Are True Combos Good for Competitive Gameplay?

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Brawl had more true combos than Smash 4. Jab-locks, infinites, and chainthrows are all lame combos.

Fixed.

 

[Thinkaman]

Fixed.

I agree. True combos are synonymous with lame combos, as zero gameplay is indeed synonymous with lame.

I think there's always been a big misunderstanding about exactly what combos are. There is no creativity in true combos. If there's something exciting to watch or fun to play, it almost definitely isn't a true combo.

Melee's greatest innovation was DI, which removed the vast majority of true combos and made the game a million times more interesting and well-suited for competition and spectators.

It's ironic that Melee is hailed for its combos, when in reality Melee killed combos and ushered in a modern golden age of gameplay, a return to substance over style that continues in Smash to this day.

 

[Praxis]

The thing though is that in every Smash game, NOT every character has true combos. I've played all smash games and some characters weren't designed to be combo-heavy characters and they barely have true combos, but they make up for it with other aspects of their playstyle. Bowser is a good example of this; He barely has any true combos, but he makes up for it with Mix-ups, Spacing, and kill power. True, he's never been a top tier character at all (though I think he's mid tier in Smash 4), but as long as their other aspects make up for that, they're good.

However, I do think there are some characters in Smash 4 that should have true combos, and I don't care if they are just two hits or three hits or more. One of those best examples is Ganondorf. True, he does have Dthrow into Uair, but it's very difficult to land due to DI.

IMO, having true combos on certain characters isn't a bad thing, but I feel if only certain characters can have true combos, you have to make sure other characters have other options to make up for their lack of true combos. As I said, Bowser is an example of this.

Bowser has uair combos, though I agree he doesn't have much- but that's why he's bad in Melee.

Ganondorf has definite several hit combos in Melee.

 

[Alfonzo Bagpipez]

I consider myself a very competitive person. But I actually thoroughly enjoy getting combo'd at times. Whether it's Smash 4, Melee, Street Fighter, or any other fighting game, I really like seeing what the other player can do with what I give them. If they do something praise-worthy, then they have my respect along with my hype, even if it's technically bad for me.

So whenever I see people say stuff like "You might as well drop your controller" or "Combos are one-sided", I just can't understand that mind-set.

So yeah, I love me some Combos. I find them engaging on both sides, as long as it's not like a Chain-Grab or an Infinite or something.

Smash 4 may or may not improve with more hitstun, but it's a pretty decent game as it is, coming from a Melee player.

 

[Madlollipop]

-_-

If you know your opponent can start a true combo by hitting you with X attack, then just avoid getting hit by X attack. Bam, interesting gameplay.

If that's not enough of an argument, then there's the fact that "what happens after the combo is over" is also an interesting part of gameplay. There are plenty of true combos in this game, but the way each player reacts after the end is... interaction.

tl;dr it's fine l2p

thats why IC were low tier due to thweir grab, just dont get brabbed?

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I agree. True combos are synonymous with lame combos, as zero gameplay is indeed synonymous with lame.

I think there's always been a big misunderstanding about exactly what combos are. There is no creativity in true combos. If there's something exciting to watch or fun to play, it almost definitely isn't a true combo.

Melee's greatest innovation was DI, which removed the vast majority of true combos and made the game a million times more interesting and well-suited for competition and spectators.

It's ironic that Melee is hailed for its combos, when in reality Melee killed combos and ushered in a modern golden age of gameplay, a return to substance over style that continues in Smash to this day.

Game kills combos.

Still had combos.

What?

DI is great because there is enough hitstun in the game to justify there being such a rapid change in trajectory. This just makes the game so much more exciting since combos aren't just a one sided interaction at certain percentages.

Just because they don't have autopilot combos anymore doesn't mean it's bad or they are trying to take away combos, but that this requires players to play better. Games like Guilty Gear, BlazBlue and Marvel 3 (for some reason...) have hitstun scaling, which reduces the amount of stun by a percentage on each consecutive move to prevent infinites and force players to mix up there game. In Street Fighter some combos need strict timing to pull off and require some frame perfect precision. Smash doesn't need this because DI functioned like a scaling mechanic and the percentage system ensured that no auto pilot combos can happen, but some can still happen.

Also , Smash 64 had some minor DI, but not like we see today.

