• 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 - More balanced than Melee? Lie or truth?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pink Reaper

Real Name No Gimmicks
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
8,333
Location
In the Air, Using Up b as an offensive move
You missed the point.

The general number I hear from good players is around 7-8, I listed Marth as a possible winner. People around here act like Brawl has a huge amount of viable characters, which really isn't true. It has a few more, but even that's debatable.
Really, the balance isn't about the number of viable "You could win with just this character" characters, its about the balance between the higher tier characters and the lower tier characters(Which Yuna has been saying all along) In terms of the upper tiers, Melee and Brawl are probably equally balanced, with a few really good characters at the top and a bunch of characters around the middle that can compete. Its at the bottom that they start to differ in that Melee's lower tier characters had ways to compete with its upper tiers in a way that was almost hilariously coincidental(The best characters in the game just happened to have the most amount of hit stun making them the easiest to combo) However in Brawl, the lower tier characters really have no way of dealing with those above them, thus tilting the balance scales.
 

Falconv1.0

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Talking **** in Cali
Really, the balance isn't about the number of viable "You could win with just this character" characters, its about the balance between the higher tier characters and the lower tier characters(Which Yuna has been saying all along) In terms of the upper tiers, Melee and Brawl are probably equally balanced, with a few really good characters at the top and a bunch of characters around the middle that can compete. Its at the bottom that they start to differ in that Melee's lower tier characters had ways to compete with its upper tiers in a way that was almost hilariously coincidental(The best characters in the game just happened to have the most amount of hit stun making them the easiest to combo) However in Brawl, the lower tier characters really have no way of dealing with those above them, thus tilting the balance scales.
I only stated that the difference between the amount of winning characters isn't that huge, wtf. Get off my case, you dont even know what I'm talking about, I never stated that either game was more balanced.

>_>
 

sagemoon

Smash Lord
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,162
Location
Lynnwood, WA
there was more broken things you could do in melee. It just took a hell of a lot more skill. In brawl, any noob can exploit the imbalances, in melee only the top players could really exploit the imbalances. Regardless they're both broken games.
 

Vyse

Faith, Hope, Love, Luck
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
9,561
Location
Brisbane, Australia
You missed the point.

The general number I hear from good players is around 7-8, I listed Marth as a possible winner. People around here act like Brawl has a huge amount of viable characters, which really isn't true. It has a few more, but even that's debatable.
AND Brawl has a larger cast, making its number of viable characters a smaller percentile of the total cast :)
 

Veil2222

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
204
Wow... not to hijack the thread or anything, but people are still talking about this? Good lord, it's barely even relevant anymore. At best this started out as a sub-argument in the astoundingly pointless "melee vs brawl" threads, now it's just.... well... pointless chatter. This is brawl tactical discussion, and all I've ever really seen in this thread since its creation is mostly talk of character proportions of brawl compared to melee, which at best, belongs in brawl character discussion.

All of these threads taper off with a "Well you've got your opinion and I have mine" stalemate since neither side has anything terribly concrete, and most of the steam being thrown around is just fueled by bias. There's not going to be a consensus on the issue, if you're discussing it just to discuss it, then treat it like that, but if you wanna rant on the subject because of a vendetta, bias, or an inability to yield your own opinion , you've gotta realize that this issue will *not* be concluded on opinion, hell, it wouldn't even be concluded by fact at this point. It's fairly irrelevant, and completely pointless, to continue argument on this subject, but if people *must* go on with it, I'd rather this thread be moved out of Brawl Tactical Discussion, since it has nothing to do with the subject of tactics in Brawl.
 

L__

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
4,459
Location
flopmerica
Wow... not to hijack the thread or anything, but people are still talking about this?
Of course, Smash is a franchise that will stay around for quite some time. Stop being so ignorant.

At best this started out as a sub-argument in the astoundingly pointless "melee vs brawl" threads,
So, for those who have actually played the game and quite extensively, is the game more balanced than Melee or not? I have yet to see a single credible person state this nor have I seen anyone reply to my challenges of "It's more balanced how?" (variations exist) with valid arguments (and by that I mean any arguments whatsoever besides "Because I think so").
really? I see it as a conversation that inquired intelligent conversation. not something YOU'RE doing.

Veil said:
Good lord, it's barely even relevant anymore.


Veil said:
now it's just.... well... pointless chatter.
really?

The general number I hear from good players is around 7-8, I listed Marth as a possible winner. People around here act like Brawl has a huge amount of viable characters, which really isn't true. It has a few more, but even that's debatable.
Up-B was nerfed. Fall speed is less. Illusion is the same. To me, Fox's recovery ability has barely improved/diminished. But this is a bit off-topic and I don't feel like arguing this any longer.

Melee's balance>Brawl's balance. Discuss?
Anyways i think Melee is more balanced then Brawl, but i still think that Brawl is tons of fun.
Veil said:
All of these threads taper off with a "Well you've got your opinion and I have mine"
thanks for pointing the obvious out.

veil said:
stalemate since neither side has anything terribly concrete,
Really?

http://hometown.aol.com/oovideogamegodoo/myhomepage/profile.html



veil said:
and most of the steam being thrown around is just fueled by bias.
THANK YOU...for pointing out THE MOST OBVIOUS THING!
veil said:
There's not going to be a consensus on the issue,
not going to? hmm... *looks at wars around the world* so those aren't going to end just because they contain conflicts with thousands of people right?


