Is the skill gap in Smash 4 too small?

[PCHU]

Once you realize that l canceling is merely a satisfaction mechanism that gives the illusion of doing something meaningful when you push a button, your soul will be set free. Granted there's a teeny weeny bit of counterplay pertaining to sheid angeling, but that will rarely matter so you're better off angeling your sheid to avoid being sheid stabbed. Though I guess the best lies often have a grain of truth to them.

It's a button press, not slavery

I was under the impression that the talk over it had ended, but people just can't seem to let it go; it's like some people only know how to debate l-canceling and forget the rest of the game exists.

A better question is "Should the Melee powershield mechanic (complete with tighter frame windows) return?"
Would it negatively or positively affect the game?
Is it bad because there's never a time to not powershield?
You guys skip over a lot of interesting stuff to debate a mechanic that (good) Smash 4 characters don't even need.

 

[Nobie]

I think powershielding is a good mechanic because while you ideally want to powershield everything, this leaves some counterplay as opponents can trick you into attempting a powershield at the wrong time, and it also means that shielding has degrees of success. If shielding meant you were always punishable but powershielding didn't, then that would be an issue.

It's sort of like how Fox Illusion in Melee is actually a really good mechanic. If you do a Fox Illusion, it's a nice move. If you learn to shorten it, it's even better. If you train hard enough to shorten it at any point during the attack, it becomes fantastic. At the same time, if you never fully master Fox Illusion, you're not suddenly left with a terrible attack, and it can still function at low and high-level play.

 

[Emblem Lord]

Except powershielding is an option tree in of itself. Which is dumb.

 

[David Viran]

"You don't have to try to make yourself sound smart". Right, "try" and "sound" well alright then my behavior is the act of a moron's ways then.

"To counter your actual argument, low shield stun and safer rolls don't make the skill gap smaller at all."

Humph, so you believe that low or "none" shield stun and safe rolls don't leave a question mark if the game is even worthy to be called technical, overrated absolutely, and "better" than other games. I checked guides and gave the game a chance it disappointed there was even people from Reddit giving up hope. https://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/2vk8w1/opinion_brawl_is_a_better_competitive_game_than/

The link is just showing that Brawl was better yet people stay with Smash-4 for various reasons.

"Honestly, they probably make the skill gap larger, since getting good requires learning how to punish overzealous rollers or people who sit in their shields all day, and also learning to stop relying on rolling because you will be punished for it."

What? You just wrote in your previous sentences that safe rolls don't change the skill gap, now you're writing safe rolls can be punished which shows it changed the skill gap by writing you can punish safe rolls. I've watched A LOT of Smash-4 videos which contained a lot of agony to watch them, but my point is I haven't seen anyone punish rolls, like the only person I can view that could kind of would be Mac or Sonic and I haven't seen your theory about punishing safe rolls man. Shield stun doesn't exist in Smash4, you could just throw random moves and not be punished compared to BRAWL. Also a smart player would know how to abuse safe rolls and I've fought some in the past. The only way I could ever get inside was have a projectile character like Link, don't write "I don't know what I'm doing" I do, every-time I would try to bait, they would just rolls and grab which wouldn't work but my point is safe rolls are a huge flaw in Smash-4 just like "tripping" in Brawl.

I don't see what you're writing to be seem valid, I need proof that you can punish this and that when the game has no shield stun and safe rolls. This just screams bs, I can't count how may times people are complaining about Smash-4 mechanics now than even Brawl, which was a huge decrease towards people complaining. All I ever heard and read about Brawl was (ban MK) (get rid of tripping), where as Smash-4 is (Nerf Greninja), (Nerf Diddy), (Nerf Sheik), get rid of safe rolls, fix the air dodge mechanics which Brawl's was better), get rid of this technique that Nintendo will even do just so you all wont see others as higher as higher, this game defines communism towards how everything must be equal oh wait, no. Let's see, what else do people complain about, (make Smash-4 faster), (make Smash-4 get rid of secret items like Peach Bomb omb which rarely happens). So, a game like Brawl which had like two problems, MK, and tripping now compared to Smash-4 which has more problems, nerf this, ban this is seen better than other games right? Here's the kicker, Diddy is the new MK and also Sheik is a runner up, heck now Luigi which people are getting (tried of) which is completely puzzling to myself. Face it, Smash-4 is not all that cracked up to be and it's not. The game has nothing but basic basic 2008 technology from when Brawl was the main attraction, yes Brawl. Thanks.

I just want to ask are you saying rolls have no punishable frames?

 

[otter]

I love these threads. They really draw out the worst in the community. Onward and vocally come the skill-is-bad crowd and the melee-elitists (both of which are our community's cancer).

These posts frequently exclude the facts that the best player in the game rarely drops a match, and the game has only been out for like 5 months. As if the top regional smash pros have had a long time to invent the meta and establish that they are actually the best. People also dismiss that one of the characters in the game was so good, that a HUGE nerf left him in the top 5, if not still one of the best. (inb4 hes not top anymore, just you wait)

I feel like these threads are frequently written by low/mid-level smash 4 players (Read: not ranked as a top 50 player worldwide) who are aspiring to get to a high level, but are becoming frustrated when they lose to opponents who they have somehow (probably incorrectly) measured as 'significantly worse' or "bad". If you're dropping games to scrubs, its not the game, its you.

Tl;dr

S4, like every other entry, has a very high skill cap and is a very mental game. If you are losing, you need to practice, not rationalize your defeat by saying, "It's a low skill cap game."

clearly, this doesn't apply to all games. Tic Tac Toe has no skill gap. If both players know the rules, it's always a tie.

People often replay to evidence of sm4sh being a bad game, or a bad player clearly beating a good player by saying "get gud", which is just as stupid as the people you described. There are tons of people IN THIS THREAD praising the fact that smash 4 has a small skill gap, and we know that the game was designed to have a small skill gap.I would start trying to put a dent in these facts before discounting anyone who makes a good argument against the game.

 

[LionKeith]

clearly, this doesn't apply to all games. Tic Tac Toe has no skill gap. If both players know the rules, it's always a tie.

People often replay to evidence of sm4sh being a bad game, or a bad player clearly beating a good player by saying "get gud", which is just as stupid as the people you described. There are tons of people IN THIS THREAD praising the fact that smash 4 has a small skill gap, and we know that the game was designed to have a small skill gap.I would start trying to put a dent in these facts before discounting anyone who makes a good argument against the game.

Okay, where to start...

You cant just compare two games that are so completely unrelated and act like you have a valid comparison. The reason tic tac toe is so limited is because p2 only has 2 choices on turn 2 if p1 took center, and gets less choice from then on, and there is a max of 3-4 turns. Tic tac toe is a rigged game.

S4 has hundreds of possible input combinations, not to mention a lot of hidden ATs. If they didnt want there to be a skill gap in S4, there would not be one. Why perfect pivots? Why pivot grabs? Why b reversals? Why dash cancel grab? Why like 20+ sheik ATs? There is no evidence that they have intentionally scrubbed the game at the competitive level, besides samurai's words. All he is doing is trying to prevent his game from achieving the same public opinion and niche market as street fighter. I can't blame him.

Speaking of at's, both players have to understand the "meta" in tic tac toe to playout your hypothetical. A skilled player will never lose (if hes first he takes center, if hes 2nd he knows to force the tie).

Anyone who thinks S4 has a small skill gap (edit: Read: the people praising/claiming it in this thread) hasnt played any high level players. Go on smash ladder and fight a 1600+ player or pm one of the pros on smashboards.

You haven't even touched the fact that zero is undefeated to the extent that he almost never even loses a game, or that s4 top players are relatively stable for a 5 month old game.

 

[N.T.A.O ChangeOfHeart 死の剣]

clearly, this doesn't apply to all games. Tic Tac Toe has no skill gap. If both playuers know the rules, it's always a tie.

People often replay to evidence of sm4sh being a bad game, or a bad player clearly beating a good player by saying "get gud", which is just as stupid as the people you described. There are tons of people IN THIS THREAD praising the fact that smash 4 has a small skill gap, and we know that the game was designed to have a small skill gap.

Right, that's true, but why indulge in the game this much, heck why despise Brawl for example when that game that better entities than smash-4 has. Well the mystery continues towards why people prefer Sm4sh than Brawl other than "ban MK" and of course "tripping". Thanks.

Edit: And they continue, pitiful.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

"You don't have to try to make yourself sound smart". Right, "try" and "sound" well alright then my behavior is the act of a moron's ways then.

"To counter your actual argument, low shield stun and safer rolls don't make the skill gap smaller at all."

Humph, so you believe that low or "none" shield stun and safe rolls don't leave a question mark if the game is even worthy to be called technical, overrated absolutely, and "better" than other games. I checked guides and gave the game a chance it disappointed there was even people from Reddit giving up hope. https://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/2vk8w1/opinion_brawl_is_a_better_competitive_game_than/

The link is just showing that Brawl was better yet people stay with Smash-4 for various reasons.

"Honestly, they probably make the skill gap larger, since getting good requires learning how to punish overzealous rollers or people who sit in their shields all day, and also learning to stop relying on rolling because you will be punished for it."

What? You just wrote in your previous sentences that safe rolls don't change the skill gap, now you're writing safe rolls can be punished which shows it changed the skill gap by writing you can punish safe rolls. I've watched A LOT of Smash-4 videos which contained a lot of agony to watch them, but my point is I haven't seen anyone punish rolls, like the only person I can view that could kind of would be Mac or Sonic and I haven't seen your theory about punishing safe rolls man. Shield stun doesn't exist in Smash4, you could just throw random moves and not be punished compared to BRAWL. Also a smart player would know how to abuse safe rolls and I've fought some in the past. The only way I could ever get inside was have a projectile character like Link, don't write "I don't know what I'm doing" I do, every-time I would try to bait, they would just rolls and grab which wouldn't work but my point is safe rolls are a huge flaw in Smash-4 just like "tripping" in Brawl.

I don't see what you're writing to be seem valid, I need proof that you can punish this and that when the game has no shield stun and safe rolls. This just screams bs, I can't count how may times people are complaining about Smash-4 mechanics now than even Brawl, which was a huge decrease towards people complaining. All I ever heard and read about Brawl was (ban MK) (get rid of tripping), where as Smash-4 is (Nerf Greninja), (Nerf Diddy), (Nerf Sheik), get rid of safe rolls, fix the air dodge mechanics which Brawl's was better), get rid of this technique that Nintendo will even do just so you all wont see others as higher as higher, this game defines communism towards how everything must be equal oh wait, no. Let's see, what else do people complain about, (make Smash-4 faster), (make Smash-4 get rid of secret items like Peach Bomb omb which rarely happens). So, a game like Brawl which had like two problems, MK, and tripping now compared to Smash-4 which has more problems, nerf this, ban this is seen better than other games right? Here's the kicker, Diddy is the new MK and also Sheik is a runner up, heck now Luigi which people are getting (tried of) which is completely puzzling to myself. Face it, Smash-4 is not all that cracked up to be and it's not. The game has nothing but basic basic 2008 technology from when Brawl was the main attraction, yes Brawl. Thanks.

If you could punish Lucario rolls in Brawl you can punish them here.

Low shield stun doesn't matter as much in Smash 4, even with that being low, more shield damage and faster/safer gameplay in general with footie play is more of the emphasis.

I also don't know why you are complaining about both these yet praising Brawl when both were present in some form there on top of in the case of shields being way stronger.

Defensive play was toned down a lot along with fixing large balance and gameplay issues, Metaknights, chain grabs, infinite locks, etc.

You can post a reddit post or quote Praxis of you want but in the end you seem to not really understand the core differences between them either.

Patches open the door for more whining vs getting better. Project M has this same problem. But really, Nerf Greninja is a dumb meme at this point that needs to die. Shiek wasn't that much better than the rest of the cast, and still isn't. Diddy was a tad too strong but was nerfed accordingly.

But saying MK was in the same level is clear ignorance. He has shown via data Rajam gathered if his winnings, players at the top strongly flocking to him and using him to pretty much take over every tournament. Multiple stages banned because of him, rules put in place just to stop him from abusing the ledge, moves that alone shut down large portions of the cast. Complaining will happen regardless but I do not like implying Diddy is near the same level.

Nintendo got rid of Davis and stuff they didn't intend for the game, and for the better. Link jab into jab combo lock? Gone. People are mad at the removal of Dacus, when it is still clearly a glitch and not intended which can they're off balance.

Then the 2008 Part, so? Smash games build off each other and if you can do well in chances are you can perform well in another. The game will change from here, customs being a large perk and the larger cast with a new stage list and added changes like stronger hit stun, that you can't cancel out of like in Brawl, removing the planking/tripping issues and an online that actual functions right.

