Automatic L-Cancelling Discussion

[kinje]

Don't mind me, just quoting myself here.

Relevant.

The decision to use options other than shield in response to an aerial happens before shielding. Reacting to a missed l-cancel on shield happens after the shield is already out.

Also, prediction is committing to an option before your opponent acts. Reaction is having a series of options planned to respond to each of their potential actions, and then choosing the option after the opponent acts.

 

[Kurri ★]

No, because I'm picking two options beforehand, and I commit to one or the other on reaction.

I don't think that's how it works... Explain please.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

The decision to use options other than shield in response to an aerial happens before shielding. Reacting to a missed l-cancel on shield happens after the shield is already out.

Also, prediction is committing to an option before your opponent acts. Reaction is having a series of options planned to respond to each of their potential actions, and then choosing the option after the opponent acts.

So in this theory fight, if I spot dodge your aerial and you MLC, then I still punish you, what point are you really making?

 

[kinje]

Lets use another situation, say, a tech chase. Once I know my opponent is going to land on the ground while in tumble, I can either wait and try to react to their tech option, or read it.
If I try to read their tech option, I think, "they are going to tech away, so dash that direction and grab" and then I do that.
If I try to react, I think, "if tech away, dash there, punish; if tech in place, dash there, grab; if tech in, stay, grab; if no tech, dash attack; if getup attack, dash, shield; etc." and then I wait for an action to react to.

 

[kinje]

So in this theory fight, if I spot dodge your aerial and you MLC, then I still punish you, what point are you really making?

If I'm fox or falco, I shine you after my l-canceled aerial before your spot-dodge's endlag is up.

 

[Narpas_sword]

You really need to stop double posting mate. edit your last ones.

 

[Draco_The]

Just quoting some comments from this article:

They only reason people don't want 3 frame links or..... whatever is because they want SF to be the "elitist" game of the FGC. Fighting games suffer from this type of thinking, Just Look how the smash community has grown. Making the barrier of entry easier in a fighting game changes NOTHING. The people whom are the best in a game are not the best due to their ability to hit 1 frame links, I can do 1 frame links and i've never won EVO, those people are the best because they've put in the time and dedication to learn the game at the highest level AND can play at the highest level consistently. Being worried about a game becoming to "easy" to play is just stupid.

Who knew, all you needed to be great at SF4 was the ability to do one frame links. Damn, I feel real stupid now spending all that time learning match ups, footsies, anti airs, frame traps, mix ups, safe jumps, option selects, etc. when all I needed to be a great player and an evo champion is one frame links.

Damn there are some stupid people in this community.

I'll take it even further actually. One frame links are one of the LEAST important high level concepts in SFIV. They're not inherently hard, they just take repetition. ANYONE can do them if they just put in enough time against the training dummy. You can say what you want about the ability to do them under pressure, but that applies to EVERY mechanic and concept in the game. If they can really pull off not having them in SFV, which I have my doubts due to the frame data issues that others have mentioned, then it'll be fine and maybe even for the best because it'll strip off a layer of needless technicality and let players spend more time learning, practicing, and evolving the real meat of the game.

SO by making links a bit easier by adding a buffer, Capcom has made it harder for pro players? So I guess reaction speed, neutral, mixups, actually learning tech, matchups, meter management, spacing and everything else that separates the top players from everyone else is gone now?

Give me a break. I for one am ready for this beta and definitely thank Vesper for the SFV content he has already provided.

Change 1 frame links with L-cancel and 3 frame links with auto. BAM.

 

[Stryker]

I haven't done much looking into reaction time science.
but isn't the 'humanbenckmark' test twitch reaction, not decision based?

Wouldn't reacting to a missed LC be a decision based reaction?

i guess if your options were 'continue hold shield' or 'do OOS' then it could be considered twitch.
but usually there are more options than that.

I'm not sure though.
Mind explaining?

