• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Brawl is so good

AlphaZealot

AlphaZealot

Former Smashboards Owner
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
12,731
Location
Bellevue, Washington
The same **** can happen in Melee. Or 64. Actually, in any fighting game, both players can just sit there.

LOL at running away with the score tied at zero.
 
Mike G

Mike G

███████████████ 100%
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
10,159
Location
The Salt Mines, GA
you're right AZ, but you have to admit, that **** is bonkers in brawl.
 
tubes

tubes

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
528
Location
Atlanta, GA
GA Peach said:
you can't camp like that in ANY other fighting game. Smash has that bull**** on LOCK.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to think how the devs could have changed the way the ledge works to prevent this. I don't really know enough about smash yet to really say but anyone else think this **** could be avoided entirely if grabbing the ledge didn't give invincibility frames?
 
G

GA Peach

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
1,122
Location
CHUG! CHUG! CHUG!
tubes said:
I'm trying to think how the devs could have changed the way the ledge works to prevent this. I don't really know enough about smash yet to really say but anyone else think this **** could be avoided entirely if grabbing the ledge didn't give invincibility frames?
Click to expand...
well, you could reduce the amount of time someone is invulnerable. the auto-sweetspot system only adds to the stupidity of it, as you are invulnerable the entire time you are sweetspotting a ledge, and invulnerable for a lengthy time when coming off of the ledge.
 
tubes

tubes

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
528
Location
Atlanta, GA
GA Peach said:
well, you could reduce the amount of time someone is invulnerable. the auto-sweetspot system only adds to the stupidity of it, as you are invulnerable the entire time you are sweetspotting a ledge, and invulnerable for a lengthy time when coming off of the ledge.
Click to expand...
do people actually need to be invulnerable when getting on the ledge though? I mean what if being on the ledge didn't do jack **** but rolling or doing a get up attack stayed the same?
 
ph00tbag

ph00tbag

C(ϾᶘϿ)Ͻ
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
7,245
Location
NC
GA Peach said:
well, you could reduce the amount of time someone is invulnerable. the auto-sweetspot system only adds to the stupidity of it, as you are invulnerable the entire time you are sweetspotting a ledge, and invulnerable for a lengthy time when coming off of the ledge.
Click to expand...
This is a common misconception. In Melee, you were invulnerable after grabbing a ledge even after you let go, but in Brawl, letting go makes you vulnerable again. You still flash after letting go, but the flashing has been shown to be purely cosmetic in Brawl; you might be invulnerable while not flashing, or you could be vulnerable while flashing. The primary issue is that, first of all, you can grab the ledge from an extremely safe distance below the ledge, even without ledge grabbing, with most characters. Furthermore, you can cover a lot of returns to the ledge with a hitbox that won't leave you vulnerable afterwards (Fire, Dolphin Slash), or have a recovery move with verly little or not vulnerability before grabbing the ledge (Flip Jump, Dimensional Cape).

Now on the topic of Melee, you can look there for some pretty ridiculous ledge stalling tactics. Ganondorf's second jump was short enough that he could grab a ledge, drop, jump and regrab the ledge, and be invulnerable for almost all of the period. The only issue was that Ganon's recovery was punishable if you got the edgehog in at the right time, so it wasn't incredibly effective against people that knew how to deal with it. The fact that you could drop immediately, and get all of the invincibility of being on the ledge was really pretty good. The primary saving grace was the punishability of most recoveries, and the fact that ledge-snapping was a lot less forgiving.
 
leafgreen386

leafgreen386

Dirty camper
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
3,577
Location
Playing melee and smash ultimate
THAT WAS SO EXCITING! DID YOU SEE IT WHEN HE GOT HIT? IT WAS AMAZING! The mindgames and skill shown in that match is commendable.

Seriously, this stuff is worse than ledgestalls in melee were, by far.

tubes said:
I'm trying to think how the devs could have changed the way the ledge works to prevent this. I don't really know enough about smash yet to really say but anyone else think this **** could be avoided entirely if grabbing the ledge didn't give invincibility frames?
Click to expand...
This just gave me an idea for brawl+, actually. A way to largely preserve the use of invincibility frames on the ledge, while removing the abuse of them. We already removed auto-sweetspot ledges in brawl+ (you can still grab them backwards, you just can't grab them during your upB), which helped nerf planking, as well as speed up the ledgegrab animation, which greatly reduced the invincibility duration (so you can act as quickly off of ledges as you could in melee or 64, basically, but with less invincibility to prevent stalling). This would let us keep a longer invincibility duration while also effectively killing stalling on the ledge. What I posted on a thread concerning brawl+:

We've had some discussion about increasing ledge invincibility, but the point of stalling just keeps getting brought around. Well... what if we implemented a sort of "invincibility gauge?" It wouldn't be visible to the player, but basically it would store up some number of invincibility frames to draw from (say... 120), and every time you grab the ledge, a portion of that gets used up. Let's say we want grabbing the ledge to give 20 invincibility frames. After grabbing the ledge once, the invincibility bank would drop to 100, and for each frame where you aren't invincible (or perhaps every two frames) the invincibility bank is replenished by 1 frame. If they have less invincibility left in the invincibility bank than 20 frames, they would just get whatever was left. So a player would be able to maintain perfect invincibility for no more than 120 frames, before abruptly losing the ability to get any invincibility from grabbing the ledge. So if a person tried to stall, they would be forced to either stop or leave themselves vulnerable for long periods of time, greatly increasing the risk associated with doing so. However, this wouldn't punish someone who's just using the ledge normally, and would more than likely be off of it for long enough periods of time to restore their invincibility bank.
Click to expand...
I'd say it would pretty well fix ledgestalling.

edit:
ph00tbag said:
This is a common misconception. In Melee, you were invulnerable after grabbing a ledge even after you let go, but in Brawl, letting go makes you vulnerable again.
Click to expand...
Really? Interesting. Hm. Then I guess my idea of an invincibility bank isn't really necessary.
 
ph00tbag

ph00tbag

C(ϾᶘϿ)Ͻ
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
7,245
Location
NC
leafgreen386 said:
THAT WAS SO EXCITING! DID YOU SEE IT WHEN HE GOT HIT? IT WAS AMAZING! The mindgames and skill shown in that match is commendable.