I'll say this, the smash 4 has what might be the lowest skill floor in smash. Ceiling, it's there and we have seen with results there are skill differences.

If you want to argue real depth, then I'd like you to bring something stronger to the table. As it is right now, it seems more like you have this clear bias, as I've seen when you said Brawl Link was better despite multiple mains and results showing otherwise.

If you want to discuss the game, I'd welcome a discussion like that.

As it stands, you're are spreading ignorance and hate without much discussion substance and I don't want to stand and watch that happen.

 

[otter]

Okay, where to start...

You cant just compare two games that are so completely unrelated and act like you have a valid comparison. The reason tic tac toe is so limited is because p2 only has 2 choices on turn 2 if p1 took center, and gets less choice from then on, and there is a max of 3-4 turns. Tic tac toe is a rigged game.

S4 has hundreds of possible input combinations, not to mention a lot of hidden ATs. If they didnt want there to be a skill gap in S4, there would not be one. Why perfect pivots? Why pivot grabs? Why b reversals? Why dash cancel grab? Why like 20+ sheik ATs? There is no evidence that they have intentionally scrubbed the game at the competitive level, besides samurai's words. All he is doing is trying to prevent his game from achieving the same public opinion and niche market as street fighter. I can't blame him.

Speaking of at's, both players have to understand the "meta" in tic tac toe to playout your hypothetical. A skilled player will never lose (if hes first he takes center, if hes 2nd he knows to force the tie).

Anyone who thinks S4 has a small skill gap (edit: Read: the people praising/claiming it in this thread) hasnt played any high level players. Go on smash ladder and fight a 1600+ player or pm one of the pros on smashboards.

You haven't even touched the fact that zero is undefeated to the extent that he almost never even loses a game, or that s4 top players are relatively stable for a 5 month old game.

Of course Tic Tac Toe and Sm4sh don't have the same skill gap, I was just trying to demonstrate that not all games have an equal one, which invalidates the idea that you can claim anyone who dislikes the game is bad, which you're still trying to do. I was a top ten player on Smash Ladder when I played the game. I've won tournaments in a dozen fighting games. I am a moderator on /r/smashbros. These things don't make my opinions correct, but if that's what it takes to earn a real discussion about the mechanics, the fact that the game was designed to have a small skill gap, and the fact that a large portion of the people on this super niche competitive website agree and are happy that the game has a small skill gap, so be it.

I understand your point about the game having consistent top players, and it's true, but that's not what "skill gap" means to me. Let's create a scale where someone playing the game for the first time is a 0. and M2K (I'll use him so the analogy works with sm4sh and melee) is a 100. someone who wins local tournaments and is sort of known online is 50. In Melee. if two people are playing who's skill is 5 or 10 points apart, the better player is going to win, especially in a set. This encourages growth because there is always a clear goal and someone barely better than you to chase. In Sm4sh, if a 30 and a 50 player are in a match, it could have pretty randomized results, but that's not going to threaten the people at the very top. The game will be fun for the top player and his fans, but not the "gatekeepers". These are players typically putting money in the pot, running tournament, streaming, and making technical breakthroughs in the game. This can really corrode the community over time.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Of course Tic Tac Toe and Sm4sh don't have the same skill gap, I was just trying to demonstrate that not all games have an equal one, which invalidates the idea that you can claim anyone who dislikes the game is bad, which you're still trying to do. I was a top ten player on Smash Ladder when I played the game. I've won tournaments in a dozen fighting games. I am a moderator on /r/smashbros. These things don't make my opinions correct, but if that's what it takes to earn a real discussion about the mechanics, the fact that the game was designed to have a small skill gap, and the fact that a large portion of the people on this super niche competitive website agree and are happy that the game has a small skill gap, so be it.

I understand your point about the game having consistent top players, and it's true, but that's not what "skill gap" means to me. Let's create a scale where someone playing the game for the first time is a 0. and M2K (I'll use him so the analogy works with sm4sh and melee) is a 100. someone who wins local tournaments and is sort of known online is 50. In Melee. if two people are playing who's skill is 5 or 10 points apart, the better player is going to win, especially in a set. This encourages growth because there is always a clear goal and someone barely better than you to chase. In Sm4sh, if a 30 and a 50 player are in a match, it could have pretty randomized results, but that's not going to threaten the people at the very top. The game will be fun for the top player and his fans, but not the "gatekeepers". These are players typically putting money in the pot, running tournament, streaming, and making technical breakthroughs in the game. This can really corrode the community over time.

At the same time, many people seem to not get the game when they bash it or use generalist stances on gameplay.

Not everyone who is bad at the game is a hater which is true. But I do feel a strong level of ignorance on hate between titles of smash as is, mostly from the PM/Melee crowd.

 

[platologic]

In Sm4sh, if a 30 and a 50 player are in a match, it could have pretty randomized results

This is exactly the point of Smash 4. It's not a fighting game, it's a party game. We, the Smash community, have a long tradition of doing things that were never intended to be done. That's part of why the Smash community is so great, but we have to be honest about what we're doing: we're taking a party game and making it competitive. We're doing an awesome job at it, but there are limitations.

Sakurai's opinion on the subject:

Personally, I feel that if you want to play a fighting game seriously, there are other competitive fighting games that are more suited to that, and people like that could have fun playing those. If you play Smash Brothers seriously as a competitive game, the game itself has no future.

If I wanted to, I'm sure I could make a more hardcore Smash Brothers game. I could make the game speed much faster, increase the number of inputs...but then, beginners would no longer be able to play the game. When the game becomes more like a sport, a tool that more strictly rewards the player with more skill, the game tapers off more, like a mountain. Just like how a mountain tapers off into its peak, that area becomes more and more narrow.

Source: http://www.gamnesia.com/news/sakurai-explains-why-he-doesnt-want-smash-to-be-a-competitive-game

The question "Is the skill gap in Smash 4 too small?" is well-intentioned and deserves some attention. We can (and should) talk and argue and debate but in the end the real question is:

What are we going to do if it is?

 

[PCHU]

The question "Is the skill gap in Smash 4 too small?" is well-intentioned and deserves some attention. We can (and should) talk and argue and debate but in the end the real question is:

What are we going to do if it is?

Well, I don't think anyone actually expects something to be done.
In reality, if there isn't a remarkably huge upset, nobody's going to "take action" over anything because it's not a "big enough" issue to warrant it; people (both on the dev side and consumer side) would rather just forget about their concerns and focus on trying to enjoy the game anyway.
One of the fun parts about debating is that there's an opportunity to learn and share your knowledge with others so they can better form and present their opinions, but the occasions where these debates actually produce anything are few and far between.

