Automatic L-Cancelling Discussion

[GP&B]

If your interest is in being incredibly immature and providing no substance to your argument, there's nothing to say to you.

 

[qwertz143]

Tons of people also play properly..it goes both ways LOL nice argument. Ha not


Maybe I could go the route where lcanceling seperates the men from the boys (or women from girls). You're looking about 6 or 7 right now little boy. There's an ad hominem for ya.

Now pull up ur bigboy pants, stop whining, and just press the button.

I still don't get how this affects you so much. It's optional. And as a fellow kirby main, I can tell you that L-cancelling isn't even needed much compared to other characters. I mean I take advantage of kirby's landing lag as they are hitboxes. It works, there isn't any need to complain

 

[qwertz143]

Just nair, nair is always the answer

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

I don't just play Kirby.

Also, every argument against l-canceling can be used to remove teching as well, so lets get on that pmdt because I guess people want that too

Edit: also, did everyone forget about shffl? Can't have that without lcanceling


Removing lcanceling also opens up the floodgates for foxes and falcos to run rampant on pm. Great balance

 

[Rawkobo]

I see Strong Bad here. Please, man, close this thread. This happens every time, the points have been reiterated over and over again.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

I see Strong Bad here. Please, man, close this thread. This happens every time, the points have been reiterated over and over again.

Ur argument says lcanceling is useless, which is completely subjective.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

If your interest is in being incredibly immature and providing no substance to your argument, there's nothing to say to you.

I was being sarcastic

 

[GP&B]

I was being sarcastic

You were blatantly insulting other posters. This is just an excuse for poor behavior.

Also, every argument against l-canceling can be used to remove teching as well

Teching is a multifaceted decision. L-canceling is not. So no, not really.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

You were blatantly insulting other posters. This is just an excuse for poor behavior.


Teching is a multifaceted decision. L-canceling is not. So no, not really.

LOL k.

Well then lets compare lcanceling and teching shall we.

Both require timing and the use of l/r. Both also have no reason not to be used every time. Both yield the same type of reward when used.

All these things are what lcanceling is being attacked for. It's a move that should always be used when possible and yields no real "reward"

Edit: for certain moves lcanceling cab be used at different times to avoid certain punishable situations, same with teching as you can tech right, left, or still to avoid tech chases/punishes)

 

[CORY]

yeah. there are times to intentionally miss a tech in order to throw off someone who thinks they have a pattern and are trying to hard read your option out of it. or are going for option coverage that can't cover mis-tech-get up attack.

i think lcancelling could be made better overall. it has some counterplay, but the fact that you can just spam shield inputs with no fail window means that a lot of that counterplay is actually irrelevant, outside of getting counterhit into a teching situation that you're now (potentially) forced to fail, which the opponent can count on the failure and then get a punish.

and, really, none of this matters anyway, because it's an option that can be turned on and off within playgroups. and when it's turned on, it doesn't negatively affect people who have the muscle memory for it, unless you're mistiming the input. i have a friend that's played since n64 and doesn't "get" lcanceling because his fingers are slow. next time i get to play pm with him, i'm turning on some autolcancelling so he can have some more fun with the game. ain't gonna hurt anybody.

it's literally a nonissue, unless for some reason people are scared that the boogieman of autolcancel is going to come out of the shadows and sweep the entire tournament meta by force.

 

[Kurri ★]

LOL k.

Well then lets compare lcanceling and teching shall we.

Both require timing and the use of l/r. Both also have no reason not to be used every time. Both yield the same type of reward when used.

All these things are what lcanceling is being attacked for. It's a move that should always be used when possible and yields no real "reward"

Edit: for certain moves lcanceling cab be used at different times to avoid certain punishable situations, same with teching as you can tech right, left, or still to avoid tech chases/punishes)

You can tech in place, you can tech roll to the left, you can tech roll to the right, you can not tech at all and from there you can either just get up, roll, or get up attack. Every one of those choices has a risk and reward to them.

 

[GP&B]

Both also have no reason not to be used every time.

Choosing not to tech when on a platform allows you to mixup when you'll get invincibility frames, which can throw off the opponent and give you an opportunity to escape or retaliate.

Both yield the same type of reward when used.

Also wrong as teching offers a choice for using it. And hell, the big difference is that it still offers viable choices for not using it. L-canceling does not 99% of the time.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

Not using ff to lc and just double bairing or fairing is just as viable as not teching for mixup purposes.