Veil said:
if you're discussing it just to discuss it, then treat it like that,
Yuna/OP said:
So, for those who have actually played the game and quite extensively, is the game more balanced than Melee or not? I have yet to see a single credible person state this nor have I seen anyone reply to my challenges of "It's more balanced how?" (variations exist) with valid arguments (and by that I mean any arguments whatsoever besides "Because I think so").
veil said:
but if you wanna rant on the subject because of a vendetta, bias, or an inability to yield your own opinion , you've gotta realize that this issue will *not* be concluded on opinion, hell, it wouldn't even be concluded by fact at this point.
See above.
veil said:
It's fairly irrelevant, and completely pointless,
Shut up, you're so stupid...I hate that people have such idiotic opinions and NOTHING to back it up. GTFO.

to continue argument on this subject, but if people *must* go on with it,
Why do you insist on people stopping due to your idiotic commands?

veil said:
I'd rather this thread be moved out of Brawl Tactical Discussion, since it has nothing to do with the subject of tactics in Brawl.
So who died and made you god of smashboards?
 

IrArby

Smash Ace
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
883
Location
Portsmouth VA
Wow... not to hijack the thread or anything, but people are still talking about this? Good lord, it's barely even relevant anymore. At best this started out as a sub-argument in the astoundingly pointless "melee vs brawl" threads, now it's just.... well... pointless chatter. This is brawl tactical discussion, and all I've ever really seen in this thread since its creation is mostly talk of character proportions of brawl compared to melee, which at best, belongs in brawl character discussion.

All of these threads taper off with a "Well you've got your opinion and I have mine" stalemate since neither side has anything terribly concrete, and most of the steam being thrown around is just fueled by bias. There's not going to be a consensus on the issue, if you're discussing it just to discuss it, then treat it like that, but if you wanna rant on the subject because of a vendetta, bias, or an inability to yield your own opinion , you've gotta realize that this issue will *not* be concluded on opinion, hell, it wouldn't even be concluded by fact at this point. It's fairly irrelevant, and completely pointless, to continue argument on this subject, but if people *must* go on with it, I'd rather this thread be moved out of Brawl Tactical Discussion, since it has nothing to do with the subject of tactics in Brawl.
Actually, most of the arguments taper off with Yuna or someone else intelligent winning an argument with some odd noob with only opinions much like yourself. Please stick around you could be next. I'm also pretty sure that in the last 4 pages I read to catch up with the thread, your post was the only ranting vendetta that tapered off with a biased opinion. The competition between posters of vying view points is a good thing for the discussion. If you don't think competition is good for the community, even in discussions like these, than you shouldn't be on this site.

And where the **** is Coreygames? That guy was good for intelligent posts every once in a while.
 

RDK

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
6,390
It's good to see Colonel Christmas still going at it with you guys.
 

The Halloween Captain

Smash Master
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,331
Location
The northeast
RDK's Colonel Christmas would be me:laugh:.

Veil is actually correct. Reguardless of his intelligence, he is right in saying all debate will boil down to opinion stalemates, which I dare say Yuna wins more out of patience and somewhat indirect (for my tastes) answers than anything else.

Part of the problem is consensus concerning who is viable, and opinion about how to measure viability. Are Pikachu, Lucario, and Pit viable in Brawl? I think so, but a lot of people disagree. Should viablility be measured by the number of characters that can compete, or the proportion of characters that can compete? number of characters is technically incorrect, but a larger number means more metagame variety, reguardless of actual proportions.

The greatest factor contributing to this debate's endurance would probably be disagreement on the evidence each side uses in its debate. I vehimently oppose using the tournament victory chart as evidence (as I've stated, GW destroys it) and Yuna doesn't believe any character beneath second best tier is viable.
 

Fawriel

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
4,245
Location
oblivion~
The one and only reason it's impossible to end this discussion is because few people actually read this thread.
 

JigglyZelda003

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
6,792
Location
Cleveland, OH
The one and only reason it's impossible to end this discussion is because few people actually read this thread.
really? i thought its cause they fail to read the last 10 pages? and then some people drop in with a random opinion, usually a repeated one, Yuna corrects it , usually again, then were back to square 1. with some people actually briging up evidence.

EDIT: and can someone answer my question about DK's viability please? ty in advance :)
 

Veil2222

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
204
I'm not going to fall into all the little flamebait traps set up for me here. I fully expected all of what's being thrown at me, but I really don't care, because most of my post wasn't about me.

Eventually people are just going to argue definitions and whether or not they apply to smash, they're going to argue how to quantify what's being argued, or if it's even possible to do so. Still, no one has told us how this is relevant to "Brawl Tactical Discussion", and somehow worthy of continued argument based on any sort of relevance. On the subject of argument, "competition" (what is competitive?...), verbal sparring, debate, whatever you want to call it, what's going on in this thread is *not* any of those. Unless, however, you count three or four people arguing for the sake of arguing on the subject of something they have an opinion about, and refuse to yield (mostly because "i'm right ur wrong here's a link taht sais so look at mah post count nd ur a noob").

Yeah, it's my opinion that this thread should be moved somewhere else. If you're a person who really thinks this is an important topic of discussion, it won't matter where the thread is, you'll find it, and discuss it. I just feel that the relevance for such an argument has passed, and it doesn't deserve a front page spot in a section that has nothing to do with this argument, especially since it won't come to any sort of useful conclusion for anyone here at SWF.
 

AlphaZealot

Former Smashboards Owner
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
12,731
Location
Bellevue, Washington
Wow... not to hijack the thread or anything, but people are still talking about this? Good lord, it's barely even relevant anymore. At best this started out as a sub-argument in the astoundingly pointless "melee vs brawl" threads, now it's just.... well... pointless chatter. This is brawl tactical discussion, and all I've ever really seen in this thread since its creation is mostly talk of character proportions of brawl compared to melee, which at best, belongs in brawl character discussion.
I agree with this, except with moving/recreating the thread. The arguments in this thread have been rehashed to many times at this point for anything new to come up.

Rest in peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom