free if they're in range. Most unmanly fight style ever. Completely lame. No one wants to watch that, and it requires no skill but gives instant success to players playing wifi battles.

Almost Entirely incorrect. Projectiles were generally nerfed and are reasonably slow, people can kill easily when they use their moves properly so they don't stale. ledge guarding has changed, not disappeared. Sweet spotting recoveries is part of every game, so irrelevant. If playing defensive is so low risk, then why do I see a hyper aggressive sheik winning tourneys everywhere. Shield Grabbing is a reasonable excuse for defensive play...If you suck at spacing since grabs are at a somehat short range this game. About multi air dodges, yeah they can mess up follow ups but predicting them gives you a free hit and they can't be spammed close to the ground otherwise that character lags hard. All the grabs you presented are rather slow shield grabs and even then, that's a stupid way to ooS for them. Greninja's counter is terrible, its the slowest in the game and you shouldn't get hit by it. The forward b can easily be punished on landing, what are you doing? On little mac, sounds like you don't know how to approach the match up, that's fine, lots of people don't know and the meta is young. But I'd avoid making untrue statements like "Side B is abusable" and "they base his game off the 1-hit ko", when there's video evidence to prove you wrong. It sounds like you're johnning your losses when you don't know how to play properly to win.

On the topic note,
Smash 4's going to be an excellent game for both casual and the competitive scene, I've seen enough matches to see that. But I feel that certain aspects could be better, with high landing lag on certain moves, I feel that characters are limited in some spacing options (like Bowser's Nair), which considering how universally important spacing is to the meta of this game, limits its future. In addition, spacing techniques involving pivoting were recently discovered, but present a high difficulty for learning (and this is very important for those who want to space well at the high level play). Enter equipment effects like the Hard Braker ("stop your dash on a dime") and the Smooth lander (lowers landing lag). These tools alone allow for a even deeper spacing metagame for the future because they allow the potential movement techniques to become easier to learn for the average player and give more flexibility for characters to use more of their moveset to space. If you still space improperly on a shield you will be still punished for it, but you will have more tools at with to attack your opponent. In addition, if your opponent fails to space properly, your ability to punish them is greatly increased because lower landing lag results in the ability to do more combos (though they can DI out) thus get more damage and kills more reliably and quickly. This benefits the esports potential of the game, a scene I'm extremely excited to participate and learn alongside new people to the competitive community. That being said...

Custom equipment will be BANNED because they come with random stats and effects assigned to them that greatly impact character performance in game. It is far too challenging to request TOs to get the proper equipment effects and balance the stats perfectly at 0 attack defense and speed on EVERY Wii U console used in tournament. Thus, we should ask, Nintendo and Namco for a dlc badge with 0/0/0 stat mods and the effects "Smooth lander", "Hard Braker" and "Dodgy Dodger". I really feel that this would push the game into the goldilocks zone.

 

[ferioku]

Rolling Abusable
Characters are still quite floaty
Fast Falling has a time/height requirement
Fast Falling is fairly slow
Stages have much further Death lines
Characters can survive smashes at 150%+ health
Projectiles are buffed considerably
Projectiles can spike you from a great distance (Robin, Megaman)
Ledge Guarding is gone
You can sweet spot recoveries
Playing defensive is High Reward low risk in comparison to previous smashes
Characters such as Link, Pac Man, Samus have ranged grabs that can be used instantly out of a shield
Sheild Grabbing
Multi Air Dodging

These are just a few things. Few are universal but overall this game is very defensive. It's not an argument, its a well known fact. The characters that you named that are offensive happen to be top or near the top of the food chain. Just about every character that has an abusable projectile (80% of the cast with projectiles) can be played extremely lame and have very high success playing in that fashion.

Example: Greninja

Greninja isn't inherently lame/Defensive. He looks like a very aggressive character, and he is. However, someone decided that because his forward B teleports you across the map and his projectiles gain properties depending on how long you charge it that they would play him defensively. Not only do I see every greninja player play hyper defensively but whenever they feel in danger they just mash his counter which hits very very very hard and it is almost no risk but if it hits you at over 100% you'll probably lose a stock.

Playing lame is a quality that I notice the new generation of smashers are doing. Like it's instinctive to that crowd. Campy would be the most appropriate word. It's like when you're playing COD and you go running around the map trying to look for people and shoot them and you turn the corner to die to a guy proned behind a bush waiting for someone to come around.

Like that becomes the mindset. The problem is that because all these newer players are imitating what they see online and follow suit. They all try to play the game and often times lose to someone who just sits in one spot, constantly rolls, throw projectiles, and strictly zones until they want to ko with a smash attack or in a lot of cases a counter or AAA

The game directly rewards players with defensive options. Every sort of offensive edge that was in previous titles were stripped and they've buffed defensive options considerably.

So now characters who are inherently offensive that have a single move that can be abused defensively turns into a strictly lame character.

For the record, offensive characters can be very lame as well.

Little Mac for example

Best AAA combo in the game
Has a 1 Hit KO
Has a solid counter
Side B is abusable

So they base his entire game off the 1 hit ko, aaa as much as possible and just KO you for free if they're in range. Most unmanly fight style ever. Completely lame. No one wants to watch that, and it requires no skill but gives instant success to players playing wifi battles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQSWSuftc7U&list=UUOSDoiBrlgiDaovgytySB6A

^ So that is defensive play? Dude please, stop this unnecessary jibber jabber =/.
Everything you said can be punished, it's been shown various times, and you have only yourself to blame for getting caught in those attacks. They are very easy to counter, VERY EASY!