Why is there such a heavy bias against zoners in Competitive Smash?

[Frostav]

Something I've noticed in my journey through competitive Smash (which I began only a few weeks ago) is that the entire scene pretty much unequivocally hates any type of character that isn't 100% rushdown. I hear people slagging on Duck Hunt for using projectiles when using projectiles is the entire point of the character. The word "camp" and all its derivatives are practically slurs: characters are hated for being campy, stages are banned for promoting camping. People freak out if a match lasts longer than 2 minutes and start screaming "CAMPY" at the top of their lungs.

I don't get it. I play traditional fighters as well as Smash, and in all fighters the two most common types of characters are rushdowners, who simply run up to the opponent's face and wail on them until they can pressure their way through (such as Captain Falcon or Fox), and zoners, who either use projectiles (Duck Hunt) or well-spaced attacks (Marth, etc.) to fish for openings. The thing is, the Smash scene seems to hate any character that isn't pure 100% unadultered RTSD (Rush That S*** Down). I can understand disliking characters that space and play keepaway, but people act like the reliance characters like Duck Hunt, Villager, Rosalina or whoever have on keepaway is a fundamental character flaw, and not simply the intentional playstyle of that character...? I don't get it. I really don't.

I mean, damn. If I showed some people around here footage of Rachel, Nu, or Litchi in Blazblue I have a feeling some heads would explode. God forbid if I show some Immaterial and Missing Power where every character is campier than Duck Hunt because they have three dedicated buttons to projectiles and projectile camping is one of the fundamental parts of the game.

 

[GdspdUblkprzdnt]

Just growing pains of a very peculiar scene. A phase if you will. Maturity will eventually settle in and a lot of the scene's biases will be long forgotten teenage acne.

 

[Indigo Jeans]

The smash scene isnt "growing", if by that you mean it is freshly developing. Its been around for something like 15 years. The issue is that Melee is basically worshipped as the pinnacle of competitive smash (this is why people bemoaned the loss of wavedashing and hard directional airdodges in Brawl, why PM is a thing, and why threads dedicated to making Smash 4 "feel more like Melee" crop up much more than they should), and even characters who werent total rushdown in Melee, like Samus and Marth, still play incredibly aggressively compared to later installments. Melee, for better or for worse, cemented it into the people's minds that RTSD is the one true playstyle. Add to it the fact that there exists a stupid divide between the smash community and the rest of the fighting game scene due to overinflated egos and youre left with a large portion of smashers whose majority of competitive fighting game experience is from Melee, or at least the reputation that the game has.

 

[chipndip]

There's a lot of customs from this scene that came from Melee that have never been properly updated as games went by. This is one of them.

 

[LancerStaff]

Something I've noticed in my journey through competitive Smash (which I began only a few weeks ago) is that the entire scene pretty much unequivocally hates any type of character that isn't 100% rushdown. I hear people slagging on Duck Hunt for using projectiles when using projectiles is the entire point of the character. The word "camp" and all its derivatives are practically slurs: characters are hated for being campy, stages are banned for promoting camping. People freak out if a match lasts longer than 2 minutes and start screaming "CAMPY" at the top of their lungs.

I don't get it. I play traditional fighters as well as Smash, and in all fighters the two most common types of characters are rushdowners, who simply run up to the opponent's face and wail on them until they can pressure their way through (such as Captain Falcon or Fox), and zoners, who either use projectiles (Duck Hunt) or well-spaced attacks (Marth, etc.) to fish for openings. The thing is, the Smash scene seems to hate any character that isn't pure 100% unadultered RTSD (Rush That S*** Down). I can understand disliking characters that space and play keepaway, but people act like the reliance characters like Duck Hunt, Villager, Rosalina or whoever have on keepaway is a fundamental character flaw, and not simply the intentional playstyle of that character...? I don't get it. I really don't.

I mean, damn. If I showed some people around here footage of Rachel, Nu, or Litchi in Blazblue I have a feeling some heads would explode. God forbid if I show some Immaterial and Missing Power where every character is campier than Duck Hunt because they have three dedicated buttons to projectiles and projectile camping is one of the fundamental parts of the game.