So the biggest difference in reactions is expectation. If you're brain expects what's coming AND knows what to do once it recieves the signal, it has an easier time preparing for the reactive task, and thus can start and complete it faster without needing to analyze the situation.
What's important to note here is even if there are decisions to be made (such as how to punish.) your brain can make them in advance, or prep for fewer more likely options, and it allows you to react more easily.

On the other side of things, if you do not have proper expectation, then you either are going in Surprised, or unplanned. Unplanned is when you get hit with something that while you were not %100 prepped for it, it is close enough to what you prepped for that your brain needs to make a confirmation or adjustment. I would put this akin to being grabbed instead of hit in a combo, You can usually react and DI the throw correctly, but it's not what you were initially expecting.
Then finally surprised is when you get hit by something you were not expecting, which is where we have the slowest reaction time. this is due to us having to make an assessment and decision all after we've reacted, so it takes us a bit longer to decide on the right option, and then do it, as opposed to just do the option we know is going to be right.

So to bring this back, humanbenchmark is twitch based for sure, but the more you are learn the micro-situations of a matchup, the less each microsituation becomes a decision based reaction and more a twitch based reaction. Once you've decided upon your adaptation, even if that decision is to try to punish something on reaction, the faster you can get to doing it once the time is correct, and the less you have to take that time to decide on the right option.
Once you're brain is prepared for what you have to do and has proper expectation for what to watch for and how you want to react, it becomes a twitch based reaction.

 

[kinje]

Sorry about the double posts guys.

I ignored it cause I thought you guys were just being petty about me not agreeing with all of your opinions.
Didn't know it was a forums rule.

My b.
Will edit in the future.

Also, Kurri, don't even fake. My shield grabbing and OOS defensive game have always been flawless. My overly bipolar neutral game and pathetic combo DI were always my main problems.

 

[trash?]

Just quoting some comments from this article:




Change 1 frame links with L-cancel and 3 frame links with auto. BAM.

street fighter, historically, likes taking tech people've learned from past games and turning them into core strategy. they built combo scaling from a complete accident in the first version of SF2, for example, and SF4's focus attack was literally just first pushed as "parrying, but you actually have to commit to doing it", it's quite good at pulling that sort of thing off.

I still think there's an interesting idea in having l-cancels be similarly strategic and committal, but then the sole reason I've stayed far away from this thread is solely because I know how PM's always going to handle l-cancelling, and so I'm not exactly holding my breath

 

[Draco_The]

street fighter, historically, likes taking tech people've learned from past games and turning them into core strategy. they built combo scaling from a complete accident in the first version of SF2, for example, and SF4's focus attack was literally just first pushed as "parrying, but you actually have to commit to doing it", it's quite good at pulling that sort of thing off.

I still think there's an interesting idea in having l-cancels be similarly strategic and committal, but then the sole reason I've stayed far away from this thread is solely because I know how PM's always going to handle l-cancelling, and so I'm not exactly holding my breath

If not L-canceling added things like hitboxes to the landing animations, wind effects that push opponents or, well, just anything meaningful that would make someone go like "hey, now I'm not going to L-cancel this aerial", then of course I wouldn't have any problem with it, but as it stands right now L-cancel isn't an option but just something that you have to do yes or yes, and like you said I don't think the PMDT is going to change that.

 

[kinje]

If not L-canceling added things like hitboxes to the landing animations, wind effects that push opponents or, well, just anything meaningful that would make someone go like "hey, now I'm not going to L-cancel this aerial", then of course I wouldn't have any problem with it, but as it stands right now L-cancel isn't an option but just something that you have to do yes or yes, and like you said I don't think the PMDT is going to change that.

I'd like to see the same thing, just not in the main PM release (maybe in a test build with different frame data on certain options) , as it could be disastrously bad, and it might even work out worse for the community if it were only slightly worse or a little better, because it would cause additional rifts in a community with already shaky footing.

 

[Kurri ★]

I'd like to see the same thing, just not in the main PM release (maybe in a test build with different frame data on certain options) , as it could be disastrously bad, and it might even work out worse for the community if it were only slightly worse or a little better, because it would cause additional rifts in a community with already shaky footing.

