Are Project M Recoveries too good?

[Master WGS]

Make Metal Melee the new standard. Eliminate most recoveries, except Mewtwo.

 

[Rᴏb]

I just remembered that backward ledge grabs have yet to be fixed due to how ledge grab boxes work in Brawl. This certainly contributes to how safe it feels for some characters to recover because they don't even have to face the ledge!

Just a detail everyone seems to have overlooked.

 

[otter]

If you want to compare the two extremes, being automatically killed if thrown of stage would be far better than having guaranteed recoveries. You're still fighting for center stage, you're still doing more than just trying to hit your opponent. Youre still playing smash bros.If you want to play on stamina mode, any other fighting game does it better, and you don't have to stop playing for 5 seconds every time you hit your opponent.

 

[Raijinken]

If you want to compare the two extremes, being automatically killed if thrown of stage would be far better than having guaranteed recoveries. You're still fighting for center stage, you're still doing more than just trying to hit your opponent. Youre still playing smash bros.If you want to play on stamina mode, any other fighting game does it better, and you don't have to stop playing for 5 seconds every time you hit your opponent.

I dunno, I think I'd rather play with guaranteed recoveries, since I find side and ceiling kills more fun than gimping to begin with. Ringout kills in games like Soul Calibur are pretty boring and anticlimactic, and favor certain characters innately (at least in the state that game is. Of course, a game designed around that would probably make it a more enjoyable system.

 

[kaizo13]

I agree, though I think Melee was a bit harsh with the strength of edgehogging.

the only edgeguarding mechanic that was too strong in Melee was rolling from the ledge, and PM already fixed that by cutting the time in half

I dunno, I think I'd rather play with guaranteed recoveries, since I find side and ceiling kills more fun than gimping to begin with. Ringout kills in games like Soul Calibur are pretty boring and anticlimactic, and favor certain characters innately (at least in the state that game is. Of course, a game designed around that would probably make it a more enjoyable system.

yea ringouts can be pretty lame in SC, but not so much in Smash because you have so much more mobility than in any other traditional fighter...so getting hit offstage and edgeguarded is usually just mistakes being made that could have completely been avoided. Welcome to competitive gaming.

you'd really prefer playing with guaranteed recoveries?
that would completely nullify the "sandbox" aspect of smash, which literally puts you inside a box and gives you more than one way to defeat your opponent. Either by knocking them into the blastzones or finishing them early with a well executed edgeguard.

 

[Joe73191]

Define too good. Is it that they are recoveries that are better than melee recoveries? Is that they are hard to edge guard? Are those valid reasons to nerf recoveries? Is that so few characters have such good recoveries that the game is unbalanced? I don't think so few characters have such good recoveries that game is unbalanced. It is the most balanced smash game yet.

The rationale for nerfs is the same "johns" the accompany the whole "I don't like wavedashing and l-canceling, they are not intuitive take them out" It's like people are saying "the game is too hard". I'll tell you this I'm terrible compared to high level players, but I want to be one of the best, not by nerfing the game, but by buffing my skills.

 

[Hinichii.ez.™]

I think it's a combination of a lot of things. Like, some recoveries are just too good, some characters aren't very good at edge guarding, some people don't know how to edge guard, PM still being young, having a lot of people playing that don't know the ins and outs of this game etc.

 

[Raijinken]

you'd really prefer playing with guaranteed recoveries?
that would completely nullify the "sandbox" aspect of smash, which literally puts you inside a box and gives you more than one way to defeat your opponent. Either by knocking them into the blastzones or finishing them early with a well executed edgeguard.

Given the two absolutes, I'd rather played Smash as a platforming fighter with guaranteed recoveries (this is assuming that hitstun and velocity are still relevant for sideline KOs) than with guaranteed death off-stage. That's just my preference, though. I'm also odd for preferring fighting at high damage/stakes over playing safe/campy or going for low-damage gimps.

But I'd still prefer a nice balance that requires comparable risk and reward from both the guarder and the recoverer, instead of the too-many too-safe recoveries we have now, or the extreme guard-favor that much of Melee had. In a match of equal skill and a matchup that is as close enough to even, I think the guarder should only have a moderate advantage.

 

[Deleted member]

i'm changing my vote to yes, recoveries are too good. playing marth vs samus and edge guarding her grapple for 4 hours made me want to exsanguinate myself from a rusty hook.

 

[kidd_guez]

If there are ways to edge guard tethers then why hasn't anyone made a video for the people showing how that's done

 

[Scuba Steve]

If there are ways to edge guard tethers then why hasn't anyone made a video for the people showing how that's done

You can edge guard up-b tethers just fine. The problem is zair tethers

 

[Bleck]

It's not a matter of not wanting to learn matchups.

Yes it is.

I am capable of learning how to wait 5 seconds every time I hit my opponent because edgeguarding them is useless, but that's why I don't play Brawl.

The idea, here, isn't that 'edgeguarding is useless' - it's that the definition of the position is inherently flawed etymologically, since dealing with a recovering opponent should not necessarily have to be near the edge.

I posit that if you're moving to center stage to take advantage of a Diddy using his full up special to sail clear past the ledge and onto the stage but still suffering from landing lag, you're still essentially 'edgeguarding'. Defining dealing with a recovering opponent by limiting the position/action to 'literally on the edge of the stage/smacking them again when they try to return' is clearly a very narrow definition and exactly the kind of simplification that Armada is trying to imply is a bad thing.

If being offstage isn't dangerous, it hurts the entire game.

Yes - but 'dangerous' is an ambiguous word to be using, in this context. I believe that 'dangerous' is not necessarily the same as 'once you've been hit off the stage, you're going to die 90% of the time', like in Melee.

The fact that you're fighting on a floating island and one wrong move will kill you is central to the fun of the game.

The game does not necessarily have to be punishingly difficult for it to be fun or competitive - also, consider that off-stage play being a point of major focus in the Melee metagame is not necessarily optimal. If Smash Bros was intended to, competitively, be all about preventing your opponent from recovering, it could be argued that the whole idea of percentage and scaling knockback is essentially obsolete, and the entire game should be structured around forcing your opponent off the stage and them smacking them when they try to recover - which, to me, sounds like more of a simplification than anything.

 

[MechWarriorNY]

I think it's a combination of a lot of things. Like, some recoveries are just too good, some characters aren't very good at edge guarding, some people don't know how to edge guard, PM still being young, having a lot of people playing that don't know the ins and outs of this game etc.

Or they do, and want handouts for their moaning and groaning anyway.

 

[Lil Puddin]

The only ones that seem too good are the up+b's people can act out of like Snake, Sonic, or Mewtwo. Mewtwo is basically a better Peach with teleport and longer range.

 

[yohoos]

If there are ways to edge guard tethers then why hasn't anyone made a video for the people showing how that's done

This so much. Also, if people do figure out how to edge guard tethers consistently with most of the cast, it still isn't a good thing because then their recoveries would be useless since it contains little to no variability and control and everybody would start crying for recovery changes anyway. Long story short, tethers just aren't good mechanics atm because of how automated they are.

 

[Fortress]

This so much. Also, if people do figure out how to edge guard tethers consistently with most of the cast, it still isn't a good thing because then their recoveries would be useless since it contains little to no variability and control and everybody would start crying for recovery changes anyway. Long story short, tethers just aren't good mechanics atm because of how automated they are.

While this isn't wrong there shouldn't have to be a video out there to spoonfeed you on how to stop tethers, or explain how they're punishable.

1) You have to be within a certain range to tether
2) Tethering always (read as: will always 100% without-a-doubt), always pull the character to the same spot, and not instantly. You can punish that.
3) Tethers aren't instant. Throw out a huge move with a huge hitbox that lasts ten centuries and have fun with your free kill

Even if people 'figure out' how to guard against tethers (which has been happening for a while, unless you're free), tethers still have mixups that you can perform out of them. Link specifically has his own cancel into multiple bomb tricks or simply into uB (which is oftentimes enough of a mixup alone).

Seriously, if you've learned how competitive Smash can be enough to the point where you know what a Smashboards is, you should know how to punish a tether by now. Stop being free, everybody, and figure out that Neutral Air is just 'A' in the air with no direction assigned to it. Lasts for-****ing-ever with most cast members, and has a giant hitbox for most cast members. Link main speaking.

i'm changing my vote to yes, recoveries are too good. playing marth vs samus and edge guarding her grapple for 4 hours made me want to exsanguinate myself from a rusty hook.

Marth has those neat-o tipper things on his u-Tilt if you're not braindead with spacing, and most stages have ceilings. Samus, being pretty floaty, should get killed pretty early off of those. Or hadn't we heard. Anyway, disagree with me, write a fifty-page essay on why I'm wrong and free, link me to Project Fallacy, and get your eighty-six 'likes' so I can go to bed.

Drunk Fortress out.

 

[yohoos]

While this isn't wrong there shouldn't have to be a video out there to spoonfeed you on how to stop tethers, or explain how they're punishable.

It's been about a year, I want answers. And if no one on Smashboards can explain it then I'm gunna have to assume the worst.

1) You have to be within a certain range to tether
2) Tethering always (read as: will always 100% without-a-doubt), always pull the character to the same spot, and not instantly. You can punish that.
3) Tethers aren't instant. Throw out a huge move with a huge hitbox that lasts ten centuries and have fun with your free kill

1) the range is quite long in fact its as long as some standard recoveries
2) true but I as well as many others feel that it is still too fast for most punishes, only Link's and TLink's tethers are slow enough to punish during reel in but that's irrelevant since they have a zair tether which is infinitely better than UpB tethers
3) I hope you realize that such moves are either scarce on certain characters or because they last so long they end up killing the user or puts them in an awful position if missed making it a huge shift in balance

Even if people 'figure out' how to guard against tethers (which has been happening for a while, unless you're free), tethers still have mixups that you can perform out of them. Link specifically has his own cancel into multiple bomb tricks or simply into uB (which is oftentimes enough of a mixup alone).

I agree Link's tether has options, but you are neglecting the fact that he has a zair tether, I was referring more to the UpB tethers. But since you brought it up I hope you know that Link's recovery options from tether are some of the worse offenders for why people made this thread.

Samus, being pretty floaty, should get killed pretty early off of those.

Link's pretty heavy last time I checked.

 

[Ace55]

The idea, here, isn't that 'edgeguarding is useless' - it's that the definition of the position is inherently flawed etymologically, since dealing with a recovering opponent should not necessarily have to be near the edge.

I posit that if you're moving to center stage to take advantage of a Diddy using his full up special to sail clear past the ledge and onto the stage but still suffering from landing lag, you're still essentially 'edgeguarding'. Defining dealing with a recovering opponent by limiting the position/action to 'literally on the edge of the stage/smacking them again when they try to return' is clearly a very narrow definition and exactly the kind of simplification that Armada is trying to imply is a bad thing.

No offense dude but you missed the point completely. Armada isn't complaining about having to take center stage to punish certain recoveries. He's saying taking center stage against certain recoveries is the best option because it's not worth trying to edgegaurd them. So you abandon any followups, position yourself as best as possible (typically center stage) and start over again. Very Brawlish and not good for the game imo.

I would say something about Melee having a 90% mortality rate once someone is offstage (which is bs) but nvm. I seriously can't believe you thought Armada meant having to punish recoveries center stage is the problem. Are you trolling or what?

 

[a vehicle]

Having read the entire thread it feels as if people in favour of easy recoveries are playing a different game.
And to people claiming that recoveries are perfect and they should never ever be tweaked in any way: congratulations, you have achieved a new level of regressive thought standard pioneered by "fox is op" threads.
The whole reason this thread exists is because it's on everyone's mind and we oughta analyse this

1) You have to be within a certain range to tether
2) Tethering always (read as: will always 100% without-a-doubt), always pull the character to the same spot, and not instantly. You can punish that.
3) Tethers aren't instant. Throw out a huge move with a huge hitbox that lasts ten centuries and have fun with your free kill

None of this makes any sense. Specially when it comes about z-air tethers, I could make a list of reasons why people shouldn't complain about falco's laser spam in melee and it would lead us nowhere, same as yours

Given the two absolutes, I'd rather played Smash as a platforming fighter with guaranteed recoveries (this is assuming that hitstun and velocity are still relevant for sideline KOs) than with guaranteed death off-stage. That's just my preference, though. I'm also odd for preferring fighting at high damage/stakes over playing safe/campy or going for low-damage gimps.