The skill gap is fine, the game is just more demanding of hard reads than Melee was due to characters generally remaining in neutral longer as opposed to comboing/applying shield pressure through block strings.
Even at the highest level, there isn't as much to account for in neutral (depending on character, of course; as mentioned before, characters like Wario have more options than some others) because of the base difference in mechanics.

In the end, if Smash 4 is your cup of tea and the whole game appeals to you, play it and enjoy yourself.
If you don't like it, well, it ain't for everyone.
The only reason I debate so much is because I feel this game has the potential to be great, but it just doesn't seem to be addressing problems that arise; I'd be willing to put up with the mechanics if they'd hand out a few buffs, namely actually putting hitboxes where the character is hitting.

 

[platologic]

Well, I don't think anyone actually expects something to be done.

"Nothing" is a valid answer, and I agree.

One of the fun parts about debating is that there's an opportunity to learn and share your knowledge with others so they can better form and present their opinions, but the occasions where these debates actually produce anything are few and far between.

Also agree, as long as the participants understand the purpose of the debate and can stay focused on the topic long enough. Unfortunately, as we've seen above, such focus is difficult to maintain.

I'd be willing to put up with the mechanics if they'd hand out a few buffs, namely actually putting hitboxes where the character is hitting.

*looks at Robin's Dair, cries*

 

[N.T.A.O ChangeOfHeart 死の剣]

If you could punish Lucario rolls in Brawl you can punish them here.

Low shield stun doesn't matter as much in Smash 4, even with that being low, more shield damage and faster/safer gameplay in general with footie play is more of the emphasis.

I also don't know why you are complaining about both these yet praising Brawl when both were present in some form there on top of in the case of shields being way stronger.

Defensive play was toned down a lot along with fixing large balance and gameplay issues, Metaknights, chain grabs, infinite locks, etc.

You can post a reddit post or quote Praxis of you want but in the end you seem to not really understand the core differences between them either.

Patches open the door for more whining vs getting better. Project M has this same problem. But really, Nerf Greninja is a dumb meme at this point that needs to die. Shiek wasn't that much better than the rest of the cast, and still isn't. Diddy was a tad too strong but was nerfed accordingly.

But saying MK was in the same level is clear ignorance. He has shown via data Rajam gathered if his winnings, players at the top strongly flocking to him and using him to pretty much take over every tournament. Multiple stages banned because of him, rules put in place just to stop him from abusing the ledge, moves that alone shut down large portions of the cast. Complaining will happen regardless but I do not like implying Diddy is near the same level.

Nintendo got rid of Davis and stuff they didn't intend for the game, and for the better. Link jab into jab combo lock? Gone. People are mad at the removal of Dacus, when it is still clearly a glitch and not intended which can they're off balance.

Then the 2008 Part, so? Smash games build off each other and if you can do well in chances are you can perform well in another. The game will change from here, customs being a large perk and the larger cast with a new stage list and added changes like stronger hit stun, that you can't cancel out of like in Brawl, removing the planking/tripping issues and an online that actual functions right.

I'll say this, the smash 4 has what might be the lowest skill floor in smash. Ceiling, it's there and we have seen with results there are skill differences.

If you want to argue real depth, then I'd like you to bring something stronger to the table. As it is right now, it seems more like you have this clear bias, as I've seen when you said Brawl Link was better despite multiple mains and results showing otherwise.

If you want to discuss the game, I'd welcome a discussion like that.

As it stands, you're are spreading ignorance and hate without much discussion substance and I don't want to stand and watch that happen.

Right, "ignorance" if you haven't noticed yet, Diddy and Sheik have been winning everything, compared to Brawl where MK won some, Marth, Ice climbers, Olimar, Donkey Kong, and much more. What is your point then "wise one" so patches open a new field of higher caliber of skill towards Smash-4, wrong. Nintendo already patched the game four times and now going for five years yet it's still easy and easy to catch up to everyone else without breaking a sweat, no technically, and once more moves are still nerf-ed whether you agree or not.

" As it is right now, it seems more like you have this clear bias, as I've seen when you said Brawl Link was better despite multiple mains and results showing otherwise. "

Links hasn't done anything what are you ranting about. My theory is still correct, Link is still nothing, the boards had another chance to change him and they failed miserably, he's still the same in Brawl nothing changed only nerfs and "ignorance" from your ends. Quite interesting a moderator would go off topic and bring something from the past that is still true and useless and ignorant for me to try disputing with you. I tend to ignore you as of now. Thanks.

 

[Kurri ★]

What's wrong with Robin's dair?

Right, "ignorance" if you haven't noticed yet, Diddy and Sheik have been winning everything, compared to Brawl where MK won some, Marth, Ice climbers, Olimar, Donkey Kong, and much more. What is your point then "wise one" so patches open a new field of higher caliber of skill towards Smash-4, wrong. Nintendo already patched the game four times and now going for five years yet it's still easy and easy to catch up to everyone else without breaking a sweat, no technically, and once more moves are still nerf-ed whether you agree or not.

" As it is right now, it seems more like you have this clear bias, as I've seen when you said Brawl Link was better despite multiple mains and results showing otherwise. "

Links hasn't done anything what are you ranting about. My theory is still correct, Link is still nothing, the boards had another chance to change him and they failed miserably, he's still the same in Brawl nothing changed only nerfs and "ignorance" from your ends. Quite interesting a moderator would go off topic and bring something from the past that is still true and useless and ignorant for me to try disputing with you. I tend to ignore you as of now. Thanks.

Geez, calm down. I'm pretty sure Nairo beat a Sheik using ZSS.

 

[J_the_Man]

Nintendo already patched the game four times and now going for five years yet it's still easy and easy to catch up to everyone else without breaking a sweat, no technically, and once more moves are still nerf-ed whether you agree or not.
.

I should just money-match ZeRo or Nairo. Based on what you're saying, They're probably free money if I practice hard enough for the next week or so.


I'm sorry, but I can't take you seriously. This is the most disrespectful thing you can say to the top players in Smash 4, and you don't even play the game. Your audacity to utter such ludicrous things is humorous.

 

[Pyr]

Right, "ignorance" if you haven't noticed yet, Diddy and Sheik have been winning everything, compared to Brawl where MK won some, Marth, Ice climbers, Olimar, Donkey Kong, and much more.

This is wrong, unless we're counting secondaries as tournament winners now. What was Metaknight at in tourny results 2 years in again? Double second place, which was Snake? Or was it triple? It was a noticeable margin.

Ice Climbers didn't start winning until the second half of Brawl. For the most part, it went MK, then Snake. MK still has most Brawl wins.

Oh ya. Speaking of ignorance, you can't just say that MK only won some and not expect to get called out on it. Brawl MK had more top 8 places then any other character BY FAR. Even a combo of those 4 couldn't out do him there when we compare it to Brawl's timeline.

Don't make up points to try and support a bad argument, mmk?

Just a quick edit: http://smashboards.com/threads/whobo-results-and-the-conflict-at-hand.230309/

Nice little results thread. Just to help with your knowledge of Brawl history, these sort of results were very typical at mid+ level play up until... 2012, I think?

Another edit: I couldn't find my source thread, but here is a character ranking for top 8s across history: http://smashboards.com/rankings/ssbb.3/league/teams

Look at that. Meta has more placings then the next 3 characters COMBINED.

Please, again, do some research before you spread false information. It makes you look incredibly bad when you attempt to bash a Mod.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

This is wrong, unless we're counting secondaries as tournament winners now. What was Metaknight at in tourny results 2 years in again? Double second place, which was Snake? Or was it triple? It was a noticeable margin.

Ice Climbers didn't start winning until the second half of Brawl. For the most part, it went MK, then Snake. MK still has most Brawl wins.

Oh ya. Speaking of ignorance, you can't just say that MK only won some and not expect to get called out on it. Brawl MK had more top 8 places then any other character BY FAR. Even a combo of those 4 couldn't out do him there when we compare it to Brawl's timeline.

Don't make up points to try and support a bad argument, mmk?

Just a quick edit: http://smashboards.com/threads/whobo-results-and-the-conflict-at-hand.230309/

Nice little results thread. Just to help with your knowledge of Brawl history, these sort of results were very typical at mid+ level play up until... 2012, I think?

good reply, and the funniest part is when he mentioned donkey kong.... DK.... I can see it now
Vs
Hilarious

 

[platologic]

What's wrong with Robin's dair?

http://gfycat.com/FlakyWideAlpineroadguidetigerbeetle

It only has a hitbox at the bottom, not during the sword swing.

 

[Pyr]

good reply, and the funniest part is when he mentioned donkey kong.... DK.... I can see it now
Vs
Hilarious

I think he meant Diddy, so I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

I think he meant Diddy, so I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

Even so, the man is flat out wrong where MetaKnight has been dominating tournies since brawl's release in top 8 and lower

 

[Kurri ★]

http://gfycat.com/FlakyWideAlpineroadguidetigerbeetle

It only has a hitbox at the bottom, not during the sword swing.

Well that explains all my missed dairs

 

[N.T.A.O ChangeOfHeart 死の剣]

I should just money-match ZeRo or Nairo. Based on what you're saying, They're probably free money if I practice hard enough for the next week or so.


I'm sorry, but I can't take you seriously. This is the most disrespectful thing you can say to the top players in Smash 4, and you don't even play the game. Your audacity to utter such ludicrous things is humorous.

Even so, the man is flat out wrong where MetaKnight has been dominating tournies since brawl's release in top 8 and lower

Will won a one stock tourney so DK won something now hush. As for the top eight, you can mention MK won pretty much every tourney however Diddy Kong has done the same thing. You just spilled rubbish and you need to read more carefully, I mentioned Smash-4 has it's flaws and they're more worse than Brawl. MK won Brawl tourneys and Diddy wins Smash-4 tourneys simple as that.

 

[Pyr]

Will won a one stock tourney so DK won something now hush. As for the top eight, you can mention MK won pretty much every tourney however Diddy Kong has done the same thing. You just spilled rubbish and you need to read more carefully, I mentioned Smash-4 has it's flaws and they're more worse than Brawl. MK won Brawl tourneys and Diddy wins Smash-4 tourneys simple as that.

It's going OT, but then that's all the last few pages has been: Diddy did have comparable results to Meta's longstanding history. That is undeniable at the time of this posting. BUT, with his nerfs, he is no longer considered the best. That applies at all levels of play (that matter). Still among the best, but his throne is empty and Sheik is trying to get comfy in it. So, while it may have been that simple, it no longer is: Diddy Kong no longer has all the tools needed to show that level of dominance, and is not going to keep the trend up in the future. Any character that shows signs of doing so will be nerfed from time to time. Makes it hard to believe that it's even a concern anymore.

As for the whole flaws argument: Mind explaining, in a neutral and clear tone, what those differences are, along with examples from both games? Cause I have a very hard time believing that you're right and being objective when you say that Diddy and Sheik are MK level currently, Rolls are nonpunishable, Shield stun is non-existent, and Brawl's air-dodge Mechanic was better then Smash4's (unpunishable mechanics ftw?). I can offer data and examples that all 4 are wrong. Can you do the same for them being right? Because I'd really like to see it.

Just saying your credibility is shrouded in blatantly incorrect information and the infamous feelies. Give me a reason to be wrong.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Will won a one stock tourney so DK won something now hush. As for the top eight, you can mention MK won pretty much every tourney however Diddy Kong has done the same thing. You just spilled rubbish and you need to read more carefully, I mentioned Smash-4 has it's flaws and they're more worse than Brawl. MK won Brawl tourneys and Diddy wins Smash-4 tourneys simple as that.

That DK was Will, he was one of best DKs in brawl and is one of the best in Smash 4.

That transferred over because moves were the same and he knew how to play him In a similar environment.

I'm asking you to provide more to the table because you seem to be just warmongering without any real substance.

MK was on par with Diddy? Results don't seem to agree with that. And even after the nerfs you think he still will? Along with Shiek?

Also results are as diverse in Brawl? You sure about that? I've played brawl far longer and seen much more happening with both games. Where are the results to show this? Was Diddy asked for a ban to the same degree MK was and would have been if not for APEX?

People have been asking why is one is better than the other for Brawl vs Smash 4?

Again you seem entirely disinterested in discussing this on a reasonable and more so want to bash Smash 4 with points but then ignore most of not all counter points.