And yeah, true combos are great for this game without a shadow of a doubt. Players want to be rewarded for pushing the risk of going offensive and defensive players want to be able to punish that, but still be able to be aggressive if they wanted too. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Sunshine Jesse]

I guess it depends on what you mean by true combos.

If it's just "use one move and the next move will hit for sure no matter what" then no, it's not good for the game. If it's spontaneous, then yeah, it's good, but if using move B after move A is always optimal, no. Memorization and similar patterns aren't skillful. The skill comes from overcoming those patterns, be they yours or your opponent's, imo.

If there are multiple potential optimal combos out of one move, I guess it's good, though.

I don't think hype is ever created by the same combos unless they're really flashy and unexpected, and it didn't look like it would or could happen.

 

[RanserSSF4]

Bowser has uair combos, though I agree he doesn't have much- but that's why he's bad in Melee.

Ganondorf has definite several hit combos in Melee.

That's right, but I'm talking about Smash 4, not Melee.

 

[Meek Moths]

true combos completely ruined project M

 

[Nobie]

As with many other things, combos can be good but only in moderation. There is such a thing as too much/

 

[ChronoPenguin]

As with many other things, combos can be good but only in moderation. There is such a thing as too much/

This is the situation where "might as well drop your controller" comes in to mind.
There isn't ground teching or wtf? Actually got boring.

 

[Nobie]

This is the situation where "might as well drop your controller" comes in to mind.
There isn't ground teching or wtf? Actually got boring.

That game is literally one where every character has multiple infinites and 100% combos. Imagine if everyone in Smash was Ice Climbers.

Example

 

[Senko Zero]

That game is literally one where every character has multiple infinites and 100% combos. Imagine if everyone in Smash was Ice Climbers.

In a sense it's completely faithful to it's source material, seeing as everyone in Hokuto no Ken itself (including everyone in that game with the exception of Mamiya, Mr. Heart and maybe Jagi) were pretty broken to begin with.


As for the topic at hand, there's no real problems with true combos itself, as they are your potential reward for getting a hit or opening up your opponent. The problem arises in the length and\or amount of that reward.

If I got a guaranteed three hit combo that leads me to some momentum in my favor, like a basic jab or throw combo, that's fine. If I get an infinite from a jab on the first hit of the round and you die, there's an issue somewhere.

 

[Roukiske]

One of the reasons I went from casual Melee to competitive were combo videos. I like the idea of DI and how some combos involved the attacker to react to the direction the defender would DI. I'd be a fan of balanced combo mechanics, that is, risk/reward/reaction combos. I don't want someone being able to combo off a jab (unless it leads to things that aren't OP like a kill or 0%-100%), but follow ups after a jab like a tech chase are fine since you have to guess or react. I like the idea of grounded meteor hits giving enough hitstun to do fancy stuff with because a balanced meteor could be punished if they miss or got blocked. I like throws having combo potential at certain percents and DI so they had more reward (most throws in this game IMO don't have enough true followups so I'll gladly stay in shield all game since it has not penalized me enough).

They can be in the game with balance. I'd welcome anything and I mean ANYTHING in the game if it were balanced.

If someone legitimately enjoyed a game and legitimately wanted to get into it competitively, I don't understand why getting combo'd is such a turn off when you can do it yourself. If you don't want to learn, there are some poke characters too. I mean if you play someone like C. Falcon for example in Melee and all you want to do is poke, then don't complain another C. Falcon is hitting you with combos. Some people complained about Tekken juggles, something all characters could do, and still wanted to play competitively while moaning about them. Comments like that make me go jackiechan.jpg

 

[LunarWingCloud]

I think having guaranteed follow-ups are fine, but not full combos. When you have too many true combos you just see people trying to abuse those to win and that's not fun for anyone.

 

[digiholic]

I find it kind of funny how people are constantly lamenting the lack of combos in 4, calling it one of the strikes against it ever being competitive, but as soon as someone finds Diddy's throw combo all anyone can talk about is how they need to nerf it.

I'll take my combos please, the good with the bad.

 

[Roukiske]

I find it kind of funny how people are constantly lamenting the lack of combos in 4, calling it one of the strikes against it ever being competitive, but as soon as someone finds Diddy's throw combo all anyone can talk about is how they need to nerf it.

I'll take my combos please, the good with the bad.