As I always say, if the removal, or complete reworking of L-Cancel causes people to stop playing PM, they were never playing PM in the first place. They were playing "Fox and his Melee Pals 2: Electric Boogaloo"

 

[kinje]

As I always say, if the removal, or complete reworking of L-Cancel causes people to stop playing PM, they were never playing PM in the first place. They were playing "Fox and his Melee Pals 2: Electric Boogaloo"

Or they like PM as it is now...which already isn't Melee 2, but its own beast entirely. Believing it needs to actively try to differentiate itself from melee is dumb. The PMDT has already stated it is no longer project melee, but they haven't removed l-canceling from the game, indicating that it is part of their shared vision for the game, regardless of meleetude.
There's nothing wrong with the game having similarities to melee. Most people don't care if l-canceling is an option or not, and like it for the plain and simple catharsis of the action and for the fact that it's what they're used to in PM. Even many old brawl players who don't like melee enjoy l-canceling in PM for that same reason.
And even people who like it mostly for its similarities to melee have just as much of a right to enjoy the game the way they like it as you do.

 

[wiiztec]

The dev team is not 100% in agreement about L-Canceling. but it's definitely in PM because it was in melee not because it was a part of our vision of what the ideal smash game should be.

 

[Kurri ★]

Or they like PM as it is now...which already isn't Melee 2, but its own beast entirely. Believing it needs to actively try to differentiate itself from melee is dumb. The PMDT has already stated it is no longer project melee, but they haven't removed l-canceling from the game, indicating that it is part of their shared vision for the game, regardless of meleetude.
There's nothing wrong with the game having similarities to melee. Most people don't care if l-canceling is an option or not, and like it for the plain and simple catharsis of the action and for the fact that it's what they're used to in PM. Even many old brawl players who don't like melee enjoy l-canceling in PM for that same reason.
And even people who like it mostly for its similarities to melee have just as much of a right to enjoy the game the way they like it as you do.

After my revelation in the social thread, you have a point... But I see going from MLC to ALC being such a minimal change, that if someone were to drop the game for that, they probably weren't too into PM anyways. Whereas the change from 3.02 to 3.5 was large, so I could understand the disappointment for that.

 

[GP&B]

The dev team is not 100% in agreement about L-Canceling. but it's definitely in PM because it was in melee not because it was a part of our vision of what the ideal smash game should be.

 

[Arcalyth]

$0.02:

I'm against auto-L cancelling because half the reason I play this game is because it's fun as heck to press buttons really fast and have them do sick combos.

This game would not be the same to me without the wonderful clicky rigidness of pressing my L trigger constantly. Dead serious.
It's the same reason I'm into games like Guitar Hero. I just like the tactile feedback.

PM was meant to emulate Melee, and the things that made Melee great. I argue that Melee would not be as great without manual L-canceling: that wonderful tactile feedback. For these reasons I as a TO will never allow automatic L-cancelling and I hope other TOs follow suit. However the game is allowed to be played however its community sees fit

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

The dev team is not 100% in agreement about L-Canceling. but it's definitely in PM because it was in melee not because it was a part of our vision of what the ideal smash game should be.

An ideal smash game should follow melee's example, considering it is the most popular and has been that way for about 14 years

 

[Kurri ★]

An ideal smash game should follow melee's example, considering it is the most popular and has been that way for about 14 years

You mean a broken game where only 8 characters are actually viable? Nah, that's dumb. Why not just take the good from Melee, the good from Brawl, a bit of ingenuity and make something new?

 

[Draco_The]

An ideal smash game should follow melee's example, considering it is the most popular and has been that way for about 14 years

You can't be serious. You just can't.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

You mean a broken game where only 8 characters are actually viable? Nah, that's dumb. Why not just take the good from Melee, the good from Brawl, a bit of ingenuity and make something new?

Good from brawl? You mean where it split the community and almost destroyed competitive smash single handedly(yea that's only the "good" part about it)?? I mean..if that floats your boat...I guess

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

You can't be serious. You just can't.