It gets... Bad, around places like this. Some of it's justified, the stages namely, but the characters in SSB4? Eh. Met a fellow who said Megaman shouldn't have such a powerful projectile game, and yet he's lower-mid tier. Sheash.

And do you go to MKBoards? Name rings a bell.

 

[TimeSmash]

Campiness is tricky because there are characters that thrive on it, or use it because they are not traditionally rush down. Characters like Rosalina, Villager, and Project M 3.02's Zelda are characters that benefit heavily from punishing, and so camping is a gift for them. Zelda in PM had a easy-to-use and very effective way of using Din's Fire to zone, and then capitalize on that. But it was such a polarizing way to play, there were way too many complaints and so she was nerfed heavily, perhaps even too much, for safety reasons. While Rosalina isn't particularly fast, the fact she has a portable ally greatly aids her, and prevents her from taking a lot of damage. Not even considering ATs, Luma allows Rosalina to punish most of the cast heavily, with her somewhat slow but powerful kill moves. Using Villager Side B and Forward/Back Air is a great way to keep opponents off you and tack on damage, especially when a lot of Villager's other moves are pretty lacking in the range department.

Camping isn't exactly anticompetitive, but excessive camping can be viewed as cheap, and really isn't that fun to watch. No one wants to see Falco spamming lasers all day, but since Falco in pretty much every iteration of Smash is a fast character, you don't see people lasering for days, although it is quite effective against slower opponents and stopping a lot of approaches. If a character's in a bad situation, you'll see more camping because they are trying to space themself from the player, and hopefully add on damage in the meantime. This greatly helped Peach in Melee, as turnips were a great way to keep your opponent at bay but also good for approaching, and even gimps. Characters like Duck Hunt Dog get a lot of flack because projectiles are pretty much how that character functions or gets openings. It's not the most thrilling thing to watch, but is how that character plays to an extent. Camping isn't extremely fluid for most characters, though, which limits a style of playing where you shoot and weave your way in. Zelda in 3.02 could actually do this, because she was so punish heavy, and so can Rosalina.

The biggest thing about camping is that it allows for free damage and a lot of the cast of any Smash game has trouble dealing with it. But adding in how much Melee made it seem worse, we are at the state we are now

 

[Frostav]

Camping isn't exactly anticompetitive, but excessive camping can be viewed as cheap, and really isn't that fun to watch. No one wants to see Falco spamming lasers all day, but since Falco in pretty much every iteration of Smash is a fast character, you don't see people lasering for days, although it is quite effective against slower opponents and stopping a lot of approaches.

I disagree: camping can be interesting to watch, it's just that Smash has never really gotten camping down right. Camping can be fun to watch as long as its aggressive--the problem with, say, Brawl's camping was that camping in that game was crazy-passive; you couldn't really capitalize off of your camping, and messing it up didn't really hurt you.

I brought up the fighting game Immaterial and Missing Power as a good example of a game where camping with projectiles is still excited to watch (at least for me). This video demonstrates pretty well:

IaMP is an incredibly campy game because every character has tons of projectiles; the character with the weakest projectiles, Meiling, is universally considered to be the abject worst character. Yet, as you can see in that video, it's not boring like Smash camping is because the camping in IaMP is aggressive--characters are not throwing projectiles just to tack on damage, but to force their way in or control space, and when someone messes up, the other player gets in their face and punishes them for it. From what I've seen of Smash, most campy characters are good at playing keepaway...but they can't really do anything once they actually open the opponent up. Yet, they also have incredible ease at keeping other players out--it's hard to capitalize on their mistakes, since they can just set up their projectiles again. I guess is why stages that promote camping way too much are banned (since campy characters will be almost impossible to touch on them).

A zoner needs to be weak at close-up neutral to incentivize their projectile and zoning game, but they also need to be actually get in when they do open up their opponent, and they need to actually be in danger of punishment when they mess up their zoning. Smash zoners generally aren't like that; they're just slow and can't do much besides spam projectiles. I dunno why. Sakurai is weird *shrugs*

So, imo, the problem is more with how zoners work in Smash than the community's attitudes. If we had some exciting zoners I feel people wouldn't mind so much.