 

[N.T.A.O ChangeOfHeart 死の剣]

It's going OT, but then that's all the last few pages has been: Diddy did have comparable results to Meta's longstanding history. That is undeniable at the time of this posting. BUT, with his nerfs, he is no longer considered the best. That applies at all levels of play (that matter). Still among the best, but his throne is empty and Sheik is trying to get comfy in it. So, while it may have been that simple, it no longer is: Diddy Kong no longer has all the tools needed to show that level of dominance, and is not going to keep the trend up in the future. Any character that shows signs of doing so will be nerfed from time to time. Makes it hard to believe that it's even a concern anymore.

As for the whole flaws argument: Mind explaining, in a neutral and clear tone, what those differences are, along with examples from both games? Cause I have a very hard time believing that you're right and being objective when you say that Diddy and Sheik are MK level currently, Rolls are nonpunishable, Shield stun is non-existent, and Brawl's air-dodge Mechanic was better then Smash4's (unpunishable mechanics ftw?). I can offer data and examples that all 4 are wrong. Can you do the same for them being right? Because I'd really like to see it.

Just saying your credibility is shrouded in blatantly incorrect information and the infamous feelies. Give me a reason to be wrong.

Are you a Smash-4 player?

 

[Pyr]

Are you a Smash-4 player?

Decade+ of Melee, Brawl for 4 years, Smash 4 since release. You can call me a Smash Brothers Player.

Na. Wait. I also played BB (Lambda, Bang), am in love with GG (Chipp you glorious *******), advocated Skullgirls (made some of double's BnB known), played Akuma exclusively in any game he's in, or Sagat for Turbo (old Sagat, don't be hating), TvC because Zero/Alex traps are fun, SvC Chaos because I played that one in the arcade (and Akuma, yay!), and MvC exclusively because I think foot dive is hilarious. Oh, and Persona 4 Arena because Shadow Labrys has a giant mother ****ing axe. Guess you can call me a fighting game player.

I just play Smash because I have a love for it that's greater than GG or Akuma. I'm making S4 my focus for Evo this year.

Point being, I have a lot of experience in fighters, something that you can use to make your next response... Well... Useful. Because, in spite of what games I've played, I'm playing Smash Brothers and posting here to participate in discussion about the games. I'm asking for a return of discussion from you.

You see, for all the complexities and flaming and ******** that goes on between the Melee, P:M, and Smash 4 communities, it's all the same game with just slightly different systems. Fundamentals are the same. Really, the pissing contest has been so constant and so massive that many people are now swimming in a pool of piss. No one can tell which is theres anymore, but be damned if they won't keep contributing because they haven't drowned yet! Cause, at this point, no one seems to realise that that pool of piss is just Smash and, fundamentally, it's all the same piss now.

/rant about pool piss.

What type of player I am is irrelevant, but there you are. If you think it is, then you are not able to have a simple, objective discussion and should stop derailing the threads unfortunate enough to receive you. If you also think it's irrelevant, you should stop asking stupid questions and contribute to the community you are seemingly so passionate about.

Edit: She has that, too, but she also has an Axe.

 

[otter]

The whole "what are your qualifications" thing is stupid, especially when they are fishing for you to say you don't only play smash 4. Playing other games gives you a more objective opinion regarding the mechanics if anything.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

Will won a one stock tourney so DK won something now hush. As for the top eight, you can mention MK won pretty much every tourney however Diddy Kong has done the same thing. You just spilled rubbish and you need to read more carefully, I mentioned Smash-4 has it's flaws and they're more worse than Brawl. MK won Brawl tourneys and Diddy wins Smash-4 tourneys simple as that.

One lucky tourney sure makes me wrong...... Yea.
Also comparing a 5+ year timeline to 6 months is not a very smart thing to do, with one shows the end of the game and the other the beginning.

 

[LightLV]

I think you got confused by what I was saying, no worries, I posted that from my phone so it probably came out wrong.

I wasn't talking about a move being safe on sheild, but rather the risk-reward of L-Cancelling (in Smash Bros) vs Instant Blocking (in other fighters such as GGXRD or Blazblue). My point was that L-Cancelling, at the moment, is a bad mechanic because there is no choice on whether or not you should L-Cancel and that the risk-reward was insignificant.

In Guilty Gear, it's always a better idea to instant block because of the rewards you receive, but it comes at the risk of messing up your defense.

With L-Cancelling, there's no risk in doing it, you're not giving anything up when you attempt to do it.

Failing to instant block and getting a regular block isn't much of a punishment. Much more likely is screwing up the timing and simply getting hit. Failing to L-Cancel and getting a regular attack isn't much of a punishment, unless you're now in a vulnerable state where you wouldn't have been if your L-cancel was successful.

Please stop saying there's no risk to using it. Getting hit after failing an instant block, and getting hit after failing an L-cancel are the exact same thing. You attempt to use a skill, screw it up, and get hurt for it.

Define "too small." What negative effects would be caused by the skill gap being too small?

There aren't any. The problem I have in this thread isn't the fact Smash 4 has the lowest skillgap, it's that people are pretending Smash 4 is something that it totally isn't. Smash 4's skill gap is the smallest it's ever been in SSB history, period. You miiiight be able to argue this against Brawl, but it's absolutely no contest against Melee or 64.

As for the tournament scene...what's going to happen if the skill gap is too small, is that there wont be a tournament scene. Usually, thats what happens in fighters of course -- Smash 4 will likely always have tournaments because of how hilariously easy it is to play, for the reasons outlined in this topic.

They are Jack of all trade characters and master of a few in Melee. Ok top of that they have tools that are grossly unfair to the rest of the cast. Shine is a move for Fox that can do multiple things in one move. Gimp, combo, combo breaker, reflect, shield pressure. Did I also mention they have some of the best KO potential in Melee? They out camp the cast, their hitboxes are very large compared to mon sword characters. They also have fast running speed. Their recoveries are better than 50% of the cast. Downside, they fast fall....uh ok though Falcon Roy etc suffer that worse without all those upsides.

And then you think, gee I wonder why Fox and Falco can't jump out of shine anymore in Smash 4, or cancel end lag of lasers, or have less KO power, and nerfed range in hitboxes.

Fox and Falco are good because Shine comes out in 1 frame and does set knockback. It's really that simple. Without that, they wouldn't have the amount of edge they do on everyone else. But their best attributes are highly technical, their air speed is horrible and their high fall speed + low weight gives the cast massive options to combo them. I mean yeah, they were definitely OP on paper but it's not like they're just going to steamroll the other top tiers.

As for why Fox can't cancel shine anymore, that's anyone's guess. It's just another removed technique -- the reason people say the skill ceiling is so low. Instead of building around it, they just outright removed it.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Failing to instant block and getting a regular block isn't much of a punishment. Much more likely is screwing up the timing and simply getting hit. Failing to L-Cancel and getting a regular attack isn't much of a punishment, unless you're now in a vulnerable state where you wouldn't have been if your L-cancel was successful.
Please stop saying there's no risk to using it. Getting hit after failing an instant block, and getting hit after failing an L-cancel are the exact same thing. You attempt to use a skill, screw it up, and get hurt for it.



There aren't any. The problem I have in this thread isn't the fact Smash 4 has the lowest skillgap, it's that people are pretending Smash 4 is something that it totally isn't. Smash 4's skill gap is the smallest it's ever been in SSB history, period. You miiiight be able to argue this against Brawl, but it's absolutely no contest against Melee or 64.

As for the tournament scene...what's going to happen if the skill gap is too small, is that there wont be a tournament scene. Usually, thats what happens in fighters of course -- Smash 4 will likely always have tournaments because of how hilariously easy it is to play, for the reasons outlined in this topic.




Fox and Falco are good because Shine comes out in 1 frame and does set knockback. It's really that simple. Without that, they wouldn't have the amount of edge they do on everyone else. But their best attributes are highly technical, their air speed is horrible and their high fall speed + low weight gives the cast massive options to combo them. I mean yeah, they were definitely OP on paper but it's not like they're just going to steamroll the other top tiers.

As for why Fox can't cancel shine anymore, that's anyone's guess. It's just another removed technique -- the reason people say the skill ceiling is so low. Instead of building around it, they just outright removed it.

You answered your own statement on why they removed jumping out of shine.

It's also not just shine, they have multiple attributes that are too good of polarizing.

 

[LightLV]

No, i mentioned why shine was good. Why did they feel the need to remove shinejump when you can't even directional airdodge anymore?

And as i mentioned, their bad attributes ARE bad, just not as good as their good points. That's pretty much THE defining characteristic of a top-tier character.

Fox/Falco are really, really good when they're on-point because of their offense. But in tournaments, if they get grabbed on FD, they're probably about to get launched off the stage at 60~70% regardless of what their damage was when the combo started.

Get knocked off? Plenty of time to edgehog with that up-B animation. Fast fall speed, they get tapped with literally anything while trying to recover, theyre dead. You can list a bunch of super + points for all the top-tier characters in Melee. The current standing tier list has 8 S-tier characters in it.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

No, i mentioned why shine was good. Why did they feel the need to remove shinejump when you can't even directional airdodge anymore?

And as i mentioned, their bad attributes ARE bad, just not as good as their good points. That's pretty much THE defining characteristic of a top-tier character.

Fox/Falco are really, really good when they're on-point because of their offense. But in tournaments, if they get grabbed on FD, they're probably about to get launched off the stage at 60~70% regardless of what their damage was when the combo started.

Get knocked off? Plenty of time to edgehog with that up-B animation. Fast fall speed, they get tapped with literally anything while trying to recover, theyre dead.

They removed it so it's isn't insane with shield pressure/combining/gimping/reflecting/combo breaker, etc.

Letting them easily do that changes a lot of dynamics which also why the size got nerfed as well in brawl.

Wolf could do nifty things with his, but that was a tool they wanted him to have instead of the other two.

They are horrifically too strong in Melee, even in PM just not as bad.

 

[Kurri ★]

Failing to instant block and getting a regular block isn't much of a punishment. Much more likely is screwing up the timing and simply getting hit. Failing to L-Cancel and getting a regular attack isn't much of a punishment, unless you're now in a vulnerable state where you wouldn't have been if your L-cancel was successful.
Please stop saying there's no risk to using it. Getting hit after failing an instant block, and getting hit after failing an L-cancel are the exact same thing. You attempt to use a skill, screw it up, and get hurt for it.

I never said getting a regular block was the punishment, I said getting hit was.

Not L-Cancelling leads to retaining all end lag. Missing an L-Cancel leads to retaining all end Lag.

Not Instant Blocking generally leads to just using a regular block. Failing to instant block generally leads to getting hit, and further opening yourself up to a full combo.

If you're going to use a skill, failing it should be more severe than had you never used it at all, which with L-Cancelling it isn't. You fall back to the default state rather than a punished. L-Cancelling and Instant blocking aren't the same at all because once again, there is no risk in L-Cancel, only rewards.

 

[otter]

If you're going to use a skill, failing it should be more severe than had you never used it at all, which with L-Cancelling it isn't. You fall back to the default state rather than a punished. L-Cancelling and Instant blocking aren't the same at all because once again, there is no risk in L-Cancel, only rewards.

I disagree. Performing an unsafe approach is pretty severe, not to mention you are going to be hitting buttons afterwords instead of trying to minimize the risk since you may not react to the missed input in time. You're acting like the game would be played the same if L canceling did not exist.

 

[Donkeybutter]

There aren't any. The problem I have in this thread isn't the fact Smash 4 has the lowest skillgap, it's that people are pretending Smash 4 is something that it totally isn't. Smash 4's skill gap is the smallest it's ever been in SSB history, period. You miiiight be able to argue this against Brawl, but it's absolutely no contest against Melee or 64.

As for the tournament scene...what's going to happen if the skill gap is too small, is that there wont be a tournament scene. Usually, thats what happens in fighters of course -- Smash 4 will likely always have tournaments because of how hilariously easy it is to play, for the reasons outlined in this topic.

I think the main reason the skill gap is relatively smaller compared to Melee/64 is because those games have had like 13-15 years of metagame development, while Smash 4 has only had like 6 months and 1 national tourney at this point. I don't think it would matter if Smash 4 was designed to have more tech, 6 months is not enough time to develop close to a mastery on the level of the earlier games. Hell, ledge snap vulnerability punish is barely being attempted yet because of the execution barrier, however in due time players will use it more and more (asit offers a huge advantage) and eventually the edgeguarding game could become way more technical at a high level.

My problem with with this thread is that most people completely ignore the importance of Smash 4 being brand new relative to the other smash games. It's completely unfair to compare Smash 4 to Melee and ignore the fact that one of those games has been out for like 25 times as long as the other. I don't think anyone really knows how deep this game is since depth is a prediction of what's to come. When people talk about Smash 4 not being super deep they aren't talking about the game, they're talking about the current meta. This game simply has not been around long enough to allow the players to push the meta to a comparable level to previous games.