I is serious

 

[PootisKonga]

Good from brawl?

The new characters. The new techs aside from momentum cancelling. Probably a lot more if you went in-depth. Also not related to the conversation. And don't double post.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

The new characters. The new techs aside from momentum cancelling. Probably a lot more if you went in-depth. Also not related to the conversation. And don't double post.

First, It is because lcanceling or getting rid of it is part of making an ideal game

Second, my b

Third, brawl and good are complete opposites

 

[Kurri ★]

First, It is because lcanceling or getting rid of it is part of making an ideal game

Second, my b

Third, brawl and good are complete opposites

But Brawl and great isn't.

 

[Jackson Cantin]

The question really boils down to "Is it okay for something to be hard for the sake of being hard?". That's a tough question. You could ask a question like "should there be a multi-shining macro mapped to taunt?" to which I'm sure you'll find the answer to be a resounding no, but what's really the difference? I think it's okay for something to be hard just to be hard. I mean look at actual fighting games. In USFIV when Evil Ryu lands a standing fierce he can combo for 350ish or 300ish and a hard knockdown for no meter. But to do that you have to push a bunch of buttons, one of which is at a really specific timing and there are some stick inputs you could mess up along the way. At the highest level, though, people will almost never drop their meterless punishes unless they're really on tilt. So should his standing fierce just do 250 and combo into something that does 100 or a 50 damage sweep and leave it at that? No, that's stupid. There's something to be said about something that's hard just to be hard. You can practice it by yourself and make obvious progress that feels good. You can grind away and get better, and beat your friend who you couldn't before because you put in the practice. That's a big reason why people play space animals and I think it's a really cool thing to have.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

But Brawl and great isn't.

Ok? Game can't be opposite of good and still be great, so nice try.......yea

 

[Kurri ★]

The question really boils down to "Is it okay for something to be hard for the sake of being hard?". That's a tough question. You could ask a question like "should there be a multi-shining macro mapped to taunt?" to which I'm sure you'll find the answer to be a resounding no, but what's really the difference? I think it's okay for something to be hard just to be hard. I mean look at actual fighting games. In USFIV when Evil Ryu lands a standing fierce he can combo for 350ish or 300ish and a hard knockdown for no meter. But to do that you have to push a bunch of buttons, one of which is at a really specific timing and there are some stick inputs you could mess up along the way. At the highest level, though, people will almost never drop their meterless punishes unless they're really on tilt. So should his standing fierce just do 250 and combo into something that does 100 or a 50 damage sweep and leave it at that? No, that's stupid. There's something to be said about something that's hard just to be hard. You can practice it by yourself and make obvious progress that feels good. You can grind away and get better, and beat your friend who you couldn't before because you put in the practice. That's a big reason why people play space animals and I think it's a really cool thing to have.

No one here is saying L-Cancel is hard, if you read through the thread you'll notice a lot of people saying it's easy. The problem is that it's arbitrary because there really is no choice in whether you do it or not, you're always going to do it. Why would you not want to halve you landing lag?

Ok? Game can't be opposite of good and still be great, so nice try.......yea

Level design
Characters
Music
Tech

Stop being dumb

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

No one here is saying L-Cancel is hard, if you read through the thread you'll notice a lot of people saying it's easy. The problem is that it's arbitrary because there really is no choice in whether you do it or not, you're always going to do it. Why would you not want to halve you landing lag?


Level design
Characters
Music
Tech

Stop being dumb

Level design: so banned stages basically? Oh cant forget about reskinned melee stages
Characters: true
Music: isn't pmdt getting rid of that and putting in their own stuff?
Tech: tripping?

Pm should follow melee's example, except for the 8 character thing.

Also, lcanceling should stay manual with an optional not allowed in Tourney auto lcancel

 

[Kurri ★]

Level design: so banned stages basically? Oh cant forget about reskinned melee stages

Not all good levels have to be competitively viable. Besides, what is Smashville, what is Castle Siege?