 

[Kurri ★]

Not using ff to lc and just double bairing or fairing is just as viable as not teching for mixup purposes.

No, Fast fall is a choice completely independent of L-Cancel. And I'm not sure what double b-air or f-air have to do with anything.

 

[CORY]

yeah, aerial momentum and the amount of attacks you use in the air, along with when you use them, are independent of lcancelling. unless you're trying to mixup yourself by randomly doing something, making it harder for yourself to lcancel?

 

[Bleck]

Maybe I could go the route where lcanceling seperates the men from the boys

guys remember the last thread where I said that people in support of l-canceling are literally just in desperate need of something that makes them feel good about themselves

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

No, Fast fall is a choice completely independent of L-Cancel. And I'm not sure what double b-air or f-air have to do with anything.

you're right I completely misspoke and did not portray my message correctly.


Maybe spacing a planned missed lcancel correctly could bait the opponent into trying to punish, resulting in some sort of shieldgrab, CC punish, or spot dodge punish of some sort?

An alternative to the above would be to not ff into a missed l-cancel so the landing lag is less which allows for more punishes to your opponent who thinks you are vulnerable for longer then you really are?

Having to press l to lcancel makes shffl harder so we don't have an abundance of fox and falco players? Maybe

when players dodge attacks, or unexpectedly get hit by the one using an aerial, it causes the l-cancel to be messed up because the timing was not what the person expected it to be (ex: person used aerial and thought that it would hit, but opponent dodges, so he lcancels the timing as if it would hit, and not if it would miss which would cause him to miss the lcancel, etc.)


These are all the things I can think up right now that cannot happen with auto l-cancel in competitive play.


Maybe catering to the casual is ok, but putting it into competitive play is never the smartest move (catering to casual = lowering skill floor, catering to competitive = raising skill ceiling). That is my problem. Maybe some of you don't like melee, but considering it's success, you might want to atleast stay close, if not completely follow their formula competively.



Regarding my last post:

What I meant to say in my other post is that you could mixup how many aerials you do before you lcancel, but I wasn't thinking and realized myself that that is not the issue.

 

[Azurie]

If there was no L-Cancelling (or anything of that nature in the game) I would love this.

With HALVED land-lag on aerials in the game here.
Addition = If an aerial hits a shield/projectile/anything OTHER THAN non-targets (whiffs) OR hit-confirmed on a character hurt-box (actual player-controlled units), landing lag with that aerial is DOUBLED.
- Hitting the 'Shield' upon landing is required to reduce the land-lag of that aerial by a THIRD.
Almost like a 'defense against the defense' in a way.

In other words.
Hitting 'things' other than players/no target, is the only situation something should ever actually be a factor. As the only counter-play (AKA, player engagement) that accounts for anything would be the space control and timing of things on the fields (defensive options or position control stuff)
All other L-Cancel timings, in combos and whiffs, as I mentioned in the previous post, are essentially just stupid redundancies in the game.

This would also leave things like 'hitting projectiles' with aerials to get rid of them ACTUALLY be a little bit of a commitment, as there's MORE lag than in today's-game. As well as hitting someone who has actually DONE SOMETHING to defend the encounter (a decision both players make) will be much more beneficial to the player who successfully defended the attack.
^1/3rd land lag even if LC'd rather than 1/2 if LC'd as it is in today's game.

It would change the meta-game in a way with projectile-control and defensive-approaches to the game, but otherwise, every other area L-Cancelling exists is the stuff that should never exist, and if it was never there in Melee/PM, nobody would take a second look.

That's my stand on it, hope that helps you understand where the previous post was coming from.
Random side-note, your interpretation of the 'pp' thing isn't accurate, but completely understandable, and it's not worth going into. Hopefully this post helps a bit, but it doesn't really matter.
Tl;dr, L-Cing is silly, but there's something in the madness worth noting. (hence 'cancels' of sorts are mentioned as options/alternatives to this silliness at all)

I think this is a really good idea and deserves some discussion. I agree with your premise up until your new l-cancel idea. Personally, I think l-cancelling to reduce lag by a third after an aerial hits a non-opponent target kind of undermines your suggested defensive options. I know it's a good compromise to give l-canceling more meaning, and i think it would be an improvement on the current system, but all and all I think it's unnecessary.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

guys remember the last thread where I said that people in support of l-canceling are literally just in desperate need of something that makes them feel good about themselves

Well i said maybe i could go that route, but in your case we can use the trash bag with your used diapers to tell where you stand.