I think people are gonna look back and laugh at stuff like this.... how people actually complained about a low skill gap when the game was only months old.

 

[Kurri ★]

I disagree. Performing an unsafe approach is pretty severe, not to mention you are going to be hitting buttons afterwords instead of trying to minimize the risk since you may not react to the missed input in time. You're acting like the game would be played the same if L canceling did not exist.

I apologize if that was the impression I was giving. I understand the game would be played differently, other posts have already noted the dynamic with using light shields to throw off the timing, and I'm certain there's heaps of other things I'm not even acknowledging. I just believe that in it's current implementation, it needs a bit of adjusting.

You said it yourself:

Performing an unsafe approach is pretty severe, not to mention you are going to be hitting buttons afterwords

You chose to perform the unsafe approach, but you didn't choose whether or not you should L-Cancel. No matter what the situation, you're going to L-Cancel, whereas you may have never even tried to pull an unsafe approach. Failure in doing an L-Cancel leads to the same result as having never L-Canceled.

This I feel is a problem because if there's going to be a better option, it should come with harsher punishment, not the same as having never done it in the first place.

 

[otter]

I think the main reason the skill gap is relatively smaller compared to Melee/64 is because those games have had like 13-15 years of metagame development, while Smash 4 has only had like 6 months and 1 national tourney at this point. I don't think it would matter if Smash 4 was designed to have more tech, 6 months is not enough time to develop close to a mastery on the level of the earlier games. Hell, ledge snap vulnerability punish is barely being attempted yet because of the execution barrier, however in due time players will use it more and more (asit offers a huge advantage) and eventually the edgeguarding game could become way more technical at a high level.

My problem with with this thread is that most people completely ignore the importance of Smash 4 being brand new relative to the other smash games. It's completely unfair to compare Smash 4 to Melee and ignore the fact that one of those games has been out for like 25 times as long as the other. I don't think anyone really knows how deep this game is since depth is a prediction of what's to come. When people talk about Smash 4 not being super deep they aren't talking about the game, they're talking about the current meta. This game simply has not been around long enough to allow the players to push the meta to a comparable level to previous games.

I think people are gonna look back and laugh at stuff like this.... how people actually complained about a low skill gap when the game was only months old.

I think you are drastically underestimating the ability of veteran players to pick games apart, and overestimating the chances of any game going down in history as a "good fighting game". Melee barely made it through the dark ages and it was designed for competition. Smash 4 is designed to have a small skill gap.

Huge blast zones, removal of edgeguarding in favor of botched trumping mechanic, automatic recoveries, practically no combos. It takes 5 minutes to figure out if these ideas work in competition, not 15 years. you are completely welcome to prefer these mechanics, but thats different than saing they are more competitive.

It is also less likely to work in the long run because anything fun that is discovered is going to patched out anyway.

I apologize if that was the impression I was giving. I understand the game would be played differently, other posts have already noted the dynamic with using light shields to throw off the timing, and I'm certain there's heaps of other things I'm not even acknowledging. I just believe that in it's current implementation, it needs a bit of adjusting.

You said it yourself:

You chose to perform the unsafe approach, but you didn't choose whether or not you should L-Cancel. No matter what the situation, you're going to L-Cancel, whereas you may have never even tried to pull an unsafe approach. Failure in doing an L-Cancel leads to the same result as having never L-Canceled.

This I feel is a problem because if there's going to be a better option, it should come with harsher punishment, not the same as having never done it in the first place.

I guess you're saying that players don't actively look for and punish missed l cancels, or try to mess up the timing with light shields, tilted shields, and power shields, and im going to have to disagreee.

 

[Kurri ★]

Well firstly, I already noted that players try to mess up L-Cancel timings so that assumption was completely incorrect...

And secondly, going to sound like a broken record, punishing a missed L-Cancel is the same as punishing someone who didn't L-Cancel at all.

Performing a heavy attack leads to the reward of outputting more damage; the risk, it's laggier than throwing a light attack.

Performing an instant block leads to the reward of increased meter and decreased blockstun; the risk, you poke holes in your defense.

Performing an L-Cancel leads to the reward of less end lag; the risk, there is none. There is a risk in attacking, one of which being your opponent trying to throw off your timing to L-Cancel. But the L-Cancel itself? No problems. You didn't give anything up in performing the L-Cancel, that's a problem.
No one says, "Woah, you shouldn't have performed that L-Cancel." it's, "Woah, you shouldn't have performed that attack."

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I think you are drastically underestimating the ability of veteran players to pick games apart, and overestimating the chances of any game going down in history as a "good fighting game". Melee barely made it through the dark ages and it was designed for competition. Smash 4 is designed to have a small skill gap.

Huge blast zones, removal of edgeguarding in favor of botched trumping mechanic, automatic recoveries, practically no combos. It takes 5 minutes to figure out if these ideas work in competition, not 15 years. you are completely welcome to prefer these mechanics, but thats different than saing they are more competitive.

It is also less likely to work in the long run because anything fun that is discovered is going to patched out anyway.



I guess you're saying that players don't actively look for and punish missed l cancels, or try to mess up the timing with light shields, tilted shields, and power shields, and im going to have to disagreee.

Only smash game that gave a damn about competitive players was Smash 4. Melee just happened to turn out that way.

Happy accidents.

At the same time I agree we don't know for sure, but that larger meta is very relevant. With patches, DLC and players characters doing different results, no one expected Marth to top 8 at a large custom tournament.

Still people are confusing skill gap with skill floor, smash 4 is easy to get into where as Melee is not forgiving to the new comer.

The less tech skill, which is why the gap in Melee might be larger. But to be frank, I don't care for a gap made wider by that. I'd like to see it more from the most important aspect of Smash 4.

Raw fundamentals. Might be why I like it more since I like Street Fighter which is similar in that aspect. And why I'm not a fan of Marvel since it's about tech skill optimization more than fundamentals.

Not to say Melee isn't like that, far from it, but I do notice a lot of mid level players fall into that trap in Melee and PM but then forget fundamentals. So little carries over for them from those games to Smash 4.

I might be wrong but I think that is partly why the newer titles Garner some of it's hate.

As for the patch stuff, the only cool things I could think of is Dacus, a momentum glitch, or the item aerial glitch that reduced lag from either airdodges or aerials, I forget which sorry!, but in the end plays should focus on the mechanics around dashing, b reversals, traps, reads, item play, etc. the techs That are there but people keep trying to find something new instead.

Even with that, I get why they would, techs like that can change balance a lot.