Characters: true

Well at least you agree with this

Music: isn't pmdt getting rid of that and putting in their own stuff?

A majority of it is still left intact

Tech: tripping?

Don't play ****ing dumb with me

Pm should follow melee's example, except for the 8 character thing..this includes lcanceling

Okay, explain why, because all I've ever seen from you is "Because Maylay is the bestest!!!!" Which in other words means jack.

edit: forgot to put "you"

 

[GP&B]

RAR, B-reversals, much less strenuous dash inputs, custom controls, and other things I probably forgot are all significant contributions from Brawl. Are you going to be stupid on purpose here or can you actually try to listen?

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

Not all good levels have to be competitively viable. Besides, what is Smashville, what is Castle Siege?

Well at least you agree with this

A majority of it is still left intact

Don't play ****ing dumb with me


Okay, explain why, because all I've ever seen from is "Because Maylay is the bestest!!!!" Which in other words means jack.

I beginning to like the way you post kurri.

RAR, B-reversals, much less strenuous dash inputs, custom controls, and other things I probably forgot are all significant contributions from Brawl. Are you going to be stupid on purpose here or can you actually try to listen?

Never liked you tho.



Anyway, lcanceling is smash's x factor for success. Smash64 and melee are still living because of this, while brawl is dead and sm4sh's x factor is Nintendo's sponsorship to get into big tournies.

 

[Kurri ★]

Anyway, lcanceling is smash's x factor for success. Smash64 and melee are still living because of this, while brawl is dead and sm4sh's x factor is Nintendo's sponsorship to get into big tournies.

I'm sure those two games are alive for way more reasons than L-Cancel. I'd go as far as to say L-Cancel (or Smooth Lander) is the least important thing to their success.

Brawl is dead because Smash 4 was similar to it and improved on issues players had with Brawl. Smash 4 is alive because it's a continuation of Brawl.

 

[GP&B]

Never liked you tho.

Probably because the first chunk of posts you made in this thread were incredibly rude and childish. It might be, I don't know, warranted on my part to see you as immature.

Anyway, lcanceling is smash's x factor for success. Smash64 and melee are still living because of this, while brawl is dead and sm4sh's x factor is Nintendo's sponsorship to get into big tournies.

Yet you provide no reasoning to substantiate this.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

Probably because the first chunk of posts you made in this thread were incredibly rude and childish. It might be, I don't know, warranted on my part to see you as immature.


Yet you provide no reasoning to substantiate this.

Lol I'm kidding I love you dude. Ha not

Anyway, my evidence shows that 2 games that have manual l/zcanceling continue to have competitive success while the other 2 are either dead or rely on their Creator to keep them relevant. Sounds like an x-factor to me

 

[Kurri ★]

Lol I'm kidding I love you dude. Ha not

Anyway, my evidence shows that 2 games that have manual l/zcanceling continue to have competitive success while the other 2 are either dead or rely on their Creator to keep them relevant. Sounds like an x-factor to me

What evidence? Where's the evidence? You made three claims while not backing any of them up! Smash 4 doesn't rely on Nintendo unless it's at a major, everything else has been community support, like Melee. 64 isn't dying, but it sure isn't huge. The only one you have right is Brawl, and that's only a maybe. There are still community for Brawl just like 64.

Back your claims before spouting them next time.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Keep it on topic guys.

Lol I'm kidding I love you dude. Ha not

Anyway, my evidence shows that 2 games that have manual l/zcanceling continue to have competitive success while the other 2 are either dead or rely on their Creator to keep them relevant. Sounds like an x-factor to me

Seems like a case of correlation not causality.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

Keep it on topic guys.




Seems like a case of correlation not causality.

Possibly, just pointing out an observation

 

[CORY]

Lol I'm kidding I love you dude. Ha not

Anyway, my evidence shows that 2 games that have manual l/zcanceling continue to have competitive success while the other 2 are either dead or rely on their Creator to keep them relevant. Sounds like an x-factor to me

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations