Houston Smash Ultimate Thread

[Xyro77]

RJ (lucario main in brawl) recorded some stats on smash 4.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/t_nYQosZFFkSRTRJWw9v0eQ/htmlview?pli=1

Out of 122 matches, only 8 went to time (8min) and the rest finished under 7min.

Reminder, this was made with a brand new game which is naturally it's slowest. Especially 4 days into it's life.

Reminder, this is without C-stick aka a faster method to attack/combo and all around build damage.

Reminder, this is without us knowing what combos work, what moves kill or any other "lame" "cheap" ways to build damage/kill.


In conclusion, the initial test of smash 4 proves what I've said since Day one: 3 stocks 7 min is still good for smash 4. Imagine the WiiU version and 6months of everybody practicing. I see 3 stocks being taken in 6min. Very fair for tournament play even more than brawl was already.

 

[Gea]

The average time for those matches ends up being slightly over 5 minutes a match. It's fallacious to say that the matches will be slowest when the game is new when that wasn't the case for Brawl and often isn't the same in new games, since no one knows how to play defensively or sees a strong need to.

Personally I'd like to see 2 stock 5 minute matches played in 3/5 sets as the norm. Then if you have time constraints you can easily cut down time by making it 2/3. It's a good compromise that allows for more emphasis placed on counterpicking. Your analysis is bunk because you're seeing what you want to see. You're assuming people becoming efficient in this game will mean that people will camp less, not more. I can promise you that average duration of matches when Brawl came out was not the peak of slowness for the game. I'm not even saying that this game WILL get slower, but it's certainly a very real possibility. One you seem to deny that exists (big surprise, as you've clearly already made up your mind you big hypocrite).

 

[Xyro77]

You are flat out wrong.

My analysis is rooted in experience.

Beginning melee/brawl/smash 64 matches took way longer than they do today. This is literal fact.

 

[UltimateRazer]

I don't think the beginning of Brawl was slow as today's top MK dittos or Olimar matches etc.

 

[Gea]

Have fun making all the same mistakes you have for years and having those 6 AM tournaments again. The problem extends far beyond the stock count; it's your total inability to have any sort of rational data-driven discussion about anything ever without taking it like a personal affront against your ego. If you deny the possibility that a game remarked to have stock longevity to have time issues in the long run similar to Brawl's problems, you have some huge issues.

Now I'm going to wait for you to respond to Razer with something like MK ISN'T IN THIS GAME IT'S DIFFERENT and then remark how people's ruleset in Brawl was shortsighted and rushed in the very next sentence.

 

[Xyro77]

Select MUs have gotten slower, razer. That can be said for any smash game. im talking in general.

 

[UltimateRazer]

It was many match ups lol. Olimar in general caused matches to be slow. SONIC caused match ups to be slow or go to time. It was everywhere in Brawl. You could see a clear shift in the meta from early m2k/azen/royr/sethlon etc to how Brawl ended. It got gross.

Now I don't see this game turning into Brawl. It looks more balanced and looks like characters have options. I also think we should definitely run 3 stocks 7-8 mins first. BUT I also think we should be open to the possibility of switching to 2 stocks 5 minutes. All I'm asking is to look at actual results/data of tournaments run with that format and see. I can see merits to both sides.

 

[Gea]

Let me put it this way. Theory and trying to predict the future aside, you need to plan for a minimum of 5+ minute matches in a way that would make you happy if every match did last roughly 5 minutes with between 7-8% of matches running to time.

This is what the data you posted suggests. The rest is speculation. Those numbers should make you slightly uneasy as a TO.

 

[RT]

What worries me most is that Hobo 1, we had at least one timeout. Now, in late Brawl meta, timeouts are common place.

So if a sample of Smash 4's tournament settings already has 8 timeouts...what does that mean for the future...?

Also, you need to watch out for confirmation bias when looking at the data.

 

[Xyro77]

Have fun making all the same mistakes you have for years and having those 6 AM tournaments again. The problem extends far beyond the stock count; it's your total inability to have any sort of rational data-driven discussion about anything ever without taking it like a personal affront against your ego. If you deny the possibility that a game remarked to have stock longevity to have time issues in the long run similar to Brawl's problems, you have some huge issues.

Now I'm going to wait for you to respond to Razer with something like MK ISN'T IN THIS GAME IT'S DIFFERENT and then remark how people's ruleset in Brawl was shortsighted and rushed in the very next sentence.

1. I had 1-2 events end at 6am in the 10 years ive been TOing. Thats a damn good track record.

2. I can have a data driven discussion if the person actually had more experience than 3 house tournaments and stopped taking part in armchair TOing.You can jack off to numbers all day but real life exp proving otherwise trumps whatever numbers you wanna "analyze."

3. Im not taking any of this personal. ive learned over the years we just dont agree on things. im cool with that.

It was many match ups lol. Olimar in general caused matches to be slow. SONIC caused match ups to be slow or go to time. It was everywhere in Brawl. You could see a clear shift in the meta from early m2k/azen/royr/sethlon etc to how Brawl ended. It got gross.

Now I don't see this game turning into Brawl. It looks more balanced and looks like characters have options. I also think we should definitely run 3 stocks 7-8 mins first. BUT I also think we should be open to the possibility of switching to 2 stocks 5 minutes. All I'm asking is to look at actual results/data of tournaments run with that format and see. I can see merits to both sides.

I have literally held events for every single smash game from the early years to the late years and an the average match is MUCH faster late in the game than it was in the early days. 2001 melee is slower than 2014 melee. 2008 brawl is slower than 2014 brawl. Why? Instead of spamming F-smash and not edge hogging/guarding, we learned how to combo, gimp and many other things that build damage/kill and end matches faster.


Now yes, certain MUs that involve IC/Olimar or MK dittos...etc take longer but those do not dominate tournament play and most def dont happen as much at the lower level aka the largest base of an event.

The data RJ provided a little less than beginning brawl level times. its that simple.

Let me put it this way. Theory and trying to predict the future aside, you need to plan for a minimum of 5+ minute matches in a way that would make you happy if every match did last roughly 5 minutes with between 7-8% of matches running to time.

This is what the data you posted suggests. The rest is speculation. Those numbers should make you slightly uneasy as a TO.

a 3 stock 7min event with a game that is faster than brawl does indeed prepare for a "minimum of 5+ minute matches"

so its all good

 

[Xyro77]

What worries me most is that Hobo 1, we had at least one timeout. Now, in late Brawl meta, timeouts are common place.

So if a sample of Smash 4's tournament settings already has 8 timeouts...what does that mean for the future...?

Also, you need to watch out for confirmation bias when looking at the data.

I saw MANY more than 1 timeout at HOBO 1 (and hobo 2,3,4) in nearly every possible MU other than like ganon dittos or snake vs anything. in late brawl its restricted to only a few characters. VAST improvement.

A small sample showing 8 timeouts out of 122 matches is very positive news considering its a 3ds, no one knows what to do/what works....etc.

Confirmation bias? its not my fault that data backs up my views. maybe people should listen to me more instead of slaving away at writing down data that will end up siding with me.

 

[KRDsonic]

One thing that worries me about smash 4 is how some characters have such a horrible time trying to get a kill.

 

[Gea]

The data RJ provided a little less than beginning brawl level times. its that simple.

a 3 stock 7min event with a game that is faster than brawl does indeed prepare for a "minimum of 5+ minute matches"

so its all good

You're actually doing a pretty good job of your usual twisting of data. The ruleset analyzed was for 8 minute matches, not 7. 28 matches surpassed 6:00. 23% of matches either went to time or would have gone sub-minute under your proposed ruleset. That's almost a quarter of matches where the end is in sight. These were matches without planking or incentive to run away.

No matter what you decide to do with ruleset, it definitely needs to be looked at.

 

[Xyro77]

One thing that worries me about smash 4 is how some characters have such a horrible time trying to get a kill.

Coming from melee, I felt the same thing about brawl.

Then as I got better, I learned to kill/gimp/build damage better.


Again, the longer the game is out, the faster things happen.

 

[Xyro77]

You're actually doing a pretty good job of your usual twisting of data. The ruleset analyzed was for 8 minute matches, not 7. 28 matches surpassed 6:00. 23% of matches either went to time or would have gone sub-minute under your proposed ruleset. That's almost a quarter of matches where the end is in sight. These were matches without planking or incentive to run away.

No matter what you decide to do with ruleset, it definitely needs to be looked at.

I already stated the rules were at 8min. I'm saying mine will be at 7 so that even if timeouts do happen, it's not as bad as they were if it had been 8.

Nothing I said is "twisted numbers." I spoke truth on everything I said. So I'm not seeing what you just posted doing anything other than siding with me.




Edit: these were also matches missing a c-stick/bread and butter combos or knowing effective gimping techniques


Edit: plainking doesn't exist in smash 4

 

[Gea]

Whelp, I spend all day teaching highschool students. Don't need to make that my mission when I come home. Hope someone explains this to you in language that you understand.

 

[Xyro77]

Whelp, I spend all day teaching highschool students. Don't need to make that my mission when I come home. Hope someone explains this to you in language that you understand.

It's not possible. Give up.

 

[UltimateRazer]

I already stated the rules were at 8min. I'm saying mine will be at 7 so that even if timeouts do happen, it's not as bad as they were if it had been 8.

Nothing I said is "twisted numbers." I spoke truth on everything I said. So I'm not seeing what you just posted doing anything other than siding with me.




Edit: these were also matches missing a c-stick/bread and butter combos or knowing effective gimping techniques


Edit: plainking doesn't exist in smash 4

What? A timeout no matter if its 8 or 7 minutes is still garbage. It's a terrible way to end a match especially if people are playing for the timeout. The only difference in your ruleset is that someone will start thinking about a timeout at 6 minutes rather than 7 minutes. Terrible to the competitive nature.

Obviously this is a little sample size that RJ is providing, but if your first tournament results in a QUARTER of matches going to time or almost time...that sucks. I don't know why you think matches that end in less than a minute from time or to time is "bearable". That shouldn't even be what we're going for.

 

[Xyro77]

What? A timeout no matter if its 8 or 7 minutes is still garbage. It's a terrible way to end a match especially if people are playing for the timeout. The only difference in your ruleset is that someone will start thinking about a timeout at 6 minutes rather than 7 minutes. Terrible to the competitive nature.

Maybe you are not familiar with the term "play to win."

Yes, time outs are not fun to watch or be apart of but there is money, "fame" and "honor" on the line for some people and a timeout is a legit strat.

Yea a 8 or 7min timeout is still a timeout but to butcher stocks and time limits solely because of the few who timeout is stupid.

 

[UltimateRazer]

I'm very familiar with the term. It's that term that brought out players like Denti and ALSM and planking in the first place. You can argue very much that your proposed ruleset would encourage this strategy.

Once again, I'm fine with trying 3 stocks and should at first, but you should also be open to the possibility of the 2 stock format. It has merit to it that you seem to literally turn a blind eye to.

 

[Xyro77]

I'm very familiar with the term. It's that term that brought out players like Denti and ALSM and planking in the first place. You can argue very much that your proposed ruleset would encourage this strategy.

Once again, I'm fine with trying 3 stocks and should at first, but you should also be open to the possibility of the 2 stock format. It has merit to it that you seem to literally turn a blind eye to.

be it a 5min timer or a 45 min timer, Denti, ALSM, DMG it doesnt matter either. people who want to time out will time out regardless of timer. fun or not, its a legit strat found in games as well as sports. just cause its done by a few people doesn't mean everybody should suffer.

 

[UltimateRazer]

Lol it wasn't just a few people. Timeouts were rampant in Brawl. I saw RANDOMS doing timeouts at tournaments regularly. Once again you think that switching it to 2 stock 5 minutes is making everyone "suffer" which isn't true. This thinking is just showing that you refuse to look at the MERITS of having 2 stocks, just like there is MERITS to 3 stocks. So like I said, you should at least analyze actual data/results when tournaments start instead of going bull headed on this issue.

You've openly said you'll see/test custom moves legalization. I don't see why you won't wait and see and test stock reduction. Brawl was seriously unbearable for many to watch in it's last year. Streams were boring as F for the most part minus few parts or few top level matches.

 

[Xyro77]

Lol it wasn't just a few people. Timeouts were rampant in Brawl. I saw RANDOMS doing timeouts at tournaments regularly.

Dude think about what you are saying. Yes, i have no doubt you saw time outs. i have too....MANY times. However, those randoms you saw are not timing out EVERY match. DMG/ALSM/DENTI will timeout EVERY match if they can. There is a huge difference in abusing the system on purpose (denti....etc) or by accident (the randoms).

Once again you think that switching it to 2 stock 5 minutes is making everyone "suffer" which isn't true.

I play samus. I dont intentionally time out but most of my matches last 5 or more min because samus is not a rush down or aggressive or even offensive character AND she has issues with killing. 8 min allows me time to learn, adapt, and take my time trying to win. Samus isn't the only character that benefits from that and ALLAN isn't the only person that plays with that style. so YES a 5 min timer reduces the time i (and others) have to learn/adapt/think...etc so yes it forces me and many others to suffer in terms of doing something that is not meant for our char and goes completely against our styles.

This thinking is just showing that you refuse to look at the MERITS of having 2 stocks, just like there is MERITS to 3 stocks. So like I said, you should at least analyze actual data/results when tournaments start instead of going bull headed on this issue.

the only thing ill see from 2stock 5min matches is tournaments ending faster. i dont need data to see that.

You've openly said you'll see/test custom moves legalization. I don't see why you won't wait and see and test stock reduction. Brawl was seriously unbearable for many to watch in it's last year. Streams were boring as F for the most part minus few parts or few top level matches.

custom moves is different than

butchering stocks/timer (and thus styles/players) all because you want faster matches

 

[Gea]

To be fair, I think he doesn't realize that 2/3 3 stock and 3/5 2 stock offers a similar experience of play time potential with less total time for slow matches that result in non-close sets. It indirectly discourages timeouts (which I don't think he understands how a timer affects timeouts) and actually gives the TO flexibility if they want or need to run shorter sets. Really, my advocation of this set is because I think under good circumstances it would be much easier to switch to 3 stocks from 2 than to reduce 3 to 2. I also feel like it offers unique benefits and would offer more accurate results within a similar timeframe and (hopefully) discourage timeouts.

Time per stock alloted: 2.67 vs 2.5 minutes

Edit: Since SWF is ass to format any text in anymore...

Edit2: If you change this for 7 minutes per stock the max time goes to 7, 14, and 21 minutes a set with only 2.33 minutes given per stock. His current ruleset actually gives less total time per stock, and the least out of any of the three rulesets with no benefits except the lowest max time if every match/set went to time.

 

[UltimateRazer]

Dude think about what you are saying. Yes, i have no doubt you saw time outs. i have too....MANY times. However, those randoms you saw are not timing out EVERY match. DMG/ALSM/DENTI will timeout EVERY match if they can. There is a huge difference in abusing the system on purpose (denti....etc) or by accident (the randoms).





I play samus. I dont intentionally time out but most of my matches last 5 or more min because samus is not a rush down or aggressive or even offensive character AND she has issues with killing. 8 min allows me time to learn, adapt, and take my time trying to win. Samus isn't the only character that benefits from that and ALLAN isn't the only person that plays with that style. so YES a 5 min timer reduces the time i (and others) have to learn/adapt/think...etc so yes it forces me and many others to suffer in terms of doing something that is not meant for our char and goes completely against our styles.



the only thing ill see from 2stock 5min matches is tournaments ending faster. i dont need data to see that.



custom moves is different than

butchering stocks/timer (and thus styles/players) all because you want faster matches

Except, these randoms were doing it ON PURPOSE. You need to think too.

So your justification is literally based for a slower style. Nice to know you're favoring one style over many others. By the way, Gea's 2 stock 5 minutes 3/5 gives you equal amounts of stocks to 3 stocks 8 minutes. That should give you time to adapt. Adaptation is subjective. You're literally wanting to adapt from 2nd to 3rd stock when you can easily adapt from 1st stock to 2nd stock. You say it takes you over 5 minutes to win with Samus but that's with THREE stocks. You're giving reasons all based on Brawl while you've openly said that it shouldn't be 2 stocks because this isn't Brawl lol.

Yet you're cutting down timer to 7 minutes. 7 minutes divided by 3 stocks is an average of 2.33 minutes to kill. 5 minutes divided by 2 stocks give you an average of 2.5 minutes to kill. By simple math, 2 stocks 5 minutes favors your style of play. Adapting from 1st to 2nd stock is the same as from 2nd to 3rd stock in a different rule set. If you have 3/5, bam, there's your adaptation time.

 

[Xyro77]

To be fair, I think he doesn't realize that 2/3 3 stock and 3/5 2 stock offers a similar experience of play time potential with less total time for slow matches that result in non-close sets. It indirectly discourages timeouts (which I don't think he understands how a timer affects timeouts) and actually gives the TO flexibility if they want or need to run shorter sets. Really, my advocation of this set is because I think under good circumstances it would be much easier to switch to 3 stocks from 2 than to reduce 3 to 2. I also feel like it offers unique benefits and would offer more accurate results within a similar timeframe and (hopefully) discourage timeouts.

Edit: Since SWF is *** to format any text in anymore...

so at most a 2/3 game would take 24min and a 3/5 would take 25min?

ok so right off the bat it takes longer by one minute doing a 3/5...TERRIBLE. now you need to consider the time it takes to counter pick stages, characters and custom moves for a 3/5. you will be doing these more than you would in a 2/3. so again, it would still take longer.....TERRIBLE.

 

[UltimateRazer]

I'm fine with having 2 stock 2/3 tbh. I think the extra stock adaptation thing is blown out of proportion.

Edit: 3 stocks 3/5 with 8 minute time = 40 mins max of match time.

2 stocks 4/7 with 5 minute time = 35 mins max of each time

This is regarding finals ^

 

[Gea]

It's okay Allan, I knew you wouldn't get it. You're adding a potential of 1 minute in game to get more accurate results (larger set size and stages will each have less total impact on the set) in order to play a 3/5 instead of a 2/3. If you realize that you can't stay in the venue forever and you're starting at 2PM again when you were set to start at noon, switching to 2 stock 2/3 would reduce sets to 15 minutes without having to drastically change the rules that people are accustomed to.

 

[Xyro77]

Except, these randoms were doing it ON PURPOSE. You need to think too.

purpose or not, they were not doing it every single match. denti and co have no problem doing that the entire tournament.

So your justification is literally based for a slower style. Nice to know you're favoring one style over many others.

im sorry for catering to players who just wanna play the way (within reason) the want instead of players who dont have patience.

By the way, Gea's 2 stock 5 minutes 3/5 gives you equal amounts of stocks to 3 stocks 8 minutes.

That should give you time to adapt. Adaptation is subjective. You're literally wanting to adapt from 2nd to 3rd stock when you can easily adapt from 1st stock to 2nd stock.

Every player is different. There are other characters than snakes, other players than razer and other styles than what you posses. what works for you doesnt work for everybody. Some learn slower, some learn faster...its not a matter of "wanting to adapt", its a matter of it happening when it happens. Some players take 2 stocks to show you all their cards while others do it in one. By doing 2 stock 5 min you are forced to do everything i mention 1 stock faster. not all styles nor people work that way.

This whole thing is like you always arriving to a tournament at 10am and everyone else showing up between 10:01 and 11. you want everyone to be there at 10 because you dont wanna wait. They have every right to show up at 11am as long as they are not late.

You say it takes you over 5 minutes to win with Samus but that's with THREE stocks. You're giving reasons all based on Brawl while you've openly said that it shouldn't be 2 stocks because this isn't Brawl lol.

Im basing it off of brawl because:

this game is closer to brawl than any other smash
and
what i did in brawl works

Yet you're cutting down timer to 7 minutes. 7 minutes divided by 3 stocks is an average of 2.33 minutes to kill. 5 minutes divided by 2 stocks give you an average of 2.5 minutes to kill. By simple math, 2 stocks 5 minutes favors your style of play. Adapting from 1st to 2nd stock is the same as from 2nd to 3rd stock in a different rule set. If you have 3/5, bam, there's your adaptation time.

it doesnt matter how you want to divide it up. 7min is more than 5. its 2 more mins to figure **** out, abuse what ive learned about the player, see if he SDs, see if he gets tired....etc.

 

[Xyro77]

It's okay Allan, I knew you wouldn't get it. You're adding a potential of 1 minute in game to get more accurate results (larger set size and stages will each have less total impact on the set) in order to play a 3/5 instead of a 2/3. If you realize that you can't stay in the venue forever and you're starting at 2PM again when you were set to start at noon, switching to 2 stock 2/3 would reduce sets to 15 minutes without having to drastically change the rules that people are accustomed to.

You are assuming i start at 2pm at every event for the rest of time. spoilers: i dont. you wouldnt know because you dont go to smash events.

There are other ways to get more accurate results. 3/5 isn't the only way. pools...swiss....etc are there as well

 

[Xyro77]

I'm fine with having 2 stock 2/3 tbh. I think the extra stock adaptation thing is blown out of proportion.

Edit: 3 stocks 3/5 with 8 minute time = 40 mins max of match time.

2 stocks 4/7 with 5 minute time = 35 mins max of each time

This is regarding finals ^

yes its faster....at the expense of everyone who needs more time. stop being selfish and consider others.

 

[Xyro77]

brb, feeding claire. ill respond in like 30min

 

[UltimateRazer]

I hope you know there are more styles than either yours or mine. For all you know, the minority can be players who choose to take longer to do what they gotta do. It's a very opinionated argument with no facts to back it up. I don't know why you say I play with no patience when MANY of my Brawl matches went to 6 minutes and up. I've played a lot more tournament matches than you in Brawl. I can tell you that I've taken longer than 5 minutes average for sure. Snake literally didn't have the tools to rush down like MK could. This isn't just about pushing a style on everyone, but once again you choose to ignore the merits of 2 stocks.

But you have justified your reasoning before on "THIS ISN'T BRAWL". Pick one or the other.

Umm it definitely does matter. You have 2 more minutes but even LESS time than the 1st two stocks to figure it out. The 3/5 idea gives you the same amount of time to figure it out btw.

 

[Xyro77]

I hope you know there are more styles than either yours or mine. For all you know, the minority can be players who choose to take longer to do what they gotta do. It's a very opinionated argument with no facts to back it up.

yes there are more styles than yours and mine.
a 2stock 5min favors more speedy/aggressive/offensive styles and characters. why a 3stock 7min rule still allows you to be that way but ALSO allows the slower and/or more defensive players to have time to do what they do best.

i dont know if you remember this but my events are aimed at being as fair as possible to all players. Thats why ive done mid and low tier singles and teams over the years.

having said that, 3 stock 7min is more "fair" to a wider variety of players/styles/characters than a 2 stock 5min match.

I don't know why you say I play with no patience when MANY of my Brawl matches went to 6 minutes and up. I've played a lot more tournament matches than you in Brawl. I can tell you that I've taken longer than 5 minutes average for sure. Snake literally didn't have the tools to rush down like MK could. This isn't just about pushing a style on everyone, but once again you choose to ignore the merits of 2 stocks.

im not talking about patience during games. im talking patience in terms of others taking longer than 5 min. if you have patience with that then this argument has not reason to take place.

But you have justified your reasoning before on "THIS ISN'T BRAWL". Pick one or the other.

Umm it definitely does matter. You have 2 more minutes but even LESS time than the 1st two stocks to figure it out. The 3/5 idea gives you the same amount of time to figure it out btw.

im talking 2/3. 3/5 is out of the question except for finals.

 

[Xyro77]

and honestly, until you experience smash 4 at a TGC with the rules ive set in place, you have no idea how it will go. attend a TGC and THEN bich.

if it "starts at 2pm" and "ends at 6am" like gea thinks then yea we adjust some things.

im willing to change stuff but i need you guys to actually experience it instead of crap on it without even going to it.

 

[UltimateRazer]

Like I've said multiple times, I'm down for your 3 stock rule at the the first tournaments for sure. But you seem to be 100% against a switch even if there is results/data after tournaments occur. I'm just asking you to at least do that.

http://smashboards.com/threads/vect...luence-in-smash-4.368780/page-2#post-17603939

Interesting and possibly game changing mechanic found ^

 

[Gea]

Not good for the speed of the game. At least it's intuitive, I guess.

 

[Xyro77]

Like I've said multiple times, I'm down for your 3 stock rule at the the first tournaments for sure. But you seem to be 100% against a switch even if there is results/data after tournaments occur. I'm just asking you to at least do that.

http://smashboards.com/threads/vect...luence-in-smash-4.368780/page-2#post-17603939

Interesting and possibly game changing mechanic found ^

ill change if exp deems it needed or people who have exp my events need it.


as for "vectoring" it is most def a game changer for vertical trajectory. horizontal trajectory we still need to use DI.

 

[UltimateRazer]

ill change if exp deems it needed or people who have exp my events need it.


as for "vectoring" it is most def a game changer for vertical trajectory. horizontal trajectory we still need to use DI.

Then I'm fine with how it will be atm.

I don't think so. From my understanding, if you get hit directly to the right and you hold directly to the left, you'll fly as less far.

 

[Xyro77]

Then I'm fine with how it will be atm.

I don't think so. From my understanding, if you get hit directly to the right and you hold directly to the left, you'll fly as less far.

"""""However, against horizontally sending attacks, holding down either does not change your kill percentage or actually makes you die earlier. Testing this has been fickle, as anyone well versed in Smash mechanics is aware that "horizotally sending moves" actually send at a trajectory closer to ~45 degrees diagonally upwards, and a character's falling speed acceleration attribute (commonly known as gravity) acts simultaneously with knockback trajectory to make it appear to be more horizontal. But I can confirm that what I said earlier is true, as I have tested this with a fully charged Bowser Fsmash against Jigglypuff at the ledge of FD. Given the same percentage (14% in my tests), Jigglypuff died whether I was holding down or not at all. And as expected given the previous explanation, holding up or toward the stage resulted in Jigglypuff not dying. """""""


"However, against horizontally sending attacks, holding down either does not change your kill percentage or actually makes you die earlier."

^^^^^^so it does nothing and we are just supposed to DI, right?