Twin Dreams
Smash Ace
DK is a good example of a counter pick.
Can't he infinite some people?
Can't he infinite some people?
-
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?
- Thread starter Yuna
- Start date
- Status
I dunno. Snake, Meta and a few others have just as great advantages over characters like DK as Fox/Falco/Marth had in Melee.
I fully agree with the rest of this, but I think that Snake's boost smash is not the only reason he's a good slow character.
Unlike most slow characters, Snake has many fast attacks such as his AAA, amazing tilts, dash attack, upsmash to some extent, bair, nair, and fair.
He also has a solid projectile game.
But I think you're right about characters being unable to overcome their inherent weaknesses now. Many people thought and still think, unfortunately, that so called advanced techs such as wavedashing and l-canceling made Melee more unbalanced when in fact they allowed many characters such as Ganondorf, Mewtwo, Ice Climbers, Luigi and others to compete competently with the higher tier characters despite their weaknesses.
Now these characters have nothing to let them fight evenly with the top tier characters. Mind games are fine and all, but If I'm using Snake and I have mind games, and your using DK and you have mindgames, I think it's clear who has the advantage.
fallenangemon0
Smash Journeyman
Yuna... I really don't think Jiggs should be in bottom from you impressions. Thats just insane. You can't just say everything is nerfed and slap a "fail" sticker on it.
I'm not saying that Jiggs didn't get nerfed but you gotta consider that Jiggs still has a sick air game allowing her to intercept a lot of character's recoveries, all her Aerials got buffed:
Dair: causes tripping and can be spammed to make the foe KEEP tripping for easy damage.
Uair: can be used for repeated juggle combos and sometimes used in conjunction with Rest ( yes I know rest is crap but it still does good damage and knock back so don't compare it to the Melee version)
Fair: got the most nonsense buff ever. The sweetspot on this move is insane to say the least.
Bair: Ok so maybe its not for WoPing like it was in Melee but I've found a way to use this with her Nair for a new version of the WoP that works just as well.
Nair: Used to approach/combo into Rest/ intercept fast recoveries ( Fox, Marth, etc) and most importantly WoP.
Thanks to the new physics system Jiggs dying at above 90% is pretty standard now (thank god).
and those are only some examples.
Sorry if I had to make this post so lengthy but if I just made a statement and didn't support it id be an idiot.
I'm not saying that Jiggs didn't get nerfed but you gotta consider that Jiggs still has a sick air game allowing her to intercept a lot of character's recoveries, all her Aerials got buffed:
Dair: causes tripping and can be spammed to make the foe KEEP tripping for easy damage.
Uair: can be used for repeated juggle combos and sometimes used in conjunction with Rest ( yes I know rest is crap but it still does good damage and knock back so don't compare it to the Melee version)
Fair: got the most nonsense buff ever. The sweetspot on this move is insane to say the least.
Bair: Ok so maybe its not for WoPing like it was in Melee but I've found a way to use this with her Nair for a new version of the WoP that works just as well.
Nair: Used to approach/combo into Rest/ intercept fast recoveries ( Fox, Marth, etc) and most importantly WoP.
Thanks to the new physics system Jiggs dying at above 90% is pretty standard now (thank god).
and those are only some examples.
Sorry if I had to make this post so lengthy but if I just made a statement and didn't support it id be an idiot.
Orionsash26
Smash Rookie
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 5
melee is complete and udder trash... its as though every character is wearing shoes that weigh 100000000 tons and moving retardedly fast
Dark Sonic
Smash Hero
^^Oh noes, a game that makes you have to think quickly and actually learn how to play.
AlAxe
Smash Journeyman
I believe Brawl is much more balanced than melee. If you played shiek, fox, marth, or falco you pretty much dominated everyone else. Wavedashing and l-cancelling made some characters slightly more viable but the majority of people who played the game didn't wavedash or l-cancel. In fact melee was so unbalanced I would see experienced players using lower tier characters get shredded by shiek's that were much less skillful. I brawl even the most low tier characters stand a chance against the top in the hands of experienced players. This was not true of melee. I can see many more viable characters in Brawl than in melee. Snake, Marth, Falco, Wolf, Olimar, Toon Link, Game and Watch, MK, Kirby, DDD, ROB, shiek, Pit, Picachu, and Link can all compete with the top tier. I'm tired of hearing that the only worthwhile characters are Snake, MK, and maybe one other because its simply not true. In melee you pretty much had to play a top tier character to stand a chance. In Brawl this is not true.
Taymond
Smash Journeyman
Ooooh, it's just not true. I see. Sheesh, what a relief. I mean, here we had all this evidence, all these actual tournament results, you know, facts and the like. And they all said that MK and Snake place highest in tournaments almost infallibly.
But yeah, I guess if it's just not true because you say so, that, that reassures me.