They wouldn't have to nerf it if most of the cast had access to combos like his. I'd be happy if they just started buffing everyone else, though that would be a challenge.

 

[TeaTwoTime]

Combos that are guaranteed given that the attacking player fulfils the conditions of the combo are fine. These conditions include the opponent being within a certain range of percentages (character specific), predicting or reacting properly to the opponent's DI, etc. This is to say that the player being attacked should, with correct execution, be able to escape from extended combos in order for the combo to be good for competitive play. Being entirely helpless to control your fate is not healthy or fun.
To give examples, dying to Luigi's down-throw to Nair at a percentage over 100% is fine, because at those high percentages you should expect to be KO'd if you misplay and get punished. ZSS' paralyser to down-throw to Uair is fine because it only kills at very high percentages and you had the opportunity to avoid the paralyser. The Uair juggling that follows is also fine because it is both avoidable and limited in how long it can continue for. However, if you were at a low percentage and being hit by a paralyser meant that she could freely Uair you to death from low percentages, or - as with the Robin infinite - footstool and paralyse repeatedly and then KO you before you can escape, there would be a problem.

tl;dr: they're fine if they're reasonably limited in effectiveness or length or if the player being attacked has can escape it by choosing the right escape option.

 

[Rajikaru]

I'm conflicted. While I dislike "true" combos because they don't really represent skill, they represent the ability to press buttons in a set order, especially in easy inescapable combos like Mario's d-throw to utilt combo at low percentages easily racking up damage, I do like combos because they're a good way to rack up damage if you can land them. That's also one thing I dislike about Melee: the competitive scene seems very combo-heavy, and most "awesome videos" I see about cool kills are just inescapable combos that ended with a meteor smash or racked up high enough damage to prevent recovery.

I'd say I'd rather have them out over the game having to be balanced around them. I'd rather the game be about who can outplay the other, instead of being about who managed to get his inescapable 0-to-death combo first (metaphorically, of course).

As bad as I am at it, I have to say I love how the focus of play in Sm4sh is more about zoning out your enemy and playing mind-games, even if I end up hating the game because I constantly lose to a guy one day, I'll come back the next day and have fun because I know it's about me improving, not me having to avoid getting in one specific situation and dying because of the one mistake.

 

[Roko Jono]

I'm conflicted. While I dislike "true" combos because they don't really represent skill, they represent the ability to press buttons in a set order, especially in easy inescapable combos like Mario's d-throw to utilt combo at low percentages easily racking up damage, I do like combos because they're a good way to rack up damage if you can land them. That's also one thing I dislike about Melee: the competitive scene seems very combo-heavy, and most "awesome videos" I see about cool kills are just inescapable combos that ended with a meteor smash or racked up high enough damage to prevent recovery.

I'd say I'd rather have them out over the game having to be balanced around them. I'd rather the game be about who can outplay the other, instead of being about who managed to get his inescapable 0-to-death combo first (metaphorically, of course).

As bad as I am at it, I have to say I love how the focus of play in Sm4sh is more about zoning out your enemy and playing mind-games, even if I end up hating the game because I constantly lose to a guy one day, I'll come back the next day and have fun because I know it's about me improving, not me having to avoid getting in one specific situation and dying because of the one mistake.

You are implying Melee is all 0-death while actually it doesn't happen that often. Combo videos highlight when they do happen, but if you analyze many of the combos, they are escapable at some point and it highlights a players ability to read/react to techs or DI. Smash 64 has 0-death combo's too, but that's not the majority of high level play either. A simple down-air knee combo isn't always guaranteed as you have to react to DI and time it (timing seems easy, but to inexperienced players, its possible to miss). The thing about Melee combo's that people love is that many of them are free form and take timing. In a game like Marvel, you can do those combo's with your eyes closed once you've confirmed the hit.

True combo's are cool, but combo's like Melee that are escapable or mixup-able by DI or some teching are probably more balanced.

 

[Soshii]

True combos create consistency which is bread-and-butter to competitive play in any game or sport.

 

[Yong Dekonk]

The problem isn't with the presence or lack of true combos. The problem is that some characters have true combos while others don't. The more I play Smash 4 the more I think it's not much more balanced than previous smash games. Personally I don't like true combos but if each character had unique true combos I would be ok with it.