I think you need to elaborate on what an absolute is, because right you're basically describing brawl. Also gimping isn't a strategy, it's a consequence for being overplayed.

I posit that if you're moving to center stage to take advantage of a Diddy using his full up special to sail clear past the ledge and onto the stage but still suffering from landing lag, you're still essentially 'edgeguarding'. Defining dealing with a recovering opponent by limiting the position/action to 'literally on the edge of the stage/smacking them again when they try to return' is clearly a very narrow definition and exactly the kind of simplification that Armada is trying to imply is a bad thing.

In a game where things make sense if you move to the center of the stage to edge guard a character then they would just go for the border, I think someone before made a post about options and that right now the issue lies on how it's very hard or virtually impossible to cover all the options the recoving player has when edge guarding. Also you're probably not going to take a stock off the diddy with your center-of-the-stage-edge-guard, you're just launching it off-stage again.

i'm changing my vote to yes, recoveries are too good. playing marth vs samus and edge guarding her grapple for 4 hours made me want to exsanguinate myself from a rusty hook.

We're here for you

 

[MechWarriorNY]

Having read the entire thread it feels as if people in favour of easy recoveries are playing a different game.

Yeah. The blame game.

/thread

 

[Raijinken]

I think you need to elaborate on what an absolute is, because right you're basically describing brawl. Also gimping isn't a strategy, it's a consequence for being overplayed.

The absolutes are "if you are knocked off stage, you die" (such as in Soul Calibur), and "if you are knocked off stage, then once you're done being in hitstun, if you've not hit a blastline, you are guaranteed a way back to the stage" (which sounds like Kirby series physics).
And really, I did quite enjoy Brawl's survivability. I enjoyed all of the Smash Bros games for different aspects. What I preferred about Melee was the slightly higher combo potential, and the speed of the game. Thus, like I think I've said, the ideal Smash game from my perspective would have a balance of recoverability and guardability, but I would rather the guarder assume greater risk than they had to in Melee (which, as has been mentioned, they slightly do, since rolling doesn't hold the edge as long). The broader point that I've apparently failed to make is that on the whole, PM's recoveries aren't too good in my opinion, because most of them simply require you to guard more cleverly than just hopping onto the ledge, and I think that is a good dynamic to encourage. Others, such as Diddy's and Lucas's, are too versatile or safe or long range or what have you, and need tweaking.

 

[DMG]

i'm changing my vote to yes, recoveries are too good. playing marth vs samus and edge guarding her grapple for 4 hours made me want to exsanguinate myself from a rusty hook.

See, the first and only mistake you made was that you assumed fighting Samus was going to be fun in any regard.

 

[Fortress]

Link's pretty heavy last time I checked.

You'll notice that I said Samus is pretty floaty, not Link is pretty floaty. See, I even spell-checked it and everything.

And another thing: weight and floatiness are two separate properties that are independent of one another.

It's been about a year, I want answers. And if no one on Smashboards can explain it then I'm gunna have to assume the worst.

Settle down, A Few Good Men. Your answer is that Melee tethers aren't as easy to implement as flipping a switch, and if there was a better way to utilize tethers in the game, it'd be in at this point. Pretty sure we can count on seeing a better tether system in an update soon though. At least, that's what everybody's banking on.

1) the range is quite long in fact its as long as some standard recoveries
2) true but I as well as many others feel that it is still too fast for most punishes, only Link's and TLink's tethers are slow enough to punish during reel in but that's irrelevant since they have a zair tether which is infinitely better than UpB tethers
3) I hope you realize that such moves are either scarce on certain characters or because they last so long they end up killing the user or puts them in an awful position if missed making it a huge shift in balance

Sheik's bAir is short enough, Link's nAir is short enough, Samus' nAir is short enough, Falco's bAir is short enough, Fox's bAir is short enough, Sonic's nAir is short enough, Snake's bAir is short enough, Bowser's nAir/bAir are short enough... I can go on, but I won't. There are plenty of moves out there that last long enough to punish tethers.