But th gameplay isn't the same. Brawl is much more defensive, and that makes top tier characters in Melee not as effective, at least not as they game style used to be. I agree with you, but I don't think not having WD and LC alone makes Brawl less balanced. I am still dangling between both opinions.
ICANTCOUNT123456
Smash Journeyman
Look back at Melee tournaments, I guarantee Fox, Falco, Marth, Sheik, CF, or IC's won tourneys. With Brawl, the playing gap is much more leveled. (well it would be perfect if Snake didn't have those tilts of doom)
Orionsash26
Smash Rookie
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2007
- Messages
- 5
oh dear... yes indeed I have to think very quickly and learn to play... oh yes what game other game has made me do the same... oh yeah just about every other **** video game out there.
Sure melee was good back in the day, but all the little petty hardcore fanboys really need to stop complaining about how Brawl is "worse" than melee. If anyone wants to cry go learn how to make your own **** video games instead of complaining about the ones that are being made.
the smash community needs to grow and not be nerfed by all the whiners out there!
Samochan
Smash Master
Mango won pound 3 with jigglypuff. You lose.
Taymond
Smash Journeyman
Yeah, uh.. here's the thing. You can't just say things that are incorrect and expect the fact that they've been said to prove them somehow. You say "the playing gap is much more leveled." Well, that's terrific, but.. it isn't.
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=165954
MK and Snake have more than double the points of any other regularly-placing characters in this weighted placings list Ankoku put together. They have more than DOUBLE the score that the others have. Even excluding top8 placing, they still have more than double most characters below them, and even in wins alone, Snake has double what any other character has, and beyond a clear "top 5" in wins only, the rest of the cast has far less win representation. There's some evidence, some facts, something that isn't just my opinion to back up the things I'm saying. Where's yours? If you're trying to convince others of a fact you need more than your own blind adherence to a postulate.
Yeah, you're right. Melee had a clear top tier and a clear high tier, and those tiers held the majority of tournament placings. I'm not seeing, at all, how that is any different than what is going on right now. You tell me where the difference is.
FeArTeHsMaSh
Smash Cadet
I think that tournament data is slowly showing that Brawl will be just as imbalanced as Melee - except there is a high chance that the discrepancy between the top tier characters in Brawl will be greater than such in Melee, i.e. , Snake, Metaknight, unless we create an extra God Tier List, then the traditional Top, High, etc.
But all arguments that Brawl is more balanced are arguments based on nothing more than faith.
But all arguments that Brawl is more balanced are arguments based on nothing more than faith.
You suck.
Melee for the most part was balanced, even the low tier characters stood a chance. In Brawl compared to the top 3-5 characters every other character is garbage tier. What most people don't understand is in Melee the majority of the community and top-level players used Fox, Falco, Sheik, Marth, Peach etc...not because they were overpowered or those characters were their only options of winning, it was because those characters increased your chances of winning. Of course this made things more difficult for characters such as CF, Link etc...but that doesn't change the fact those characters were still very playable at high-level competition. The only reason why we didn't see Link's winning tournaments is due to the fact the "best" players used the characters that gave them a greater chance at winning a tournament. In Brawl you are FORCED to use the best because they completely **** every other character in the game.
denizen
Smash Apprentice
too early to tell i think...but i think it's pretty balanced.
FishkeeperTimmay!
Smash Ace
The game isn't effin balanced right now. If your character can't approach, you're sunk in this game. Only a handful can.
Fewer actually have a defensive enough game to keep high up, but even then, what if your opponent never approaches? Defensive characters STILL require **** good projectiles to force approaches.
Not many characters run in the middle well. Only Snake, the god of Brawl.
As power-shielding gets more precise, projectiles will be less useful, and then we'll only have the characters that can approach OR spam projectile so bad that power-shielding doesn't help much. That'll likely leave 10 characters PLAYABLE in a game of almost 40.
At least in Melee I could play the bottom tiers and make it in a few freakin' rounds. >.<
Fewer actually have a defensive enough game to keep high up, but even then, what if your opponent never approaches? Defensive characters STILL require **** good projectiles to force approaches.
Not many characters run in the middle well. Only Snake, the god of Brawl.
As power-shielding gets more precise, projectiles will be less useful, and then we'll only have the characters that can approach OR spam projectile so bad that power-shielding doesn't help much. That'll likely leave 10 characters PLAYABLE in a game of almost 40.
At least in Melee I could play the bottom tiers and make it in a few freakin' rounds. >.<
GetSmashedWithTheBros
Smash Apprentice
more characters = more counter-characters = more balance
woo simple logic
woo simple logic
GetSmashedWithTheBros
Smash Apprentice
Rebel581
Smash Champion
One has had 7 years. One has had less than 7 months.