 

[Flamecircle]

Frostav, you're right, that is an interesting type of zoning, but a lot of other fighters have zoners who zone to keep zoning. It's not a just unique to smash.

And which zoners would you say can only zone? The strongest zoners in my mind are DHD, Villager and Tlink, possibly Samus, all of which can and need to get in eventually.

I think you're example is a huge outlier, too. That's a Tohou fighting game, isn't it? A franchise that's thing is bullet hell? Hardly the average.

 

[Gunslinger]

Projectile based characters have been a thing since Link in Smash 64. Like the OP said, zoners are also common in other fighting games. I play a rush down character in every game (even though Fox has lasers, I only use them against defensive players or when I have the lead), and I honestly don't mind the zoners (although I think a match between aggro fighters is much more entertaining). It's extremely satisfying to overcome campiness rather than johning about it. Be it a baiting a ledgestalling Sheik in Melee or weaving through the projectile patterns of a DHD that doesn't know how to use the A button in Sm4sh. People complain about it only because it can be unfun to play against, (which is a good point) but if they are unable to change their playstyles to deal with it they are missing one of the key elements of Smash (and FG in general): adaptation.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

As someone who plays heavy zoning in a lot of games and who has played Brawl for years, I'll say this. People find it very frustrating to lose to defensive playstyles. It's a slow loss, and trying to "play hard" just makes them lose harder. I mean, in an aggressive match, if you start losing you turn up the heat and try to get back in it. Against a strong defensive player, turning up the heat probably means making more unsafe attacks and getting punished more and harder and just losing faster. That means that when they lose to you they either got punished for "trying hard" or they kept their cool and tried to play patiently and you just played the slow game better, both of which are fairly soul crushing ways to lose. A lot of people respond to that with anger, and people love to blame everything but themselves for their losses.

You're best off wearing it with a badge of pride. If you just get the win and they politely accept defeat, you've won a game which is good. If they are filled with anger, cry out in discontent, and express with gusto how you have no skill and how your character is cheap with your lame camping, you've defeated them in earnest which is glorious. At that point, you've proven both in play and in mind that you are superior to them as you have robbed them of both the game and their dignity. Once you understand what it is, it's truly the most wonderful of moments, and I wish earnestly that every aspiring defensive player should experience this joy at least once.

As per the scene, you have to look at it as a filter. People who complain about how awful camping is are telling you so much useful information about how they actually are really bad at the game, about how little they understand about the game's basic design or metagame (even Melee's metagame; there's WAY more defense there than some people like to pretend), and about how their analysis on whatever else they are about to talk about is probably not going to contain valid or useful information. Most actually good and/or smart players understand defensive play for what it is, and even the strong hyper-offensive players recognize and respect a good defensive threat since part of why they are good offensive players is that they understand how to mount their offense in the face of a legitimate defense.

I mean, I suppose I can't just be totally degrading to these people; only those who pretend to be competitive players and take that attitude are really bad. A lot of them are just casuals, and there's nothing wrong with that and you see it in every game. Casual players know nothing about what it takes to win a game in most circumstances and just imagine it as fighting hard, and the defensive players work against that with their play that is pretty much working against direct action. It actually builds a healthy narrative; the rushdown players are the heroes, and the defensive players are the villains. Both are more exciting for the existence of the other, both will be present in large quantities in a healthy game, and those of us in the know about how these games really work just have to play along and enjoy our roles. The strength of the impression you make is measured best in notoriety, and negative feelings are no worse to generate than positive ones. Again, just let their salty tears give you strength if you're typecast as a bad guy; it's all good, and if you listen carefully, you'll probably find that there are quite a few people in the crowd cheering for you and the other "bad guys" anyway.

 

[BBNik]

I have a general trend in games to go for the archer class or ranged one. So I always play "zoney, ranged, spacing type characters". Which is why I enjoy smash 4 cause I can use pacman, BJr and Zelda as my mains since they offer 3 types of zoning type styles. Pacman with the hydrant and fruits with fast aerials. BJr with mix projectiles during close ranged combat. Zelda with killer sweetspot moves and recovery.

Basically I support zoning playstyles so long as it isn't spammy cause that gets boring. Spammy like this one wario I fought who spammed the motorbike. It creates a diverse range of things to play that makes the game more interesting once everyone gets accustomed to it.

 

[Gunslinger]

As someone who plays heavy zoning in a lot of games and who has played Brawl for years, I'll say this. People find it very frustrating to lose to defensive playstyles. It's a slow loss, and trying to "play hard" just makes them lose harder. I mean, in an aggressive match, if you start losing you turn up the heat and try to get back in it. Against a strong defensive player, turning up the heat probably means making more unsafe attacks and getting punished more and harder and just losing faster. That means that when they lose to you they either got punished for "trying hard" or they kept their cool and tried to play patiently and you just played the slow game better, both of which are fairly soul crushing ways to lose. A lot of people respond to that with anger, and people love to blame everything but themselves for their losses.

You're best off wearing it with a badge of pride. If you just get the win and they politely accept defeat, you've won a game which is good. If they are filled with anger, cry out in discontent, and express with gusto how you have no skill and how your character is cheap with your lame camping, you've defeated them in earnest which is glorious. At that point, you've proven both in play and in mind that you are superior to them as you have robbed them of both the game and their dignity. Once you understand what it is, it's truly the most wonderful of moments, and I wish earnestly that every aspiring defensive player should experience this joy at least once.

As per the scene, you have to look at it as a filter. People who complain about how awful camping is are telling you so much useful information about how they actually are really bad at the game, about how little they understand about the game's basic design or metagame (even Melee's metagame; there's WAY more defense there than some people like to pretend), and about how their analysis on whatever else they are about to talk about is probably not going to contain valid or useful information. Most actually good and/or smart players understand defensive play for what it is, and even the strong hyper-offensive players recognize and respect a good defensive threat since part of why they are good offensive players is that they understand how to mount their offense in the face of a legitimate defense.

I mean, I suppose I can't just be totally degrading to these people; only those who pretend to be competitive players and take that attitude are really bad. A lot of them are just casuals, and there's nothing wrong with that and you see it in every game. Casual players know nothing about what it takes to win a game in most circumstances and just imagine it as fighting hard, and the defensive players work against that with their play that is pretty much working against direct action. It actually builds a healthy narrative; the rushdown players are the heroes, and the defensive players are the villains. Both are more exciting for the existence of the other, both will be present in large quantities in a healthy game, and those of us in the know about how these games really work just have to play along and enjoy our roles. The strength of the impression you make is measured best in notoriety, and negative feelings are no worse to generate than positive ones. Again, just let their salty tears give you strength if you're typecast as a bad guy; it's all good, and if you listen carefully, you'll probably find that there are quite a few people in the crowd cheering for you and the other "bad guys" anyway.

I really liked your observation on how aggro players and patient players depend on another. We help each other grow. I wouldn't be as good as I am now (in Melee and Sm4sh) if I didn't play this campy Jiggs and Bowser Jr in my region. I also really like your comment on how its a kind of a classic "good guy bad guy" situation. It's why M2K gets a lot of hate but everyone and their grandma loves Mango.

 

[RanserSSF4]

i personally agree. As much as i love Melee and being a part of this community, i hate it when some players pretty much complain "camping doesn't belong in smash bros and Melee is the best example of how smash should be." That's like saying "Street Fighter 4 isn't as aggressive as Street Fighter 3: 3rd Strike, therefore, it's too campy." look at how huge SF4's scene is today.

i've played every smash game and fighting game for years and there's nothing wrong with having defensive options. It doesn't matter how different the fighting games are.

I do agree that camping can be boring at times and it's personally not my cup of tea, but it can be entertaining if you mix things up and i do like campers, but only specific characters. I started playing ROB and i like him a lot. Can be played either/both aggressive or/and defensive. I've kept mixing up my playstyles on my opponents, making them think i'm just going to camp, but i switch it up and go aggressive. Rinse and repeat

 

[Lichi]

The smash scene isnt "growing", if by that you mean it is freshly developing. Its been around for something like 15 years. The issue is that Melee is basically worshipped as the pinnacle of competitive smash (this is why people bemoaned the loss of wavedashing and hard directional airdodges in Brawl, why PM is a thing, and why threads dedicated to making Smash 4 "feel more like Melee" crop up much more than they should), and even characters who werent total rushdown in Melee, like Samus and Marth, still play incredibly aggressively compared to later installments. Melee, for better or for worse, cemented it into the people's minds that RTSD is the one true playstyle. Add to it the fact that there exists a stupid divide between the smash community and the rest of the fighting game scene due to overinflated egos and youre left with a large portion of smashers whose majority of competitive fighting game experience is from Melee, or at least the reputation that the game has.

Pretty much this. Melee is by many smashers seen as the standard all the other smash games have to compare to, and they always fail because they are not Melee. That's why there is so much whine about sm4sh and it's 'shortcomings', not only regarding camping and zoning.
The thing that bothers me with this is that many people fail to see that even Melee always had very defensive components. Take Sheik for example, and how good she is at creating a safe zone for her at ledges camping them. Or how one of the best options in the game to start off combos is to grab people out of their approaches. I am for sure no expert on Melee or Smash in general, but without question Melee is not the glorious master smash for aggressive players to always(!) have the better options when compared to defensive players.
Right now we are looking at a game that is barely 2 months old and that has been played on a mobile device only. I cannot imagine how people are able to deliver a final verdict on the game's meta. It sure is not Melee, and you can be mad about that or not, but wether a game is played very defensively and 'lame' or very aggressively is not only based on the game's mechanics, but also up to the players and how they evolve the meta game. And this needs more time and will probably, or likely, change over time.

 

[RanserSSF4]

Pretty much this. Melee is by many smashers seen as the standard all the other smash games have to compare to, and they always fail because they are not Melee. That's why there is so much whine about sm4sh and it's 'shortcomings', not only regarding camping and zoning.
The thing that bothers me with this is that many people fail to see that even Melee always had very defensive components. Take Sheik for example, and how good she is at creating a safe zone for her at ledges camping them. Or how one of the best options in the game to start off combos is to grab people out of their approaches. I am for sure no expert on Melee or Smash in general, but without question Melee is not the glorious master smash for aggressive players to always(!) have the better options when compared to defensive players.
Right now we are looking at a game that is barely 2 months old and that has been played on a mobile device only. I cannot imagine how people are able to deliver a final verdict on the game's meta. It sure is not Melee, and you can be mad about that or not, but wether a game is played very defensively and 'lame' or very aggressively is not only based on the game's mechanics, but also up to the players and how they evolve the meta game. And this needs more time and will probably, or likely, change over time.

i agree. Melee may award aggressive play the most, but it can be played defensively. You just don't see that a lot today and most seem to kepp forgetting about that.

 

[GrnFzzTgr]

I used to be one of those people who would call zoning cheap, but over time I realized it's a valid tactic, and if I can't deal with it, then it's my fault mostly. Though it also depend on the characters you use. Now a days I know it's a valid tactic and I won't call it cheap or cheating, but that doesn't make it any less boring or frustrating to me. People will play how they want to play, or they'll play to win.

 

[Ryusuta]

I don't get it. I play traditional fighters as well as Smash, and in all fighters the two most common types of characters are rushdowners, who simply run up to the opponent's face and wail on them until they can pressure their way through (such as Captain Falcon or Fox), and zoners, who either use projectiles (Duck Hunt) or well-spaced attacks (Marth, etc.) to fish for openings. The thing is, the Smash scene seems to hate any character that isn't pure 100% unadultered RTSD (Rush That S*** Down). I can understand disliking characters that space and play keepaway, but people act like the reliance characters like Duck Hunt, Villager, Rosalina or whoever have on keepaway is a fundamental character flaw, and not simply the intentional playstyle of that character...? I don't get it. I really don't.

ChrisG says hi.

 

[otter]

I play many fighting games as well and I've also noticed this unique attitude in smash. Personally, I love how marvel and melee have a great balance of rushdown and zoning. You can play Wolverine or Dorm, Fox or Puff, and do well.

What's really strange is that people who like the campy nature of the new Smash games also get mad when you take advantage of it.

 

[Ghostbone]

text

I can't imagine you're a very popular person, anyone who takes joy in other people's rage is pretty gross
Clearly that shows they're passionate about the game, and the way you dismiss them as if they're not even worthy of playing you (lmao you're not even good) is extremely elitist, do you just want to kill off your smash scene by discouraging anyone from attending?
Like defensive playstyles are fine, enjoying a defensive playstyle is fine, enjoying other people getting mad at it shouldn't be the most you could ever enjoy playing the game. And your aura of elitism can't be good for a healthy scene.

If I'm playing "gay" or whatever, and someone's getting frustrated because they can't get around my zoning, I don't get off on their anger and laugh at how scrubby they are, i'd not enjoy it, in tournament I'd do it anyway because it's about winning, in friendlies I'd try and teach them how to get around it, and if I'm just better than them to the point the game isn't fun when I'm playing like this, I wouldn't keep doing it.
Sometimes those you consider "casuals" or "pretend competitive players" are those who are extremely passionate about the game but just don't quite have the right mindset for it yet, and you're clearly not helping them with that.

 

[guedes the brawler]

projectile camping at least is generally simple in temrs of what inputs are going on, people feel cheated because their entire character can get shut down by falco's blaster by itself, and so on.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Depends on who you're asking. The lack of precision provided by the 3DS artificially buffs zoning, which is frustrating. A lot of my punishes or precision aerials are noticeably more difficult. Retreating aerials don't exist as well without a C-Stick, and I have a great problem doing U-Airs close to the ground without a C-Stick, on top of not being able to continue moving left or right at full speed while using it or D-Air. The precise movement options via left-right-left that allow you to stop an initial dash halfway aren't reliable with the Circle Pad, either, so dashing as Little Mac at mid-range is downgraded from a powerful spacing option to suicide against a good player.

Basically, there's a lot of aggressive play that's currently stifled, and that's what's least fun about zoners right now, since their options are generally stifled less. Some opponents feel that they're getting away with stuff they wouldn't on a GameCube controller.

EDIT: My signature CAN'T WAIT.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

People freak out if a match lasts longer than 2 minutes and start screaming "CAMPY" at the top of their lungs.

You can thank the Melee Community for that.

 

[SmashBro99]

It seems like most competitive Smash players started with Smash, and not real fighting games, so they can't see that it's a completely legit tactic you need to get used to, they just see it as cheap/lame?

Not meant to be offensive at all, just my opinion.

I've been pretty into Street Fighter, MvC series and some other fighting games so it's something I got used to and understand it's something you gotta overcome. If you are getting "camped" hard, it usually just means you are in a situation where you and your opponent are trying your hardest to win (Tournament, For Glory, etc) and your opponent knows they can zone you out so they do it.

It's not so much a problem as it was in past games.

 

[Nobie]

I think a lot of people are dazzled by the combos and chains from Melee, the 0 to deaths, the Ken Combos, etc., and they begin to believe that the combos are what make the game great and competitive. To them, the neutral game is merely a means to an end, the less important, less attractive part, and zoning is essentially keeping your opponent on the back foot such that they can never overcome the neutral game (not to say zoning = neutral play of course). There's a lack of appreciation for what happens when characters are just poking at each other just because there's less visual spectacle and perhaps even to them less emotional satisfaction.

 

[smashmachine]

.....uh, people complain about camping/zoning in other fighting games too

 

[popsofctown]

Camping is generally only boring to watch when the victim is playing poorly. Perfect shielding and clanking attacks are very powerful against predictable projectile camping, but sometimes as a camper you play a guy and you realize he doesn't have the perfect shield timing for your particular projectiles yet, so you go, "yeah, i guess instead of shorthopping my projectiles and looking for openings I should just stand still and use this projectile for free damage"

Perfect shielding makes camping for damage instead of camping for openings hideously weak in Smash in reality. And camping for openings isn't very dull

 

[Blade Knight]

Because it's very boring to both watch and play against. It's broing for everybody involved even if it is a legitimate tactic.

 

[PokemonyeWest]

Zoning is legitimate and I have no complaints against it. It's not only Smash players that complain about it, from Street Fighter to Blazblue the message is generally the same. "It's boring" "It's slow" "It makes me mad"

I tend to view people who whine about it as salty scrubs. Zoning can be beat just like rush down can be beat. Both can end up beating you, too.