I agree Link's tether has options, but you are neglecting the fact that he has a zair tether, I was referring more to the UpB tethers. But since you brought it up I hope you know that Link's recovery options from tether are some of the worse offenders for why people made this thread.

No, I'm very much not neglecting that. Bet you can't wait for Melee tethers when he gains even more options though, huh?

I'm not saying that the current tether system is perfect or not more than a little effective, but I am saying that it wouldn't kill people to stop being so free, crying about how they can't ledgehog tether-users, and actually throw out a hitbox or two offstage.

 

[Bleck]

No offense dude but you missed the point completely.

Whatever you say.

Armada isn't complaining about having to take center stage to punish certain recoveries.

I know.

He's saying taking center stage against certain recoveries is the best option because it's not worth trying to edgegaurd them.

I know.

So you abandon any followups, position yourself as best as possible (typically center stage) and start over again.

Not having guaranteed offstage follow-ups against everyone in the cast is a necessary consequence of there being a varied number of viable characters in the game - the complaint, here, is that one has to play differently against different kinds of characters instead of having a catch-all strategy to pursue. As I've explained, saying that the game is 'more simple' because you have to have more knowledge and more skills to be effective against everybody doesn't make any sense.

Very Brawlish and not good for the game imo.

Saying something is 'like Brawl' is not a valid criticism.

I seriously can't believe you thought Armada meant having to punish recoveries center stage is the problem. Are you trolling or what?

Nobody who has anything meaningful to say ever brings up 'trolling' into a discussion.

In a game where things make sense if you move to the center of the stage to edge guard a character then they would just go for the border, I think someone before made a post about options and that right now the issue lies on how it's very hard or virtually impossible to cover all the options the recoving player has when edge guarding.

Yes - and I'm saying that edgeguarding should be hard. There should not be a point where a character being off the stage means that they're basically going to lose a stock - the only reason people expect the game to work this way is because that's how it's worked in Melee forever, which is not a good reason in itself for things to work that way.

Also you're probably not going to take a stock off the diddy with your center-of-the-stage-edge-guard, you're just launching it off-stage again.

Not being able to immediately take a stock just because you got someone off the stage is not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[yohoos]

You'll notice that I said Samus is pretty floaty, not Link is pretty floaty. See, I even spell-checked it and everything.

And another thing: weight and floatiness are two separate properties that are independent of one another.

I'm sorry if what I meant didn't get through but I was trying to get across the fact that Link is not so easy kill off the top but he has just as good a recovery as samus atm.

Settle down, A Few Good Men. Your answer is that Melee tethers aren't as easy to implement as flipping a switch, and if there was a better way to utilize tethers in the game, it'd be in at this point. Pretty sure we can count on seeing a better tether system in an update soon though. At least, that's what everybody's banking on.

Cool so you do realize this tether system isn't perfect :D

Sheik's bAir is short enough, Link's nAir is short enough, Samus' nAir is short enough, Falco's bAir is short enough, Fox's bAir is short enough, Sonic's nAir is short enough, Snake's bAir is short enough, Bowser's nAir/bAir are short enough... I can go on, but I won't. There are plenty of moves out there that last long enough to punish tethers.

I'll just begin by saying that all these options are only possible starting from the ledge. If you are onstage and trying to bair offstage in reaction to a tether you won't make it in time due to how fast most tethers are; some walk off fairs/nairs work like Shiek. Additionally if you are on the ledge, the hitbox you throw out must be instant so only drop-off bairs or nairs work. If you try to do something like drop off ledge, jump, bair, it won't make it in time or the other person can just wait it out and then reel in later.

Samus's nair is big but does not have enough horizontal reach behind her so depending on the angle of the reel in, it may or may not work. Spacies bairs don't work because they are not big enough and they fall too fast making it too risky also it's near impossible to hit with their sweetspot in that position anyway making it pretty much pointless. Sonic can actually use his spring which is more effective than his nair for tethers, Wizzrobe has shown us that. Bowser I agree but also at the same time if he misses which he can if the other person decides to tether regrab and hover for a bit, Bowser might just die from that because he will have a difficult time making it back onstage similar to spacies. Unless I'm up a couple stocks I'm not gunna risk my own stock for an inconsistent edgeguard.