(reaction to this post: obvious flame post is obvious ;D)

 

[Narpas_sword]

This argument always comes down to people not understanding WHY L-canceling is a bad game mechanic.
and then erupts because they think we're arguing that its bad because we think it's "hard" or something.

lol

 

[Kurri ★]

you're right I completely misspoke and did not portray my message correctly.


Maybe spacing a planned missed lcancel correctly could bait the opponent into trying to punish, resulting in some sort of shieldgrab, CC punish, or spot dodge punish of some sort?

An alternative to the above would be to not ff into a missed l-cancel so the landing lag is less which allows for more punishes to your opponent who thinks you are vulnerable for longer then you really are?

Having to press l to lcancel makes shffl harder so we don't have an abundance of fox and falco players? Maybe

when players dodge attacks, or unexpectedly get hit by the one using an aerial, it causes the l-cancel to be messed up because the timing was not what the person expected it to be (ex: person used aerial and thought that it would hit, but opponent dodges, so he lcancels the timing as if it would hit, and not if it would miss which would cause him to miss the lcancel, etc.)


These are all the things I can think up right now that cannot happen with auto l-cancel in competitive play.


Maybe catering to the casual is ok, but putting it into competitive play is never the smartest move (catering to casual = lowering skill floor, catering to competitive = raising skill ceiling). That is my problem. Maybe some of you don't like melee, but considering it's success, you might want to atleast stay close, if not completely follow their formula competively.



Regarding my last post:

What I meant to say in my other post is that you could mixup how many aerials you do before you lcancel, but I wasn't thinking and realized myself that that is not the issue.

All of your points are still separate from L-Cancel. Besides a lowered skill floor doesn't mean a game is less competitive, especially if it's by removing arbitrary "mechanics".

And no, let's not copy Melee. Let's just take good things from Melee, good things from Brawl, and good things from other games and our own creativity and make something better.

 

[Narpas_sword]

'more competitive' is too hard of a thing to quantify.

a lower skill floor means more people can get to the level needed to perform at a level where they can compete.
a higher skill ceiling means there are more options to master.

Manual L cancelling does nothing beyond provide a punish window if someone messes up at high level.
at low competitive level (talking people that enter tournies here, but may not get out of pools etc) it just makes things harder for no good reason.

The GOOD players will always come out on top, auto L cancelling wont change that.
what it will change is allowing newer players to get to the higher levels of play faster. being able to focus efforts on learning actual useful techniques and fundamentals.

 

[Quillion]

Manual L cancelling does nothing beyond provide a punish window if someone messes up at high level.

THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT!!!!!

The (missed) button press is supposed to be a concession to the opponent at high-level play. Without it, PM would simply become identical to Smash U because there's no reason to capitalize on opportunities to attack.

There is NO way; NO WAY IN HELL; that there is a way to mix low landing lag for elaborate combos AND high landing lag for punish opportunities.

PS: @ MEnKIRBZ , I want to be on your side, but you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're being immature, too.

 

[Narpas_sword]

THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT!!!!!

The (missed) button press is supposed to be a concession to the opponent at high-level play. Without it, PM would simply become identical to Smash U because there's no reason to capitalize on opportunities to attack.

There is NO way; NO WAY IN HELL; that there is a way to mix low landing lag for elaborate combos AND high landing lag for punish opportunities.

PS: @ MEnKIRBZ , I want to be on your side, but you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're being immature, too.

So you find a punish opportunity to be of value if someone misses an arbitrary input?
If that is the case, how would we add this value elsewhere?

Would adding it to land cancelled lasers be a good idea?
If you dont press L as you SHB, you get more lag. Would that be an improvement?

Would adding more lag to a missed L-Cancel improve it?
If the idea is to punish for messing up something arbitrary that shouldn't be missed, perhaps instead of lag when you land, tripping would be better?

If you think auto L-Canceling would make the game like wii-u smash, you're obviously missing something.
You realise that at high levels, the L-cancel is rarely missed anyway? right?
So how would missing it make it more like wiiu? surely it would make it more like high level play?

 

[Manaconda]

I am of the opinion that L-Cancelling does add depth in certain scenarios. You can get your opponent to mess it up through shield DI, shielding, having two shields (ICs), etc. There's even more depth to it in Melee with their various degrees of shielding. And in a high-pressure situation, the more composed player is less likely to miss an L-Cancel, allowing them more punish opportunities. I've seen videos of M2K using needles to intentionally mess up an opponents L-Cancel timing. L-Cancelling isn't easy, even Armada misses them sometimes. We're all human, and making mistakes, input or decision related, is part of the game.

To me, there is undeniably some depth in this mechanic. However, the depth it adds is not really proportional to the effort it takes for a new player to learn it and start being competitive.

I think Narpas_sword has the right idea. I'd much prefer to add more depth to it than to get rid of it completely. Maybe a punishment for messing it up (MORE lag?), creating a 'no L-Cancel' window to prevent multiple attempts in the same aerial, or make more hitboxes act like GnW's dair? That last one sounds like it'd leave a bunch of lingering hitboxes around, however, which is kind of stupid.

 

[Kurri ★]

I am of the opinion that L-Cancelling does add depth in certain scenarios. You can get your opponent to mess it up through shield DI, shielding, having two shields (ICs), etc. There's even more depth to it in Melee with their various degrees of shielding. And in a high-pressure situation, the more composed player is less likely to miss an L-Cancel, allowing them more punish opportunities. I've seen videos of M2K using needles to intentionally mess up an opponents L-Cancel timing. L-Cancelling isn't easy, even Armada misses them sometimes. We're all human, and making mistakes, input or decision related, is part of the game.

To me, there is undeniably some depth in this mechanic. However, the depth it adds is not really proportional to the effort it takes for a new player to learn it and start being competitive.

I think Narpas_sword has the right idea. I'd much prefer to add more depth to it than to get rid of it completely. Maybe a punishment for messing it up (MORE lag?), creating a 'no L-Cancel' window to prevent multiple attempts in the same aerial, or make more hitboxes act like GnW's dair? That last one sounds like it'd leave a bunch of lingering hitboxes around, however, which is kind of stupid.

That's not the L-Cancel adding depth, that's the shield adding depth. Besides, whether it's easy or not is not the problem, it's whether it's arbitrary or not. It could be the easiest thing, but if it doesn't add any depth, then it should either be an easter egg, or not exist at all.

 

[Narpas_sword]

I think Narpas_sword has the right idea. I'd much prefer to add more depth to it than to get rid of it completely. Maybe a punishment for messing it up (MORE lag?), creating a 'no L-Cancel' window to prevent multiple attempts in the same aerial, or make more hitboxes act like GnW's dair? That last one sounds like it'd leave a bunch of lingering hitboxes around, however, which is kind of stupid.

I feel like if you thought that was my idea, I totally misrepresented myself.

L-canceling adds no depth.
altering it to punish more would add no depth still.

I was trying to illustrate that having a punish programmed in because you didnt press L before you land is stupid.

If depth = the gap between skill floor and skill ceiling. L cancelling creates less depth by moving the floor up higher, and closer to the ceiling.

 

[Kurri ★]

THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT!!!!!

The (missed) button press is supposed to be a concession to the opponent at high-level play. Without it, PM would simply become identical to Smash U because there's no reason to capitalize on opportunities to attack.

There is NO way; NO WAY IN HELL; that there is a way to mix low landing lag for elaborate combos AND high landing lag for punish opportunities.

PS: @ MEnKIRBZ , I want to be on your side, but you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're being immature, too.

Then don't mix them...

You can keep landing lag low and still punish, you don't automatically win just for getting 100% L-Cancel.

 

[Bleck]

lol people arguing about depth as though it's an objective qualifier in any capacity

 

[Frost | Odds]

THAT IS THE ENTIRE POINT!!!!!

The (missed) button press is supposed to be a concession to the opponent at high-level play. Without it, PM would simply become identical to Smash U because there's no reason to capitalize on opportunities to attack.

There is NO way; NO WAY IN HELL; that there is a way to mix low landing lag for elaborate combos AND high landing lag for punish opportunities.

PS: @ MEnKIRBZ , I want to be on your side, but you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're being immature, too.

OK.

From now on, in order for Ganon to forward air, he has to make these series of inputs: . If you miss one of these inputs, you instead get a crappy version of Fair with less power and twice as much endlag as normal. I feel this change will make Ganon a deeper character because otherwise there is NO WAY IN HELL for his opponent to find punish opportunities.

You agree with this change, yeah?

 

[Bleck]

3.7: ganon's side special is now the shun goku satsu and requires the same inputs

 

[Kurri ★]

That actually sounds pretty dope, and with no meter what's stopping you from spamming it!