 

[Quillion]

This man ZeRo has already demonstrated that rushdown-types can beat zoning-types:

But according to Melee fans, zoning and defense aren't real skills. Particularly the latter, since defense is all one button and moving the control stick.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Zoning is legitimate and I have no complaints against it. It's not only Smash players that complain about it, from Street Fighter to Blazblue the message is generally the same. "It's boring" "It's slow" "It makes me mad"

I tend to view people who whine about it as salty scrubs. Zoning can be beat just like rush down can be beat. Both can end up beating you, too.

Amazing avatar, dude.

 

[PokemonyeWest]

Amazing avatar, dude.

heh thanks!

 

[TheReflexWonder]

This man ZeRo has already demonstrated that rushdown-types can beat zoning-types:

One match hardly demonstrates that, especially when Link isn't even a premier zoner.

 

[Quillion]

One match hardly demonstrates that, especially when Link isn't even a premier zoner.

You being part of PMDT, I can sense definite bias here.

But ZeRo was still talking about zoners in general and ways to deal with them.

 

[ChronoPenguin]

Ill be different and say our maps and damage formula make camping less attractive.
Traditional fighter map size compared to Smash bros is... "claustrophobic"


If you made a custom map, stamina mode...a cage to emulate traditiona' fighters...most would probably have a different perspective.

Not that it is a problem, but camping in smash takes on a different effect given the maximum distance you can create your zone.

 

[Jasku]

It's not zoners the ones who drives me nuts, but the players who spam proyectiles (mostly Link) and takes me forever to kill. I've always thought those players are ''exhausting'', because they're not good at all, but the match goes on and on and you just can't kill them. u.u

 

[Indigo Jeans]

It seems like most competitive Smash players started with Smash, and not real fighting games

Im curious, what exactly makes a game a "real" fighting game? What does smash as a series lack (or have) that discredits it as a "real" fighting game? Its a game where you fight, isnt it?

This man ZeRo has already demonstrated that rushdown-types can beat zoning-types:

But according to Meleef*gs, zoning and defense aren't real skills. Particularly the latter, since defense is all one button and moving the control stick.

Assuming defense = purely shield button actions is a terrible assumption to make.

 

[Lichi]

You being part of PMDT, I can sense definite bias here.

But ZeRo was still talking about zoners in general and ways to deal with them.

One piece of evidence hardly ever qualifies as base for general assumptions, regardless of topic or occupation of the person stating that.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

You being part of PMDT, I can sense definite bias here.

But ZeRo was still talking about zoners in general and ways to deal with them.

Being that I primarily play Smash 4 and was a top Brawl player for a long time, I can sense you have little idea what you're talking about in terms of me.

It remains to be seen what strategies will become dominant in competitive play, but what Fox can do may or may not be emulated by, say, Captain Falcon or Little Mac. Also, zoning doesn't have to be about distancing oneself--Some characters that camp are very good at stage control; that catches ZeRo multiple times there and he talks about it, but a character like Diddy can switch between them a lot better.

There's a lot more to approaching a zoner than just reading purely defensive/retreating options, since there's a lot more to playing a zoner than just avoiding combat altogether.

 

[Quillion]

Assuming defense = purely shield button actions is a terrible assumption to make.

But rolling and air dodging is incredibly effective. Sure, AD was nerfed, but it's still really good.

Like it or not, defense controls the pace in Smash 4, just like how Egoraptor said that jn Ocarina of Time the enemy controls the pace of the fight by making you wait.

Being that I primarily play Smash 4 and was a top Brawl player for a long time, I can sense you have little idea what you're talking about in terms of me.

I apologize. I'm just really peeved at PMDT right now (and you can see that I'm anti-Project M).

 

[Gawain]

Because it's not as interesting to watch arguably requires less skill, at the very least mechanically and probably in terms of mentally as well. It invalidates even more characters than offensive focuses in games because there are a lot fewer chances for the dominating person to make mistakes, making comebacks less likely. This makes it even more obnoxious to watch. Essentially it is viewed as degenerative considering smashes style. It works in a game like street fighter because everything is more defined abd the arena is smaller; the non defending player doesn't have to play perfectly for as long.