If you've noticed the trend here is that tether edgeguards are inconsistent throughout the roster some can do it more effectively than others. Additionally, while some characters have the potential to do it, they often risk getting reverse edgeguarded if they miss because as soon as tethers reel in, the character can act instantly out of it without any lag.

No, I'm very much not neglecting that. Bet you can't wait for Melee tethers when he gains even more options though, huh?

I'm not saying that the current tether system is perfect or not more than a little effective, but I am saying that it wouldn't kill people to stop being so free, crying about how they can't ledgehog tether-users, and actually throw out a hitbox or two offstage.

Melee tethers have more options but are less safe as far as I can tell.

 

[shairn]

Yes - and I'm saying that edgeguarding should be hard. There should not be a point where a character being off the stage means that they're basically going to lose a stock - the only reason people expect the game to work this way is because that's how it's worked in Melee forever, which is not a good reason in itself for things to work that way.

The reason most Melee viable characters die early is simply because the distance from the stage at which they only have one option to recover is significantly shorter than a lot of "Brawl" characters in PM. Cover their only option and you're done, meanwhile the newer characters retain similar options throughout their recovery path regardless of how far they are and I think that's a problem. It wasn't an automatic kill in Melee to get your opponent offstage, it was an easier kill the further and further you knocked them away, which is where percent comes into play.

@ Fortress : Melee tethers have more options, yes, all of which are worse than sweetspot to the ledge. The point of having Melee tethers is for the tetherer to be forced to choose a worse option if they can't tether to the ledge.

 

[Fortress]

I never said that wasn't the case.

 

[Bleck]

The reason most Melee viable characters die early is simply because the distance from the stage at which they only have one option to recover is significantly shorter than a lot of "Brawl" characters in PM. Cover their only option and you're done, meanwhile the newer characters retain similar options throughout their recovery path regardless of how far they are and I think that's a problem.

I think that's only really the case with maybe Diddy, and even then, edgeguarding Diddy is just difficult, not impossible. Other characters I can think of that might fit into this are the three gliders (I maintain that gliding just shouldn't be in the game at all) and Mewtwo (where I don't think the issue is Mewtwo's recovery so much as it is that he should probably be reverted to a lightweight).

 

[shairn]

Some characters have very good stalling and horizontal movement that allows them to not be affected by how far they are, like Lucas and Ivy(Although, unlike Lucas, Ivy loses if she's a bit too low under the ledge). Snake similarly doesn't care where he is, if his up B doesn't bring him to the stage a C4 will. But I don't think Snake is particularly problematic, since it's so predictable and unsafe. There's also, of course, the glide characters.

Mewtwo can usually get back to the stage with his floatiness and jump alone regardless of where he is, and even then his upB goes so far + he can act out of it so good luck killing him in the bottom blast zone. I agree his weight could be looked at if we want to keep his recovery similar, but to be honest there's a lot of problematic things about him beside that.

 

[Ace55]

Nobody who has anything meaningful to say ever brings up 'trolling' into a discussion.

I seriously suspected you were trolling me. So if I understand correctly your idea of a good ledgeplay system is one where you don't really want to challenge chars on their way to the ledge? Are you then allowed to pressure them on the ledge or are you supposed to give them at least a decent amount of space to move around?

There should not be a point where a character being off the stage means that they're basically going to lose a stock

So infinite recoveries?

 

[EclipseKirby]

There should not be a point where a character being off the stage means that they're basically going to lose a stock.
the only reason people expect the game to work this way is because that's how it's worked in Melee forever, which is not a good reason in itself for things to work that way

Not being able to immediately take a stock just because you got someone off the stage is not necessarily a bad thing.

You seem to be arguing extremes. It's like you're saying 'Everyone should have huge recoveries with plenty of options, as the only alternative is recoveries that are Falcon-level easy to edge-guard'. How about we think about the grey area?

 

[otter]

If Smash Bros was intended to, competitively, be all about preventing your opponent from recovering, it could be argued that the whole idea of percentage and scaling knockback is essentially obsolete, and the entire game should be structured around forcing your opponent off the stage and them smacking them when they try to recover - which, to me, sounds like more of a simplification than anything.

That is literally the point of the game. Watch the demo at the beginning of any Smash Bros game.

It doesn't make percentage and knockback obsolete because these factors determine how difficult the recovery process will be. If you are nearly touching the corner of the bottom and side blast zones, you should have a single digit percentage chance of living (depending on your character). If you get thrown off the side at a low percentage, you should have a very high chance of living.


Even if we disagree with where PM currently stands on that scale, do we agree on that premise? Or do you think anyone who can input Up+B should be rewarded with a guaranteed %150+

 

[Bleck]

I seriously suspected you were trolling me. So if I understand correctly your idea of a good ledgeplay system is one where you don't really want to challenge chars on their way to the ledge? Are you then allowed to pressure them on the ledge or are you supposed to give them at least a decent amount of space to move around?

No, there's nothing wrong with being able to challenge characters on their way to the ledge or while they're on the ledge - it's just that a) there being match-ups and/or situations in which you can't do so is not necessarily a bad thing, and b) it should not be easy.

So infinite recoveries?

You misunderstand - I'm talking within the context of edge-guarding. There being a point where you're incapable of recovering no matter what is natural, but it should not be because you were thrown off the stage at 0 percent.

You seem to be arguing extremes. It's like you're saying 'Everyone should have huge recoveries with plenty of options, as the only alternative is recoveries that are Falcon-level easy to edge-guard'. How about we think about the grey area?

I'm not saying that first one, but I am saying that no recovery should be 'Falcon-level' (see above). I don't know specifically where to draw the line, but I just think there should be a difference between a) "knocked off the stage with some noticeable percent on you is dangerous" and b) "being off stage at any time at any percent could immediately lead to your opponent killing you with something unavoidable".

That is literally the point of the game. Watch the demo at the beginning of any Smash Bros game.

You misunderstand - I'm saying that both successfully edgeguarding an opponent and successfully knocking your opponent past the blastline are legitimate ways to play the game, and a character being able to avoid either of those outcomes via their moves or their attributes makes the game more varied. The problem is that people seem to believe that it being difficult to take stocks from certain characters as certain other characters is only a bad thing when taking those stocks involves edgeguarding, the implication being - again - that the game is somehow more simple because of more varied match-ups.

Notice how nobody is complaining that Bowser is too difficult to KO through the top blast line.

If you are nearly touching the corner of the bottom and side blast zones, you should have a single digit percentage chance of living (depending on your character). If you get thrown off the side at a low percentage, you should have a very high chance of living.


Even if we disagree with where PM currently stands on that scale, do we agree on that premise?

Yes.

 

[Deleted member]

Marth has those neat-o tipper things on his u-Tilt if you're not braindead with spacing, and most stages have ceilings. Samus, being pretty floaty, should get killed pretty early off of those. Or hadn't we heard. Anyway, disagree with me, write a fifty-page essay on why I'm wrong and free, link me to Project Fallacy, and get your eighty-six 'likes' so I can go to bed.

Everyone else that's good already knows you're free since you think marth's uptilt is a reliable kill move on samus.

 

[KayB]

What I got from this thread: buff Marth's recovery

 

[Deleted member]

honestly the nerf to recoveries on the whole and the buff to ganon in the next version *cough* are all that marth should need to do well imo.

 

[Narpas_sword]

If you want to compare the two extremes, being automatically killed if thrown of stage would be far better than having guaranteed recoveries. You're still fighting for center stage, you're still doing more than just trying to hit your opponent. Youre still playing smash bros.If you want to play on stamina mode, any other fighting game does it better, and you don't have to stop playing for 5 seconds every time you hit your opponent.

OH,

this must be why we only play walk-off stages.

I knew i was missing something

 

[Fortress]

Everyone else that's good already knows you're free since you think marth's uptilt is a reliable kill move on samus.

Please, f/u-tilt kill off the ceiling ezpz.

 

[Deleted member]

hilariously, samus can avoid both uptilt and ftilt easily by.... holding away during juggles to get off stage, and then using her tether.

surely most people in this thread can see where this is going.

 

[TheLostSabre]

More Ledge Camping. Great...