 

[Bleck]

3.8: ganon's side special is now the shun goku satsu and requires the same inputs except now you can cancel it at any time with the l button and immediately start it again

so much depth such thrilling rich natural [additional buzzwords] gameplay

 

[Quillion]

So you find a punish opportunity to be of value if someone misses an arbitrary input?
If that is the case, how would we add this value elsewhere?

Pro players miss it not often, but they do it just often enough to make the game more forgiving on all players, seeing as if there was no way to miss it, they'd start playing even more lame.

Would adding it to land cancelled lasers be a good idea?
If you dont press L as you SHB, you get more lag. Would that be an improvement?

That's honestly a pretty awesome idea!

Hey @Strong Bad, @ standardtoaster , and other PMDev, why haven't you thought of this? Give the game more technicality to surpass Melee!

Would adding more lag to a missed L-Cancel improve it?
If the idea is to punish for messing up something arbitrary that shouldn't be missed, perhaps instead of lag when you land, tripping would be better?

No; I think it's good enough. It takes quick reflexes to seize the opportunity of a missed cancel, but if there was just barely any landing lag (with no cancel), that would require 20XX reflexes.

 

[Narpas_sword]

That's honestly a pretty awesome idea!

Hey @Strong Bad, @ standardtoaster , and other PMDev, why haven't you thought of this? Give the game more technicality to surpass Melee!

Was a legit question. im actually trying to understand why you think it creates value having L cancelling.
If you think it's bad for SHB to need L-Cancelling, would you explain why?

 

[Draco_The]

I thought obvious troll was obvious?

 

[Narpas_sword]

I thought obvious troll was obvious?

I still like to try and reply as if troll comments dont exist.

mood dependant....


Anyway. I'm fairly certain that L cancelling is just a melee relic that has absolutely no supporting value aside from 'it was in melee and, hell, let's be honest, we all loved melee.

Bit of this logic going on I feel:

Melee = good
L-Cancelling = Melee
.:
L-Cancelling = Good.

It just doesn't hold up under any close inspection.

If L canceling wasn't a thing in melee (or 64) then PMDT decided to put it in, it would look like one of the dumbest mechanics to ever be made.


I also think a lot of people look at it from the view of:
"If you press L you halve your lag"

whereas if you look at it like:
"if you fail to press L you get punished with Double lag", it sounds ridiculous.

 

[Alondite]

OK.

From now on, in order for Ganon to forward air, he has to make these series of inputs: . If you miss one of these inputs, you instead get a crappy version of Fair with less power and twice as much endlag as normal. I feel this change will make Ganon a deeper character because otherwise there is NO WAY IN HELL for his opponent to find punish opportunities.

You agree with this change, yeah?

This post single-handedly illustrates why L-canceling is bad game design. When designing inputs, there are two goals:

1. Make the input as simple as possible.
2. Make the input discrete so as to not overlap with any other input.

Inputs should be made as simple as possible while still being unique. L-Canceling does not even need an input. There is no reason NOT to L-Cancel, therefor there is no strategic decision-making involved, rendering it completely arbitrary. Assuming both players are L-Canceling, the action is a zero-sum. A successful L-Cancel puts you at "0," whereas no L-Cancel, or an unsuccessful L-Cancel puts you in the negative.

There is no inherent risk to L-Canceling. "Oh but you could get hit and it could ruin your tech." And exactly how does that make the game more strategically interesting? Are you going to not L-Cancel to avoid running the risk of such a thing happening? Of course not. You're going to space your aerials properly, and make sound decisions so as not to suffer a hit while attempting an aerial, both of which you should be doing whether you're L-Canceling or not.

It's bad design and serves no purpose other than to artificially inflate APM so players can profess how skilled they are and how fast they play. It's an ego thing, and nothing more. Auto L-Cancel should be the de-facto rule because it lowers the skill floor without lowering the skill ceiling; there is nothing possible with manual L-Canceling that isn't also possible with auto L-Canceling.

 

[standardtoaster]

the only risk I can think of is that it does affect your tech window when you're hit out of landing lag iirc

 

[Narpas_sword]

the only risk I can think of is that it does affect your tech window when you're hit out of landing lag iirc

not if you soft press L instead of hard press though. iirc.

So the L-cancel input isn't just as silly as 'press L before you land, or you get lag'

but it is in fact:

'press L before you land or you'll get landing lag, but not too hard, or you'll ruin your chance at teching'