MajinSweet
Smash Journeyman
More characters also increases the chance of the developers making a huge flaw that changes one character from balanced to broken. Its pretty easy to balance a fighter when you only need to make 2 characters. Now try making 100 original and different characters, the chances of the game being balanced are slim to none.
Agreed...as long as there is a myriad of characters each with unique techniques and types of gameplay..any game should be pretty balanced..that takes into account that each player has relatively equal intelligence and skill.
*edit* and to the above..your assuming that the developers are..ignorant? or just not keen enough to know that as more chars enter..more options must be essentially diluted into the gene pool of techniques and all. I have decent faith in nintendo that they know how to create a good game..but then again..I could be wrong..oh well =[
Fire!
Smash Champion
That only matters if you CHOOSE the flawed char
NESSBOUNDER
Smash Master
Brawl isn't a traditional fighter. There are less techniques available to each character's movelist. So I don't think that a large roster is the problem when it comes to unbalancing the game.
It's oversights and lack of playtesting which truly unbalance the game.
It's oversights and lack of playtesting which truly unbalance the game.
MajinSweet
Smash Journeyman
Wow...you really don't have a clue about this subject do you? For one, I really doubt game balance was one of there biggest concerns when making Brawl, hell they might not have even put much thought into it. That alone makes it very easy for one character to basically be a broken character, (Snake) Secondly, even if your most desired intention of the game your making is balance, (StarCraft) its still impossible to factor in every possible thing if the game your making has lots of characters and options. A broken tactic WILL emerge. (Starcraft has had countless patches since release, Brawl will not have any)
Trying to make a game balanced requires TONS AND TONS of testing, then tweaking, and then more testing. And then some more tweaking and again, more testing. Then tweak it some more. Oh yeah, need to test again. Okay, tweak one last time. Wait, gotta test that--you get the idea?
A lot of you guys are REALLY under estimating the difficulty of "trying" to make a balanced game. I put that in quotes because its pretty much impossible for a game to be balanced. Wanna hear something that will blow your mind? Chess isn't even perfectly balanced. All the same pieces on each side, how is that possible you ask? The side that goes first has a 50.5% chance of winning if I recall. And make sure you add to that fact that Brawl was probably never even designed with balance really in mind. Sakurai has even said he didn't really want the game to be played at a competitive level.
Taymond
Smash Journeyman
What a fantastically irrelevant fact. Only one character in the top 5 of SSBM's first ever tier list did not remain in the top 5 the entire lifespan of the game. The first top 5 had Marth, Mario, Falco, Fox, and Sheik (not in correct order), and every subsequent tierlist had Marth, Peach, Falco, Fox, and Sheik in the top 5.
First impressions aren't perfect, no, but they're not usually far off the mark. People have this misconception that the Melee tier list took 16 years to develop an initial draft of, and that the general placing of the characters fluctuated drastically over the years. It didn't. From the 2nd tier list through the 8th, the top 5 characters were the same, but merely fluctuated in order to small degrees. Mario was the 5th ranked character in the first tierlist, and thus, clearly the most subject to change of the 5.
There was no point when Yoshi and Pichu were high tier. The characters that were clearly the best in that first tier list were STILL clearly the best 8 years later. The changes over time were not as dramatic as people choose to pretend. Players knew from day one that Marth, Sheik, Fox, and Falco would forever dominate the game, and they were right.
Snake and MK aren't a little bit better than the other characters. They're completely outclassing them in tournament results. No one even compares, save Wario in wins alone. Sure, we can't be certain now who's going to be eventually better out of say, Dedede, Marth, G&W, ROB, Wario, Pikachu, Wolf, or other fairly good characters. We have no illusions that those characters--all the characters--will fluctuate in small degrees in the tier list throughout the game's lifespan. But there is NO reason to question that MK and Snake will be in the top 5 characters years from now.
What's so wrong with our impression of the game at this point? We don't know 1 or 2 secret techs that *might* affect the metagame in small, menial ways? We can see perfectly well how the characters stack up against each other, and how plainly a certain two outclass the rest. We can see pretty clearly what Brawl's general style and game mechanics require, and who are best suited to excel in that environment.
Yeah, you're right. Melee was around a lot longer than Brawl. The early Melee tier lists must've been wrong, right? How could they possibly have known what would be the case several years down the road? 'Cause Marth, Fox, Falco, and Sheik sure do suck!
Edit: @ Zenonfury: You think that the more variables that are introduced into a game environment, the easier it is to balance them out? Havin' a tough time wrappin' my head around that one, lemme tell ya.
The first tier list will most likely be more of an outline of what is to be expected in the future but likely will lead up directly into a second more accurate tier list assuming that popularity has no longer become as much of an issue at this point; I believe the first tier list will cause some players to flock to high tier characters but at the same time draw in people for the challenge of playing those considered low tier to find out what true potential such characters may have.
*Sorry about the run-on sentence*
*Sorry about the run-on sentence*
Kikuichimonji
Smash Apprentice
A large number of characters is more likely to be self-balancing, because it allows for more intricate rock-paper-scissors chains. If a character has good matchups against two or more high-tier characters but is otherwise trash, it might see play because those characters are widely used. Moreover, in a tournament where you are allowed to change your character choice, then it becomes easier to counter said characters by simply switching between matches. This won't turn matches into "counter your counter"-fests in a deep enough game because of the amount of nontransferrable skill required to pick up a character in the first place - it has to be something planned in advance. In the end, this theoretically leads to a more diverse metagame.
Whether Smash has this feature or not is debatable. However, the chance of this quality increases the more characters there are.
Samochan
Smash Master
Lawl, tell me how is yoshi, link or ganondorf gonna be any good when compared to Rob for example? Last time I checked, Link was superior in popularity compared to everyone else in the whole effing game universe, as proven many times in gamefaq character battles and in overall, his popularity in both melee and brawl. And Rob? He was hated by everyone cause he got in before Krystal and Ridley. And yet he places way higher than Link ever will be, simply because he's a better character gameplay wise.
Please, think before you post.
Sikarios
Smash Cadet
I see what Taymond is saying, and I agree that Snake and MK are gonna remain top tiers. I've never played a good MK, which is is unfortunate b/c when I do get to a tournament that is probably what will beat me. But I have played good Snakes and Snake does have levels and characters that are excellent counterpicks. Don't know if this is true for MK.
zzzzzzzzzz
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2007
- Messages
- 57
how many characters there are changes nothing, as the number of characters are already factored into the current list which have MK and snake on top. being able to counter pick characters does not add to balance, its like saying this character is so good i need a specific character to counter him. also characters like MK and snake are so versatile they can play around counter picks causing little to no advantage from counter picking. the true meaning of balance is that every character should have a close to even chance of beating every other character.
Its to early to know which is more balanced. Right now, people think Meta is god. People once thought the same of Sheik in Melee, but the game evolved, people learned to counter Sheik. The game will only be unbalanced if we cannot find a counter to certain character, yet, I know Diddy and Donky are not great characters but do fine in the Meta match up.
You would not be making or reaching the conclusions your making Yuna if you were around for Melee in 2003.
You would not be making or reaching the conclusions your making Yuna if you were around for Melee in 2003.
Ch0zen0ne
Smash Lord
Forgot to mention, the reason you don't hear many notable people compare the balance of Melee and Brawl is because most realize it is simply to early to reach any sort of conclusion.
Shark Week
Smash Apprentice
i forget which game it was, but there was some 2d fighter in the past that just had so much stuff in it that the community wasn't able to really grasp how the game was balanced for at least a couple of years.
now, i'm not saying brawl will definitely be like that game, but throwing a TON of random things into a fighter has been shown to actually keep the metagame fairly fresh, at least for a while.
Correct me if Im wrong, but doesn't MvC have a **** ton of characters but only like, 7 usable ones? And I don't mean like, 7 high tiers, I mean 7 characters that are the ONLY ones ever used.
br4n
Smash Apprentice
seems to me the gap between good and bad is alot more defined this time around.
Amen to that brother.
The difference in quality between the best and the worst characters doesn't matter when considering how balanced the game is. Let's suppose that we compare two games, Brawl and Brawl+. Brawl+ is the same as Brawl except a new character has been added who has no attacks and also can't move. This character is obviously the worst character in the game and it's far worse than any other previous character in the game, so now the difference in quality between the best and worst character is a lot bigger. But since that character is never going to be selected anyway (i.e. you could play Brawl+ as though it were Brawl), I would say Brawl and Brawl+ are equally balanced.
With a similar argument it can be shown that the ratio of characters who are viable also does not matter per se.
What really defines balance is the (absolute) number of characters in the game who are viable. "Viable" will require a definition itself. If the Brawl tier system ends up using the same number of tiers as Melee, then a decent comparison of balance would be the number of characters in Mid Tier or higher.
As for the original question, simply because there are a lot more characters in Brawl, it seems likely Brawl will end up being more balanced... but it's also possible a large ratio of them will end up not being viable, so it's too early to answer the question.
With a similar argument it can be shown that the ratio of characters who are viable also does not matter per se.
What really defines balance is the (absolute) number of characters in the game who are viable. "Viable" will require a definition itself. If the Brawl tier system ends up using the same number of tiers as Melee, then a decent comparison of balance would be the number of characters in Mid Tier or higher.
As for the original question, simply because there are a lot more characters in Brawl, it seems likely Brawl will end up being more balanced... but it's also possible a large ratio of them will end up not being viable, so it's too early to answer the question.
- Status