IMO: The off-stage meta of Smash 4

[BestTeaMaker]

A bit of a caveat here. All of my impressions are based on what I've been watching (ZeRo and Denti/Sethlon/Awestin streams). I have not personally played the Japanese demo. Also, because this is a demo, my impressions are only based on the 5 characters we currently have and other information given, so what I will say may be completely wrong for the other characters.

---

It seems that Smash 4 was built with a more aggressive meta in mind, specifically ledge and off-stage meta. Here are what I've been observing:

Ledge
---
First is the way that ledge mechanics work. The trumping mechanic and the slight ledge-grab delay points to the idea that ledge-stalling tactics are dead, or at least really diminished. The advantage of trumping the ledge is the ability to jump again to attack the opponent. Inversely, the person who was trumped is able to perform recovery abilities or even retaliate in turn.

We also really interesting options for edgeguarding. In particular, Villager has a lot of options for aggressive edgeguarding: f-smash (bowling ball), dash (potted plant), and d-special (TREE4) have the ability to drop projectiles off the edge. Similarly, Pikachu's d-special (Thunder) has some interesting change: a shorter height and meteor strike at cloud level. Before, Pikachu could use this move to help guarantee a star KO. However, now it seems to be build for off-stage use.

Recovery
---
Let me start by saying that Villager has insane recovery options, from s-special (Loid rocket) to u-special (Balloons). And this seems to be the theme for this iteration. We see a lot of characters given amazing recovery options, from Olimar's new u-special (Flying pikmin) and Pit's u-special (Power of Flight) to Palutena's u-special (Teleportation) and Rosalina's u-special (Star Launch). Even characters with sub-par recovery, keep in mind that custom moves can change the properties of recovery moves (see Mario's u-special, from multi-hitting to higher range).

This leads me to conclude that there is less risk in venturing off stage to aggressively chase down opponents off stage, give that you are smart about your recovery options.

Spikes/Meteors
---
I mentioned before about Pikachu's new Thunder mechanics. In general, spiking seems to have been given an interesting boost. They seem to have been given a lot more oomph in terms of spectacle and power, from Mario's fair to Link's dair. There also seems to be a sort of indication of whether or not you've sweet-spotted the move. Again, this seems to reward more aggressive modes of attacks.

In turn, spiking moves seem to have been given an interesting balance change, either from a slower start up as seen in Link and Mega Man's d-air or a random element as seen in Villager's d-air (and u-air since it's the same move).

Blast Zones
---
The biggest indicator for me, though, is that blast zones are much greater. This especially affects the flow of the game, specifically in that it will take more effort to normally KO opponents. A lot of games had characters go into 150+%. However, with the above stated changes to the off-stage gameplay, it seems that an aggressive mode of attack can lead to effective KO's.

---

In conclusion
There seems to be a lot more aggressive options in this game, at least from what I've been seeing. I hope that this will lead to more exciting matches to watch and give Smash 4 the competitive edge it needs.

 

[TimeSmash]

How do you think stock count will go since blast zones are so wide? It's plausible we'd start off with four stocks at first, but if people are constantly living above 150% it might need to be addressed for the sake of time

 

[BestTeaMaker]

I'm no expert on the competitive meta, just a casual observer.

However, I think we will see a 3-stock count for the initial meta since we're all very new to this game. However, if an offensive meta develops over time, then I could see the stock count increase to 4. I feel like there are a lot more options, especially with the fact that there is a huge diversity in the roster.

 

[Ganreizu]

How do you think stock count will go since blast zones are so wide? It's plausible we'd start off with four stocks at first, but if people are constantly living above 150% it might need to be addressed for the sake of time

3 stocks is most reasonable. Some people call for 2 stocks, but that probably doesn't give you enough time to analyze anything (the opponent, nor possible counterpicks) especially given custom moves and a (so far, imo) very balanced and large roster.

I think 4 stocks would take way too long unless everyone is aggressive, and not everyone will.

 

[Renji64]

This is gonna be a big change I know i will be going for spikes.

 

[Raijinken]

I'm defaulting to 3 stocks no time limit just because that seems like the way to go. I never liked four as a number of stocks anyway.

As for the ledge play, it looks far more interesting than past games "You're off, and now you're hogged" meta. I'm also a big fan of the wide blast lines, largely because I have the most fun when everyone's lived up to high percents and any mistake is potentially lethal. Combined with the strength of some recoveries, I think it'll be interesting to see how the decisions to recover high or go for the edge work out over time. Some characters like Megaman may have no strong preference, with good options to cover either, but others may need to just wait at your landing spot and punish with a smash instead of trying to guard outright. I think it'll make things more interesting in general.

 

[BestTeaMaker]

I'm defaulting to 3 stocks no time limit just because that seems like the way to go. I never liked four as a number of stocks anyway.

Is no time limit a thing? I was under the impression that brawl was still 8 minutes in length at least.

 

[Ganreizu]

I'm defaulting to 3 stocks no time limit just because that seems like the way to go. I never liked four as a number of stocks anyway.

Time limit is required. Whether it should stay 8 minutes or not remains to be seen though. I'm inclined to think it should increase to 9/10 minutes, but 8 will probably be fine for a majority of matchups.

 

[Raijinken]

Is no time limit a thing? I was under the impression that brawl was still 8 minutes in length at least.

That's Brawl/Melee/64's rules, and the tournament community's rules. Neither of those necessarily have to apply to Smash4. I don't plan to follow those, as I personally don't feel that a time limit brings anything positive to the game. Many others will disagree, and I respect their opinions on the matter, but all it does is pressure matches to end sooner (deliberate stalling can be moderated in a tournament setting), or allow a fast character to get a lead and stall to the end of the time limit. I, personally, don't think that is sporting play in a fighting game, so I choose the ruleset that makes it impossible.

In short, I've never seen a serious fight take the full time, so I don't think there's a reason to have it.

 

[Empyrean]

It's interesting to note that the recoveries with most range also happen to be the ones easiest to challenge, from what we've seen. And shorter ones like Mario's and Link's offer more protection. Obviously we need to see more before making any conclusive statements.

Take Villager for example, his recovery can apparently go from bottom to ceiling, which is quite ridiculous. However, he can't really do anything while he commits to recovering: if he tries going all the way up, he falls down helpless and vulnerable; if he tries sweetspotting the ledge, the edgeguarder can easily attempt to pop the ballons without worrying about coming back himself.

I'm really looking forward to how the offstage game develops.

 

[Ganreizu]

In short, I've never seen a serious fight take the full time, so I don't think there's a reason to have it.

Consider a different kind of "serious fight". Consider the 2 minute time matches that the demo currently forces you to play. How many stocks are taken in those matches between high level players streaming the game right now who attempt to fight seriously? (as opposed to testing or stopping whenever they encounter something interesting to test later) Majority of the matches that i have seen lean towards sudden death vs results screen. Over 80% of them, even. The ones that do go to sudden death probably involve link/mario/megaman, aka the characters with weaker recoveries (compared to only villager and pikachu though), and only with 1 stock dropped between both players.

If it usually takes 2 minutes for each player to drop a stock, even with players that clearly have a more "melee" mindset, that's around 6 minutes for a 3 stock match or 8 minutes for 4 right? Given that stock time is literally required in tournament setting, you're already looking at significantly longer match times than melee and even brawl unless people are most aggressive in the edgeguard situation.

Plus, this is only with the base moveset. Throw custom moves in the mix, where there is most definitely going to be an option that enhances recovery in some way for every character, and it gets even longer.

 

[InfinityCollision]

I personally don't feel that a time limit brings anything positive to the game.

I take it you've never seen a 20+ minute campfest before? These rules exist for a reason. Yes, matches do sometimes go to time. No, constant moderation is not always practical nor can rules against stalling reasonably cover all possible ways of drawing out a match. Quality of life, both for competitors and spectators, is another valid concern.

 

[staindgrey]

In short, I've never seen a serious fight take the full time, so I don't think there's a reason to have it.

It's to prevent stalling. Technically speaking, if a player has found a way to stall indefinitely, without a time limit, there's nothing at all stopping him from doing it. The time limit is relatively high so that wins by default don't happen often, but there needs to be a time limit to keep the pace going.

 

[Raijinken]

It's to prevent stalling. Technically speaking, if a player has found a way to stall indefinitely, without a time limit, there's nothing at all stopping him from doing it. The time limit is relatively high so that wins by default don't happen often, but there needs to be a time limit to keep the pace going.

Well, as I've said, I'm aware my view differs from the majority. But simply, if someone is stalling, I say DQ them without a question (and again, I know that's not the norm). Like some people said here, the main purpose I see in it is keeping matches from going too long without needing moderator supervision. However, I think it just adds timeout as an option for victory (with a lead) or stalling to sudden death (see E3 tournament finals), which, while some find it to be a valid way to win the game, doesn't hold that meaning to me.

Especially if the matches start taking two minutes per stock (which I honestly hope and expect to not quite be the case once we get the full game and roster), I don't want to keep that sort of time limit, as it just makes it more likely for a match to end with stocks remaining. Maybe it's just me, but that's not fun to watch or to play.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

Yea - this game seems like it's going to be a lot more about gimping.

And currently not a huge fan of the new ledge mechanics - seems like it favors the recoverie way too much.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Yea - this game seems like it's going to be a lot more about gimping.

And currently not a huge fan of the new ledge mechanics - seems like it favors the recoverie way too much.

Perhaps, but I'd wager that Sakurai looked at the metagame and didn't like how the ledge was being exploited. I assume it was designed to be a relatively vulnerable position, which makes edgehogging as a tactic all the more perplexing in the abstract. ("I need to stop my opponent from recovering. I know, I'll jump offstage and grab the ledge!") Then there are the various ledge stalling techniques that make use of the invincibility frames to make approaching almost impossible. Again, the ledge being used as a beneficial position sounds very strange out of context. ("I need to stall for time and make it a royal pain for the opponent to approach me. I know, I'll jump offstage and grab the ledge! Repeatedly!")

Whether the changes made to the ledge end up being healthy for the game or not remains to be seen, but it's fairly obvious to me that they're Sakurai's reaction to edgehogging and ledge stalling.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

Perhaps, but I'd wager that Sakurai looked at the metagame and didn't like how the ledge was being exploited. I assume it was designed to be a relatively vulnerable position, which makes edgehogging as a tactic all the more perplexing in the abstract. ("I need to stop my opponent from recovering. I know, I'll jump offstage and grab the ledge!") Then there are the various ledge stalling techniques that make use of the invincibility frames to make approaching almost impossible. Again, the ledge being used as a beneficial position sounds very strange out of context. ("I need to stall for time and make it a royal pain for the opponent to approach me. I know, I'll jump offstage and grab the ledge! Repeatedly!")

Whether the changes made to the ledge end up being healthy for the game or not remains to be seen, but it's fairly obvious to me that they're Sakurai's reaction to edgehogging and ledge stalling.

I actually don't mind him getting rid of ledgestalling to be honest because it was kind of...stupid (stupid is a bit strong but couldn't think of a better word). But edgehogging I'm not so sure. I feel like edgehogging was a legitimate way of killing people, and actually required crazy reads sometimes. Plus it made it so you didn't need hard-hits or good gimp moves to get the job done because you had another tool to help you finish people.

I say it favors the recoverie because hits are weaker, and people recover high a lot more (due to them being hit at higher angles) and it's fairly easy to sweet spot in this game. Also air dodges are mad fast ( of course they are still punishable but it's more difficult ).

So after playing the demo ( mind you it was NPCs so my theory crafting could be weak ) I found that it was kind of difficult to edgeguard people. Because...

If you jump after the person for off-stage shenanigans...faster airdodging means that the defense has less to fear while airdodging off-stage.

If you try to exploit ledge trumping (aka letting them take the ledge then trumping them)...means you need two good reads. The first, is knowing exactly when they are going to grab the ledge. This was actually kind of hard because a second too soon and they trump you. But you can't do it too late because in this game if they do an action at all while on the ledge they won't be able to be trumped. This is why you sometimes see two people on the ledge because the first guy started to roll onto the stage ( for example ) when the second guy grabbed it.
* Also note there is a split second before you can act when you grab the ledge, so perhaps when people become more accustomed to the timing, forced ledge trumping will be easier. But it isn't that big and I still think the balance favors the recoverie.

Second read is after the successful trump knowing where the opponent will go. It's not as easy as trumping, then immediately jumping off and B-airing because of that ledge delay I talked about easier. So then it becomes another prediction game of if the opponent is going to go for the stage, go for the ledge, or go recovery low and go for the ledge. I suppose for certain characters this is better for ( I heard ZeRo did this well with Bowser so I supposed his big hitboxes covers multiple options ) but I know for a fact with Mario the only way to punish them was to for sure know if they were going high, medium, or low.

And it seems to make good recoveries even better. In games like Brawl you could at least grab the ledge (which forces them on-stage ) then punish them, but in this game unless the meta grows to make forced ledge trumping really good seems like there isn't too much you can do. They can just go for the ledge because they can always grab it and sweet spotting is super easy.

This is why I say it favors the recoverie too much...It's like they aren't even put in a situation that requires off-stage play that much ( because people recovery high anyway ) and when they are the game is weighted in their favor. I'm not saying I haven't been gimped or gimped the NPC ( I gimped the NPC a decent amount but seemed like my tactics would be less effective against humans ) but I feel like ledge trumping in its current form is odd considering the games other mechanics.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I actually don't mind him getting rid of ledgestalling to be honest because it was kind of...stupid (stupid is a bit strong but couldn't think of a better word). But edgehogging I'm not so sure. I feel like edgehogging was a legitimate way of killing people, and actually required crazy reads sometimes. Plus it made it so you didn't need hard-hits or good gimp moves to get the job done because you had another tool to help you finish people.

Agreed on ledge stalling, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on edgehogging. I'll elaborate more on this below.

I say it favors the recoverie because hits are weaker, and people recover high a lot more (due to them being hit at higher angles) and it's fairly easy to sweet spot in this game. Also air dodges are mad fast ( of course they are still punishable but it's more difficult ).

So after playing the demo ( mind you it was NPCs so my theory crafting could be weak ) I found that it was kind of difficult to edgeguard people. Because...

If you jump after the person for off-stage shenanigans...faster airdodging means that the defense has less to fear while airdodging off-stage.

I have no proper response to airdodging since the sum total of my Smash 4 experience is around 10 matches against the AI on my friend's demo. However, I suspect that in a proper PVP match, we can expect to see people calling out the airdodges by delaying their attack so they hit as the invulnerability frames end.

I

f you try to exploit ledge trumping (aka letting them take the ledge then trumping them)...means you need two good reads. The first, is knowing exactly when they are going to grab the ledge. This was actually kind of hard because a second too soon and they trump you. But you can't do it too late because in this game if they do an action at all while on the ledge they won't be able to be trumped. This is why you sometimes see two people on the ledge because the first guy started to roll onto the stage ( for example ) when the second guy grabbed it.
* Also note there is a split second before you can act when you grab the ledge, so perhaps when people become more accustomed to the timing, forced ledge trumping will be easier. But it isn't that big and I still think the balance favors the recoverie.

Second read is after the successful trump knowing where the opponent will go. It's not as easy as trumping, then immediately jumping off and B-airing because of that ledge delay I talked about easier. So then it becomes another prediction game of if the opponent is going to go for the stage, go for the ledge, or go recovery low and go for the ledge. I suppose for certain characters this is better for ( I heard ZeRo did this well with Bowser so I supposed his big hitboxes covers multiple options ) but I know for a fact with Mario the only way to punish them was to for sure know if they were going high, medium, or low.

And it seems to make good recoveries even better. In games like Brawl you could at least grab the ledge (which forces them on-stage ) then punish them, but in this game unless the meta grows to make forced ledge trumping really good seems like there isn't too much you can do. They can just go for the ledge because they can always grab it and sweet spotting is super easy.

This is why I say it favors the recoverie too much...It's like they aren't even put in a situation that requires off-stage play that much ( because people recovery high anyway ) and when they are the game is weighted in their favor. I'm not saying I haven't been gimped or gimped the NPC ( I gimped the NPC a decent amount but seemed like my tactics would be less effective against humans ) but I feel like ledge trumping in its current form is odd considering the games other mechanics.

The business with ledge trumping stems from what I strongly suspect is a core design philosophy in Smash 4. Namely, if you want to edgeguard a character, you have to physically jump after them and knock them even further, or try to intercept their path with projectiles, or something more involved than simply hanging onto the ledge so they can't.

Imagine you're Sakurai and you think that deliberately leaving the stage to grab the ledge (or otherwise lingering there) is silly and should be discouraged. (This covers both edgehogging and ledge stalling.) First you lower the invincibility frames for successive regrabs to make ledge stalling ineffective. Splendid. But edgehogging is still a thing. You introduce the trumping mechanic, so you can no longer edgehog. Wonderful. But now you've possibly created a situation where the defending player will try to grab the edge immediately after the recovering person. Hmm, this won't do. So to prevent reverse-trumping (?) from being too good an option, the trumped character can't be in an automatic you-lose-good-day-sir position, hence the refreshed double jump and what looks to be a slightly earlier opportunity to act.

This reduces the overall importance of the ledge game specifically and separates characters into two general archetypes: those that can kill from onstage (Bowser, Little Mac) and those that can kill via offstage gimps (Villager, Rosalina). As the metagame develops and people grow more familiar with the resources at everyone's disposal, it may turn out some characters excel at both categories and some may be really bad at both. Those will likely end up being the strongest and weakest characters overall, respectively.

I'm not sure I'm explaining myself very well here.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

Agreed on ledge stalling, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on edgehogging. I'll elaborate more on this below.


I have no proper response to airdodging since the sum total of my Smash 4 experience is around 10 matches against the AI on my friend's demo. However, I suspect that in a proper PVP match, we can expect to see people calling out the airdodges by delaying their attack so they hit as the invulnerability frames end.


The business with ledge trumping stems from what I strongly suspect is a core design philosophy in Smash 4. Namely, if you want to edgeguard a character, you have to physically jump after them and knock them even further, or try to intercept their path with projectiles, or something more involved than simply hanging onto the ledge so they can't.

Imagine you're Sakurai and you think that deliberately leaving the stage to grab the ledge (or otherwise lingering there) is silly and should be discouraged. (This covers both edgehogging and ledge stalling.) First you lower the invincibility frames for successive regrabs to make ledge stalling ineffective. Splendid. But edgehogging is still a thing. You introduce the trumping mechanic, so you can no longer edgehog. Wonderful. But now you've possibly created a situation where the defending player will try to grab the edge immediately after the recovering person. Hmm, this won't do. So to prevent reverse-trumping (?) from being too good an option, the trumped character can't be in an automatic you-lose-good-day-sir position, hence the refreshed double jump and what looks to be a slightly earlier opportunity to act.

This reduces the overall importance of the ledge game specifically and separates characters into two general archetypes: those that can kill from onstage (Bowser, Little Mac) and those that can kill via offstage gimps (Villager, Rosalina). As the metagame develops and people grow more familiar with the resources at everyone's disposal, it may turn out some characters excel at both categories and some may be really bad at both. Those will likely end up being the strongest and weakest characters overall, respectively.

I'm not sure I'm explaining myself very well here.

I get the logic - but I question how it blends in with the rest of the game mechanics. Feel like ledge-trumping would be better if people didn't get knocked so high/moves were stronger. Seems like even successful ledge-guards don't kill and just resets the situation.

Or if it felt more like a 50/50 split between offense and defense.

I'm watching the VGBC stream and doesn't look like a ton of off-stage reactions, I'm not sure if this is because people aren't familiar with the game/characters or that the game favors one side so much that it's generally not worth it...

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I get the logic - but I question how it blends in with the rest of the game mechanics. Feel like ledge-trumping would be better if people didn't get knocked so high/moves were stronger. Seems like even successful ledge-guards don't kill and just resets the situation.

Or if it felt more like a 50/50 split between offense and defense.

I'm watching the VGBC stream and doesn't look like a ton of off-stage reactions, I'm not sure if this is because people aren't familiar with the game/characters or that the game favors one side so much that it's generally not worth it...

I believe it's mostly being unfamiliar with the game and characters. After all, if so many people are complaining that you can recover from anywhere (Little Mac notwithstanding), then it follows that you can edgeguard without much fear of being unable to return. It's just that it's hard to break out of old habits.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

I believe it's mostly being unfamiliar with the game and characters. After all, if so many people are complaining that you can recover from anywhere (Little Mac notwithstanding), then it follows that you can edgeguard without much fear of being unable to return. It's just that it's hard to break out of old habits.

I hope - it's just that the mechanics where kind of bothering me currently and I needed to vent it. We will see how things look in a few month. But I still think the game needs knockback at lower angles - shouldn't B-air someone off stage and they are put in a better recovery position. I understand some characters having this but some of the characters that did this was ridiculous.

 

[BestTeaMaker]

I hope - it's just that the mechanics where kind of bothering me currently and I needed to vent it. We will see how things look in a few month. But I still think the game needs knockback at lower angles - shouldn't B-air someone off stage and they are put in a better recovery position. I understand some characters having this but some of the characters that did this was ridiculous.

Right now I think we are heading towards a new aggressive meta. If you've been watching the Tourney Locator and Clash Tournaments invitationals, it seems that more and more people are understanding the importance of off-stage aggression. One of the biggest things is in CTI's Grand Final, where Robin jumped below and took Ness's recovery attack, preventing him from recovering successfully.

 

[hotdogturtle]

After all, if so many people are complaining that you can recover from anywhere (Little Mac notwithstanding), then it follows that you can edgeguard without much fear of being unable to return. It's just that it's hard to break out of old habits.

I like this line of thinking. Let's hope that more people pick up on it.

 

[PizzaWenisaur]

Right now I think we are heading towards a new aggressive meta. If you've been watching the Tourney Locator and Clash Tournaments invitationals, it seems that more and more people are understanding the importance of off-stage aggression. One of the biggest things is in CTI's Grand Final, where Robin jumped below and took Ness's recovery attack, preventing him from recovering successfully.

Thank goodness.