Is across-the-board low landing lag on aerials really necessary?

[topspin1617]

I'm posting this because I've seen many users argue that, for this game to be competitively viable, that all aerial moves need to have significantly lower landing lag. The argument seems to be that this allows more combos, more offensive play, etc.

But is it necessary? Does it not make sense that certain moves have more lag than others if not completed in the air? Is it not possible for grounded approaches to be used as combo starters as well? A counterargument to this that I've seen is that "eventually your opponent will be launched into the air and you'll have to use aerials, so yes it is needed". But... if we're talking about following someone into the air, then for the most part, won't you be completing the aerial in the air?

I don't know, I guess I just think that it makes sense for landing lag on aerials to be move dependent because, hey, they're "supposed" to be aerial attacks. It makes sense to me that a character (player) would know which of their aerials are viable to use short-hopped, and which have other uses. I just feel like some are stuck on the mindset that aerials are the only way to approach, so if they don't have universally low landing lag, then it will be impossible to combo and therefore the game will be overly defensive. But this just doesn't seem right to me; I know in Melee, the short hop aerial is kind of the standard combo starter, but does that have to mean that either it must be done that way, or else the game can't succeed?

 

[Renji64]

Whatever keeps the game from being brawl 2.0 is needed.

 

[Raijinken]

I generally agree with your points (as the one Marth player in the universe who starts combos on the ground). The main thing that results in these sort of claims is that, in Melee and Brawl, shielding is strong and a very powerful way to prevent quick grounded approaches. Unlike, say, Smash 64, where shielding was almost a purely defensive option (with rather little in the way of counter-aggression), and thus was fairly justified in its strong defensive properties. The majority playstyle in Melee tends to be to approach from the air, as this gives you the most mobility and flexibility. Rather than adapting when aerials aren't the single best approach, a lot of players either resort to camping, or point fingers at the aerial lag as the cause of the issue.

I'd say a better idea is to keep landing lag variable by move as a way of encouraging moveset variety, and simply reduce attacker shieldstun or increase defender shield drop lag to make shielding more punishable, opening up aggressive options without making aerial game the only way to play. If something of that nature doesn't happen, Little Mac is going to have an extremely hard time being viable at any level of play.

 

[Senario]

Yes because going back into normal state and acting again allows for faster followups and not combo strings ending so early. It is especially important on slow characters since they already invest a few frames into throwing out an attack. Investing more usually doesn't come with enough payout. Oh and the game is revolved around people being launched into the air. Usually far out of your ground reach so air moves are necessary. Platform positioning also makes air moves a lot more important.

Incoming "well you're wrong because you like melee and this game is going to be better than sliced bread!" Save it. Also, o.o marth players in melee have a great ground game...dont see where the "oh they cant adapt" argument comes from.

 

[Raijinken]

Incoming "well you're wrong because you like melee and this game is going to be better than sliced bread!" Save it. Also, o.o marth players in melee have a great ground game...dont see where the "oh they cant adapt" argument comes from.

The two statements had nothing to do with each other. Many players I've observed complaining, in general, are complaining about the aerial endlag before the game's even out, and many on the demo versions continue trying to play the game as though it were Melee or even Brawl, instead of investigating and theorizing about ground-based followup and approach options unique to Smash4 (as much as is possible with only a limited demo build having been played). In other words, there's too little analysis and theorycraft and too much complaint that the game lacks approach options.

 

[topspin1617]

Yes because going back into normal state and acting again allows for faster followups and not combo strings ending so early. It is especially important on slow characters since they already invest a few frames into throwing out an attack. Investing more usually doesn't come with enough payout. Oh and the game is revolved around people being launched into the air. Usually far out of your ground reach so air moves are necessary. Platform positioning also makes air moves a lot more important.

Incoming "well you're wrong because you like melee and this game is going to be better than sliced bread!" Save it. Also, o.o marth players in melee have a great ground game...dont see where the "oh they cant adapt" argument comes from.

But why is it not okay for some moves to have low landing lag while others don't? As in, "I'll be grounded after this attack so I'll go nair which has low lag, instead of laggy dair"?

Also the part of your post that says "Oh and the game is revolved around people being launched into the air. Usually far out of your ground reach so air moves are necessary" was explicitly mentioned in the OP (did you read it? =o).

And it's not about "not adapting"; it's more about "isn't it possible for a slightly different style to still be offensive, viable, and interesting?"

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

More than this, the landing lag actually doesn't necessarily prevent combo opportunities, it just makes it unsafe if blocked or dodged. For example, someone on these boards once stated that they were able to perform Pikachu's UAir into the ground, and still combo inescapably into UTilt despite the fairly hefty landing lag. Besides, just use your less-laggy aerials! Everyone has at least one low-lag or auto-cancelling aerial in the demo, with the possible exception of Marth. Yes, this even includes Little Mac, whose NAir is very, very quick (not that this makes it a good move).

 

[Wasserwipf]

I think there something else to take into account. Just, theoretically, if there was a way to reduce the lag all ground based moves had, let's say reduce it to 50%, I bet the people would like that change instantly. Why? It speeds up the game, and it gives you more options.

The first point here is really important, because the people want a fast game. Thats where Brawl actually lacked. It's physics made it slow, not the moves itself. There are many move with almost no start up (Zelda's D-Smash, Falco's jab), and many moves with no landing lag at all (Marth F-air, Metaknights everything). So there should not be the problem.

Here strikes the second point. You say "I'll be grounded after this attack so I'll go nair which has low lag, instead of laggy dair"? But what if I now want to use bair? Maybe my bare has better knockback, maybe more range, or maybe I just want my fair to stay fresh for a later use? L-cancelling does exactly that. It gives you more options due to reducing landing lag and making more moves viable for the current situation.

This even allows for mind games. In your scenario, my enemy should know I'll go with fair, so he can counter. But if he has no clue, since I've got at least 5 different options it makes it more exiting.


So to answer your question: Is it necessary? No. Does it benefit the game? Yes. Is it the only solution? No. Like I said, something like half ending lag on ground based attack would probably do as good as L-cancelling (or something similar)

 

[topspin1617]

I think there something else to take into account. Just, theoretically, if there was a way to reduce the lag all ground based moves had, let's say reduce it to 50%, I bet the people would like that change instantly. Why? It speeds up the game, and it gives you more options.

The first point here is really important, because the people want a fast game. Thats where Brawl actually lacked. It's physics made it slow, not the moves itself. There are many move with almost no start up (Zelda's D-Smash, Falco's jab), and many moves with no landing lag at all (Marth F-air, Metaknights everything). So there should not be the problem.

Here strikes the second point. You say "I'll be grounded after this attack so I'll go nair which has low lag, instead of laggy dair"? But what if I now want to use bair? Maybe my bare has better knockback, maybe more range, or maybe I just want my fair to stay fresh for a later use? L-cancelling does exactly that. It gives you more options due to reducing landing lag and making more moves viable for the current situation.

This even allows for mind games. In your scenario, my enemy should know I'll go with fair, so he can counter. But if he has no clue, since I've got at least 5 different options it makes it more exiting.


So to answer your question: Is it necessary? No. Does it benefit the game? Yes. Is it the only solution? No. Like I said, something like half ending lag on ground based attack would probably do as good as L-cancelling (or something similar)

In your hypothetical situation I'd say "if you want to use bair, then you've accepted its strengths AND its weaknesses". If you want to keep a combo going, go with your low lag moves. If you want a launcher, then maybe a higher landing lag is fine.

I completely understand how L-cancelling or just lower general lag increases options... I guess I'm just wondering why different moves being useful in different situations has to be a bad thing. Isn't it true in other fighters anyway that certain moves are good/safe sometimes and not in other situations? I'm just trying to figure out why EVERY aerial MUST be safe at ground level, when this isn't even true in the broader fighting game community.

 

[Jalio_the_Brave]

In your hypothetical situation I'd say "if you want to use bair, then you've accepted its strengths AND its weaknesses". If you want to keep a combo going, go with your low lag moves. If you want a launcher, then maybe a higher landing lag is fine.

I completely understand how L-cancelling or just lower general lag increases options... I guess I'm just wondering why different moves being useful in different situations has to be a bad thing. Isn't it true in other fighters anyway that certain moves are good/safe sometimes and not in other situations? I'm just trying to figure out why EVERY aerial MUST be safe at ground level, when this isn't even true in the broader fighting game community.

The idea that aerials have different levels of safeness is the exact reason why I think Smash 4's approach is okay. I mean, not every ground based move is safe in every situation in Smash Bros, why should aerials be any different?

You could argue that this leads to less options for followups and combos. While this may be true, I feel like fighting games have a bit of risk factor. With low lag aerials, a lot of that risk is removed. Think about it. In Melee, usually you approach with aerials with little to know thoughts as to the consequences of that approach from a lag standpoint. It's almost mindless to me when you can rely on every single one of your aerials without thoughts of "if I whiff this, I might lag too much and will get punished".

Granted, there are other punishes in Melee even with low landing lag on every aerial with L-cancelling. But this differentiates Smash 4, makes it more ground based, and makes it to where aerials are going to be used mainly for when you are in the air, and not as an approach.

I enjoy Melee and P:M. Heck, I'm just as guilty with always approaching with aerials. Cause that's how you play those games. People just need to learn that a new style of approach isn't necessarily the bane of competitive Smash

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

If you're in a 1v1, no items environment ending a combo with an aerial into the ground, does the lag even matter? You've just launched the foe halfway across the stage and by the time they can get back on their feet and begin another approach, you'll be back to neutral. Hitstun is a thing and aerials aren't that laggy. If your foe has projectile attacks it might be a somewhat different issue, and you'll have to take that into account before deciding what aerial you end your combo with.

And as for continuing a combo? Using your character's juggle aerial into the ground seems to work for some despite landing lag. (No, I'm not talking about Mario and his amazing lagless UAir.) Then just continue into a UTilt loop and go back to using aerial combos.

And if you want to approach with an aerial? Most characters can do that too thanks to easy, intuitive auto-cancel windows or just straight-up lagless aerials. Fox's FAir, BAir, and DAir, Link's FAir, Toon Link's FAir, Samus's NAIr, Samus's BAir, Bowser's FAir and BAir, Mario's UAir and BAir, Donkey Kong's DAir, every ZAir in the game... the list goes on.

 

[MasterOfKnees]

It's not necessary per say, but it sure would be nice.

 

[Beats]

In your hypothetical situation I'd say "if you want to use bair, then you've accepted its strengths AND its weaknesses". If you want to keep a combo going, go with your low lag moves. If you want a launcher, then maybe a higher landing lag is fine.

I completely understand how L-cancelling or just lower general lag increases options... I guess I'm just wondering why different moves being useful in different situations has to be a bad thing. Isn't it true in other fighters anyway that certain moves are good/safe sometimes and not in other situations? I'm just trying to figure out why EVERY aerial MUST be safe at ground level, when this isn't even true in the broader fighting game community.

If you're only restricted to one or two aerials close to the ground, it really limits the opportunity to set up DI traps and whatever. And you might end up seeing some combos boil down to just repeating the same aerial over and over and that's not as interesting. Anyway, just because a move has lower lag doesn't make it safe. I don't have the exact data for this, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I think aerials in Melee that are safe on shield are the exception rather than the rule. And even ones that are safe, you don't want to be throwing them out willy nilly.

To be fair I don't think blindly asking for lower landing lag is all that helpful. I just hope that they're putting careful consideration into how it's going to affect the game.

 

[Imber]

High lag aerials limit combo potential. If you think one low lag aerial for each character is enough I don't know what to tell you. Also, making the game more ground-based means taking away one of the things that makes smash unique in the first place. How can you justify that?

 

[Bladeviper]

High lag aerials limit combo potential. If you think one low lag aerial for each character is enough I don't know what to tell you. Also, making the game more ground-based means taking away one of the things that makes smash unique in the first place. How can you justify that?

who ever said only one move, its just not every single move needs lower lag, id rather not see high kill potential moves get low landing lag along with moves meant to rack up percent

 

[Senario]

But why is it not okay for some moves to have low landing lag while others don't? As in, "I'll be grounded after this attack so I'll go nair which has low lag, instead of laggy dair"?

Also the part of your post that says "Oh and the game is revolved around people being launched into the air. Usually far out of your ground reach so air moves are necessary" was explicitly mentioned in the OP (did you read it? =o).

And it's not about "not adapting"; it's more about "isn't it possible for a slightly different style to still be offensive, viable, and interesting?"

I did, not all air moves need low lag but they need to not be excessive for what they do. Marths down air is one of those things where lag is fairly justified as it spikes in melee. However a forward air from him has no buisness having immense lag. Similar story with say ganon. His up, neutral, and back air all sgouldnt have too much lag but a slightly longer but jot excessive amount on the forward air and down air due to kill move and spikes.

But as much as I would lpve to say I feel like smash 4 boards has become pretty unfriendly to competitive players

 

[HeavyLobster]

People want universally low landing lag because they want a fast-paced and open-ended game. It's not entirely needed as long as every character has adequate shield safe approach options in order to keep the game from becoming overly defensive, but it gives characters more options in terms of combo starters and lets them do more crazy things. A more subdued approach wouldn't necessarily mean a broken game or one that's competitively unviable, but it would make it less fun for a lot of people.

 

[L9L]

More than this, the landing lag actually doesn't necessarily prevent combo opportunities, it just makes it unsafe if blocked or dodged. For example, someone on these boards once stated that they were able to perform Pikachu's UAir into the ground, and still combo inescapably into UTilt despite the fairly hefty landing lag. Besides, just use your less-laggy aerials! Everyone has at least one low-lag or auto-cancelling aerial in the demo, with the possible exception of Marth. Yes, this even includes Little Mac, whose NAir is very, very quick (not that this makes it a good move).

I tend to agree with this. While I'd like to see less landing lag on moves then, say, Brawl did, I accept the fact that it won't be Melee and we'll all just have to adapt.

 

[Raijinken]

But as much as I would lpve to say I feel like smash 4 boards has become pretty unfriendly to competitive players

Most likely because the majority seem to already be judging the game as terrible for competition, despite the fact that we're more than a month from release.

I more or less agree on the rest of your statement, by the way.

And as HeavyLobster pointed out, it'll be fine either way in the long run as long as characters have options. And there's always the balance patches to hope for.

 

[Gameboi834]

I can't wait for the usual suspects to turn this into a Melee v Brawl thread.

Anyways, reduced landing lag isn't necessary, but it would definitely increase game flow. It's really just a balance of aerial speed/flow vs. a solid ground game. You can have one with the other but one is definitely going to be stronger if not balanced well.

 

[Raijinken]

I can't wait for the usual suspects to turn this into a Melee v Brawl thread.

Anyways, reduced landing lag isn't necessary, but it would definitely increase game flow. It's really just a balance of aerial speed/flow vs. a solid ground game. You can have one with the other but one is definitely going to be stronger if not balanced well.

Ideally, at least from my perspective, we'd end up with a game where most stages work for most characters, and matchups are close enough to even for an objectively better player to win the majority of the time. It's fine, and makes things more interesting, when you have characters like Roy and Little Mac who are extremely polar in their air vs ground preference, but the important thing is to try to keep such balances fair, instead of the game evolving (or not) into something in which a single style is the only consistently successful strategy, like aerial approaches were in some previous games.

As fun and unique as Mac's style seems to be, no amount of ground strength would make him a strong pick in Melee. The significantly more unique newcomers in Smash4 are part of the new appeal of the game.

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

I did, not all air moves need low lag but they need to not be excessive for what they do. Marths down air is one of those things where lag is fairly justified as it spikes in melee. However a forward air from him has no buisness having immense lag. Similar story with say ganon. His up, neutral, and back air all sgouldnt have too much lag but a slightly longer but jot excessive amount on the forward air and down air due to kill move and spikes.

We've yet to see Ganondorf in Smash 4, so we cannot pass judgement on him yet. For all we know, his Thunderstomp might be auto-cancelling, or his FAir or NAir.

As for Marth, his FAir is now a kill move when tippered. Not that little upward poke it does in Melee, a straight-up kill move. And you can still double FAir as a combo, just not out of short-hop. Also, UAir is completely lagless if done into the ground. You can UAir into anything. UAir > shorthop NAir > tippered FAir > gg. UAir > pivot-cancel tippered FSmash > gg from 70%.

 

[Raijinken]

As for Marth, his FAir is now a kill move when tippered. Not that little upward poke it does in Melee, a straight-up kill move. And you can still double FAir as a combo, just not out of short-hop. Also, UAir is completely lagless if done into the ground. You can UAir into anything. UAir > shorthop NAir > tippered FAir > gg. UAir > pivot-cancel tippered FSmash > gg from 70%.

Would it be fair to say that kill moves should have notable lag, while combo moves should have fairly little? And stuff in between (combo starters and whatnot) should be in between, to somewhat linearly trade between kill potential and risk?

 

[Bladeviper]

Would it be fair to say that kill moves should have notable lag, while combo moves should have fairly little? And stuff in between (combo starters and whatnot) should be in between, to somewhat linearly trade between kill potential and risk?

that makes the most sense to me and it also seems its kinda what they are going for, we can't speak for the final product though but it seems to me its going in that direction

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

Would it be fair to say that kill moves should have notable lag, while combo moves should have fairly little? And stuff in between (combo starters and whatnot) should be in between, to somewhat linearly trade between kill potential and risk?

I think that it's combo starters that need to be the ones with no lag, while moves to continue combos should be in the middle for purposes of making sure you can't combo with them in ways that are too powerful. That said, starting a combo with a move that's supposed to be used to continue a combo should give even more advantage than simply landing a combo-starter.

And oddly enough, I've seen auto-cancelling kill aerials in Smash 4. Not sure what the justification is on that, but for example Mario, Bowser, Samus, and possibly Sonic have auto-cancelling BAirs, even though that's one of their higher-knockback aerials. Very high knockback in Bowser's case. And of course there's Fox's UAir autocancel out of short hop which is still there.

 

[Jalio_the_Brave]

Would it be fair to say that kill moves should have notable lag, while combo moves should have fairly little? And stuff in between (combo starters and whatnot) should be in between, to somewhat linearly trade between kill potential and risk?

My thoughts exactly. Aerial moves should have varying degrees of lag. Not all of them should have really high lag, not all of them ahould should have really low lag. That way approaches with different aerials (and not just one) can still be viable.

 

[JV5Chris]

I'm posting this because I've seen many users argue that, for this game to be competitively viable, that all aerial moves need to have significantly lower landing lag. The argument seems to be that this allows more combos, more offensive play, etc.

That's what people want to make the argument about, but really it's more about having a wider range of viable approach (and retreating) options that add interest to the gameplay.

But is it necessary? Does it not make sense that certain moves have more lag than others if not completed in the air?

Nothing is ever necessary, but reducing the landing lag would make matches more dynamic. You'd see a broader range of moves being used and a larger breadth of ground/air mix-ups as a result.

Reducing landing lag is not the same thing as flattening it, btw. It's a pretty common misunderstanding on this topic; no one is suggesting aerial landing lag should be a universal value to all attacks.

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

On the subject of aerial gameplay in Smash games, how often do you see jab used in tournament-level Melee? That's right, just about never. How many jabs have we seen in Smash 4 so far? Quite a few from everyone not named Rosalina. To me, the jab should be the bread and butter of damage-dealing from neutral on the ground. And in Smash 4, I've seen it used as such to great effect. On top of that, I've seen combos both into and out of jab. I saw a gameplay video of Bowser accidentally landing on the third hit of Mario's jab. He paid for this mistake by being meteor smashed off the side of Battlefield in what looked to be an inescapable combo. The hitstun from that third jab did not appear to have worn off as Mario short hopped and FAired Bowser for what looked like a pretty early KO, definitely below 100%.

So what I'm trying to say is, ground combat is not something to be afraid of in Smash, and it's nice to see the jab combo actually be used for both poking and combos in Smash 4. It's also nice to see that some characters actually want to go fully airborne for air combos well above ground level, rather than simply performing single-jump or short hop-fast fall aerials all day.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

Stylish Samus K.O. - SSBU - Smash 4 - Smash Bros …: http://youtu.be/h3LemQ-zUSw

If I can pull off stuff like this, lag or none, then that's what will make me happy. I can't say the lag has ever been that big a deal for me. For the guys who are frame perfect I can see the issue but I personally don't think less lag is needed.

 

[JamietheAuraUser]

Stylish Samus K.O. - SSBU - Smash 4 - Smash Bros …: http://youtu.be/h3LemQ-zUSw

If I can pull off stuff like this, lag or none, then that's what will make me happy. I can't say the lag has ever been that big a deal for me. For the guys who are frame perfect I can see the issue but I personally don't think less lag is needed.

Well, it wasn't a true combo, but that sure was pretty.

 

[Raijinken]

On the subject of aerial gameplay in Smash games, how often do you see jab used in tournament-level Melee? That's right, just about never. How many jabs have we seen in Smash 4 so far? Quite a few from everyone not named Rosalina.

Until I watched the Zenith Smash64 tournaments this weekend I had never realized how little anyone but Ike used jabs in any game since 64. I'm looking forward to an entire arsenal of useful moves for a change (hopefully).

 

[Senario]

On the subject of aerial gameplay in Smash games, how often do you see jab used in tournament-level Melee? That's right, just about never. How many jabs have we seen in Smash 4 so far? Quite a few from everyone not named Rosalina. To me, the jab should be the bread and butter of damage-dealing from neutral on the ground. And in Smash 4, I've seen it used as such to great effect. On top of that, I've seen combos both into and out of jab. I saw a gameplay video of Bowser accidentally landing on the third hit of Mario's jab. He paid for this mistake by being meteor smashed off the side of Battlefield in what looked to be an inescapable combo. The hitstun from that third jab did not appear to have worn off as Mario short hopped and FAired Bowser for what looked like a pretty early KO, definitely below 100%.

So what I'm trying to say is, ground combat is not something to be afraid of in Smash, and it's nice to see the jab combo actually be used for both poking and combos in Smash 4. It's also nice to see that some characters actually want to go fully airborne for air combos well above ground level, rather than simply performing single-jump or short hop-fast fall aerials all day.

To be completely fair you see jabs used at top level play very often. Jab resets are so good players will tech away to avoid it. Fox has one which leads to up smash though if you have really good tech skill you can shine wavedash up smash. Sheik uses it a bunch for her techchase grabs. Some marth players use it as a poke off stage if they arent below the stage. Pikachu and ganon use it as staples. Captain falcon literally has a name for his jabs used in competitive (the gentleman).

Just saying. Also marth is largely just as much a ground based character as he is air based. Techchases and grabs are part of the ground game. So are things like marths down tilt for edgeguarding.

 

[StarLight42]

Whatever keeps the game from being brawl 2.0 is needed.

I completely agree with every single letter in this post.

 

[Beats]

Until I watched the Zenith Smash64 tournaments this weekend I had never realized how little anyone but Ike used jabs in any game since 64. I'm looking forward to an entire arsenal of useful moves for a change (hopefully).

Your statement about jabs reminded me of this that happened in the tournament.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eDtY_Ev7G4

I mean, jabs may not be as common as other moves but I don't think they're neglected all that much. Captain falcon's gentleman is pretty common. Marth uses it to edgeguard things like phantasm. Peach will sometimes float cancel -> jab. Then there are things like jab resets and jab grabs which aren't uncommon at all.

 

[JV5Chris]

On the subject of aerial gameplay in Smash games, how often do you see jab used in tournament-level Melee? That's right, just about never.

You rarely see anyone enter a full jab combo, but jab resets happen quite frequently.

 

[Jalio_the_Brave]

It's also nice to see that some characters actually want to go fully airborne for air combos well above ground level, rather than simply performing single-jump or short hop-fast fall aerials all day.

I feel like you hit the nail on the head here. Fast fall aerial approaches, where your end result is you still standing on the ground, is something I think has become almost a crutch in competitive smash. I don't think that was ever the intent of aerials. People say what makes smash different is that there is verticality in each match. And that includes off stage game as well. But short hopped aerials don't accomplish what everyone says is the defining characteristic of Smash Bros.

Instead of viewing landing lag in a bad way, it should be seen as a way for Smash's uniqueness to shine through. If you wanna use aerials, take it to the skies! Figuratively and literally! I think that should be the outlook of these changes made in Smash 4

 

[Luigi#1]

Whatever keeps the game from being brawl 2.0 is needed.

This game is hardly Brawl like as it is.
I need a drink.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

It's not necessary per say, but it sure would be nice.

The point of the thread is that it doesn't really matter, actually.

 

[Renji64]

This game is hardly Brawl like as it is.
I need a drink.

Hardly like brawl are you seeing the same game it looks just like brawl in hd with some fixes.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

My thoughts exactly. Aerial moves should have varying degrees of lag. Not all of them should have really high lag, not all of them ahould should have really low lag. That way approaches with different aerials (and not just one) can still be viable.

This is more or less exactly what I was saying in a previous thread that ended up locked attacking balance in Smash 4 (due to Melee VS Brawl, surprise).

The conversation was predominantly on landing lag as par for the course here and some strong disagreements with Melee mechanic proponents postulations.

Landing lag is a good thing because of what it's being used for, a balancing tool to measure out the checks and balances of certain aerials. Melee may be hyper offensive in most cases but it is hyper offensive because of the fact that its footsie game is unbalanced. There is little to no consequence for actions, and even so there is still the mastery of minimizing risk in your attacks regardless of that. The (admittedly terrible and attention-seeking) Destructoid article had one thing right : Melee purists are fanatical about absolute and total control of everything, to the point that they essentially like Melee for different reasons than what Sakurai aimed to draw appeal in to the actual series with. They utterly disapprove of any sort of checks and balances system that would impede or hinder their movement. This caused a giant rift in fans of the franchise, and that group has set themselves up for disappointment with pretty much any remaining Smash game that will ever see development. Yep, we will go through this EVERY TIME a new Smash game is being developed. Buckle up...

We must no longer measure the strength of abilities completely on their landing lag, we must assess the viability of using a certain move in a certain situation taking their punishable risk in to account. It is a balance point that has clear motive in Smash 4, to promote a different kind of play.

If you don't like it, you don't need to play it. Melee isn't going anywhere.