Seriously, this stuff is worse than ledgestalls in melee were, by far.


This just gave me an idea for brawl+, actually. A way to largely preserve the use of invincibility frames on the ledge, while removing the abuse of them. We already removed auto-sweetspot ledges in brawl+ (you can still grab them backwards, you just can't grab them during your upB), which helped nerf planking, as well as speed up the ledgegrab animation, which greatly reduced the invincibility duration (so you can act as quickly off of ledges as you could in melee or 64, basically, but with less invincibility to prevent stalling). This would let us keep a longer invincibility duration while also effectively killing stalling on the ledge. What I posted on a thread concerning brawl+:


I'd say it would pretty well fix ledgestalling.

edit:
Really? Interesting. Hm. Then I guess my idea of an invincibility bank isn't really necessary.
Click to expand...
I'm almost positive. I could go re-test it, but I'm pretty sure it's the case.
 
ZIO

ZIO

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
10,884
Location
FREEDOM
Tomato is the only mod doin' his job, eh? Shouldn't this topic be closed? Could have placed the 1st post in this topic, or even the spam thread.

I SUPPOSE this topic has a purpose - enlightening us in how sad Brawl is to the series. Echo was telling me how much potential Brawl has since it depends on a different set of skills than Melee. But that video shows us just how some gamers want to take it - remove the fun, do what's necessary to win. What's the point of playing, then? I HOPE for the good of the smash scene we don't become "NO ITEMS! 4 STOCKS! ALL FOX! FINAL DESINATION ONLY" as we once were, cause that would suck, after getting to the size it has that it would see shrink due to these people.
 
actionblackbird

actionblackbird

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
483
Location
kissimmee
PLANKING

AHHHHHH!!!

YOU'LL B GOOD AT THEM!

IS A SMASH GAME FOR NOOBS, Brawl!!! (not melee)

but seriusly folks, is not banned in FL :p.
 
harriettheguy

harriettheguy

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
1,167
Location
On ya shield 20-fo-7
lol @ counterpick stages.

counterpicks encourage camping for some characters against others. people call them "advantageous for my character" but we all know it means "watch me suck d!ck"
the attacking chances were still there though.

we saw previously in rice vs -chad-, rice jumped in with dairs and got stuff started, or grabbed onto the wing and started from that.

bum approached 3:03 4:08 and ***** the camper.

xif was ****** at 2:36. the position of catching fox with a dash attack mirrors any other neutral stage (the left third of corneria) what enabled iori being able to toreador xif wasn't universal mechanics (i.e. auto-latch edges) but corneria. peach could totally corner a camping fox on any other neutral.

but there were no attacking chances in that mk ditto. even when it was on neutral settings. PS being a counterpick doesn't even apply to mk; there weren't any ddd's or foxes.

there is no option of fighting back in brawl
 
theONEjanitor

theONEjanitor

Smash Champion
Joined
May 31, 2006
Messages
2,497
Location
Birmingham, AL
NNID
the1janitor
harriettheguy said:
lol @ counterpick stages.

counterpicks encourage camping for some characters against others. people call them "advantageous for my character" but we all know it means "watch me suck d!ck"
the attacking chances were still there though.

we saw previously in rice vs -chad-, rice jumped in with dairs and got stuff started, or grabbed onto the wing and started from that.

bum approached 3:03 4:08 and ***** the camper.

xif was ****** at 2:36. the position of catching fox with a dash attack mirrors any other neutral stage (the left third of corneria) what enabled iori being able to toreador xif wasn't universal mechanics (i.e. auto-latch edges) but corneria. peach could totally corner a camping fox on any other neutral.

but there were no attacking chances in that mk ditto. even when it was on neutral settings. PS being a counterpick doesn't even apply to mk; there weren't any ddd's or foxes.

there is no option of fighting back in brawl
Click to expand...
I love confirmation bias.

yeah no one fights in brawl, this video is symbolic of every brawl match evar. ur totelly rite
yeah it was not possible to jump and interrupt the planking, you are rite. barlw is ghey
learn to play the game pl0x
auto latch edges has nothing to do with anything, you lose invincibility as soon as you let go of the ledge. meaning you can be hit. easily. see 7:20 of the MK video. these players are ********, the dudes charging f-smashes on the ledge, like that's going to work.

A campy fox is very very hard to beat in melee, ON ANY STAGE. Especially for a peach. I dont even know if the match is generally winnable for peach on most stages.

but nm lets all talk about how ghey this is just because its kul to jump on the barlw sux bandwagon even though it's easily beaten, should be banned anyway, and melee (and every other game ever) has just as much dumb stuff in it

the only difference between this and rice vs chad, is that rice vs chad eventually said "**** it, let's actually fight". Falco didn't have any openings to go an attack, he just didn't want to camp anymore so he just ran out there. and honestly he sacrificed his position in order to attack, and put himself in a bad place. the only reason he was able to gain momentum is because chad made a mistake with his upb.

its stalling anyway, which i dont understand why everyone isn't banning planking like this.
its virtually the exact same thing as wall bombing with peach.
(which is in melee)

we all play games with dumb stuff in it. get over it guyz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom