Brawl+ - Official 5.0 RC1 Build is now online! (Re-Use Autoupdater, Snake bug fixed)

[SymphonicSage12]

After reading all the fuss in the last day of posts or so, I would be fine with adding Melee's system (or a variation thereof), where the damage stales but the KB doesn't.

 

[Mattnumbers]

I'm on the Anti-SMN side, as it really wouldn't add much to the game at all; it would just make matches take longer.

 

[kupo15]

So let me get this straight Kupo.

A very small, almost nonexistent damage staling system will add diversity by messing with damage output in very small amounts, and thus lead to the possibility of different combos and more inventive gameplay?

I just want to be sure before I say anything else. I wish to know, in layman's terms, why you want the damage stale system.

That is part of it. Another part is to not reward spamming (like projectiles which are easy to do) and another reason is to make the game slightly more challenging to pull off combos which this game really needs. Why do I have a feeling that you are about to tell me I'm wrong?

Secondly, reducing KB does not make combos more interesting, because a move with low KB is EASIER to combo off of, and you could just create big chains of the same move, then finish off with a "fresh" one.

You just made a rebuttal for me. Reducing kb can actually create more interesting combos. Don't forget that a combo isn't just moves linked during hitstun but it also includes strings as well which are more challenging to pull off which lead to another two hit combo. So if you have a slightly staled move, it may not tumble at 0% like your used too. That is another thing that makes combos so much easier. Did you know that a lot of moves send into the tumble much earlier than they did in melee? Part of it is the setting of your hitstun (because that also controls when moves send to tumble) and a little bit is also no SMS. The knee doesn't tumble in melee when hit at 0% like it does in Brawl+. IIRC, the knee doesn't tumble until hit at 10% unless of course its a little staled then the percent would be off by a few percents.

stale moves has never been good. It's just a handicap for the guy who hits the most.

Nice. A non programmer telling all the fighting game development teams that they are wrong and don't know what they are doing. Thanks for that!

If you want to design a system that can actually reward players instead of stealing damage output be my guest. But stale moves is no "Super Meter" it's the exact opposite.

You're in luck because I actually have developed system designed to reward players. Its called "damage," "knockback," and "hitstun."

Because to make the melee system it would have to be knockback compensated? So yes, subsequent actions in a string would be effected, but it wouldn't change my marginal use of a move which is the effect I *thought* we were aiming to instate with SMN.

Sure, shanus. If that is your reasoning behind adding SMN to the game, then add SMN. Then this debate will be done.

Stale moves just makes the game take longer. 4-stock Brawl+ matches already take way too long as is. Leave it alone.

Well, with the revamp of your brand new ledge system, any move that was even a pixel away from KOing will at least set up for a edge guard and now that you have the ability edge guard legitimately, matches should be lasting much longer. And if that isn't enough, maybe consider increasing growth kb to select kill moves. In comparison to melee, mos moves are much weaker and don't get strong enough, fast enough.

Why do I get the feeling that you are still thinking of Vbrawl's SMN?

 

[Doval]

I never ever, ever, not once kept track of my "state" when I play melee. Ever.

Of course not. There was no need. Knockback didn't stale. Yes, the damage is calculated using the opponent's final % number; but the KBG was the same, and that's by far the most important detail. There was no difference between doing a 15% move at 90%, and doing the same move now staled to 13% at 92%. Same end result. Reliable.

You can not focus your game on getting your opponent to 73% every stock in order to attempt this combo you want to do.

Again, no need to. Combos don't work at precise %'s. They work on % ranges. I don't need to have my opponent at precisely 27% to hit him with a combo that works from, say, 27% to 56%. I don't even have to know the precise start and end %'s. A ballpark is enough, as more often than not the enemy's % won't end up close enough to the start and end %'s to worry about it.

The point is, there is nothing wrong with not knowing what will happen because if you are skilled enough, when the combo opens up that you weren't expecting, you will be able to recognize it and perform it

How's that? Not a single fighting game screws around with the reliability of combos. Different games implement all sorts of penalties to prevent long combos from being too strong, but they never arbitrarily mix up which moves will combo. I can't think of any fighter that does that besides Smash. For that matter, I can't think of any fighter that reduces a specific move's properties if it's spammed. They don't care. They simply gimp subsequent combo hits, no matter what those hits are.

I don't believe for a minute that you can say that it is impossible to be able to adapt to new situations if a stale system is in place when there was one in melee and players could adapt to new situations in an inherently much faster, thinking on your feet game.

Again, Melee's stale move system was practically pointless. There was no need to adapt; it didn't change the combos. It just moved the ranges at which a combo would work (or a move would kill) marginally. If a combo worked from 20 to 40, a 2% (arbitrary number here) reduction in the move's damage shifted the combo range from 22 to 42%

Did the stale system ruin staple combos in melee? What is your basis on claiming that a proper stale moves system will ruin staple combos?

It did not. I apologize for this one. I didn't think it through properly. I figured I'd wait for you to post rather than edit the previous post for the billionth time.

However, I return that inquiry with the other side of that coin - how does Stale Moves introduce new combos? In nerfing a move's knockback, all you're doing is enabling the player to use a combo starter that only works at a lower %, at a higher %'s. The follow up will be the same; it's not like the move's trajectory has been changed or anything.

More importantly, how is applying a universal mechanic a good way to address specific flaws? I think this is the key issue here. It's not like applying Stale Moves is the only way to increase combo diversity. Rather than attacking the root causes that make Brawl+'s combos not as varied as Melee's - gravity, the stun constant, and the characters' moves themselves, you're proposing screwing around with the way ALL combos work in the hopes that this blanket change will trigger new combo possibilities and no unbalances. But something will break, I think we all know that. You don't expect to implement a change that permeates every move every character has and expect nothing to break somewhere. That's extra rebalancing work just to fix moves that weren't broken.

Well, if you look at melee, it has the defense mechanics in place to combat projectile spam already, yet it also has a more powerful stale system for the projectiles as well. Do you have any explanation as to why that is? Did it made the game terrible for having it and if so, why?

I have no idea why that is; probably to cut newbs some slack, since they won't have the technical skill to make use of the mechanisms the game has to work around spamming. Still, that's comparing apples to oranges. Or perhaps they were taking into consideration that Smash isn't strictly a 1vs1 game, and you can get away with spamming in Teams or Free For Alls. But projectiles seldom participate in combos, and practically never combo into themselves. Whatever sort of Stale Moves was applied to projectiles in Melee is totally irrelevant as to what that same Stale Moves implementation would do to combos.

And, while it wasn't problematic, I don't think Melee's Stale Moves for projectiles was optimal either. This is something I believe should be done on a case by case basis, much like tweaking a characters' moves to make them conducive to combos. Not all projectiles are equal, and not all characters use them for the same purposes. Yoshi's Egg Toss is nowhere near as easy to use as, say, Fox's Lasers. Why should the Eggs be penalized the same, then? It takes real effort to land an egg, whereas it's practically inevitable for the opponent to be hit by some lasers if the Fox opts to run around and spam. Moreover, the lasers are really just supplemental and safe damage to Fox; the eggs are more than just damage to Yoshi, they restrict the opponent's approach options.

 

[JCaesar]

Why do I get the feeling that you are still thinking of Vbrawl's SMN?

Not I. I'm pretty sure everyone in here agreed that Brawl's system is total garbage, and we're basically only debating whether to add Melee's system or something similar. But moves doing less damage = longer stocks, even though it may be barely noticeable. But like you said, hopefully the problem of Brawl+ matches taking too long will be solved in other ways.

Regardless, I think move staling is pointless. I might be willing to support move staling for specials only though. It's much less likely to break something (as Doval put so elegantly) and it would further reduce the effectiveness of camping, which, even as a ROB main, I think is a good thing.

 

[IC3R]

Would that be all specials or just the projectiles?

Falcon Punch staling? Blasphemy!

 

[Plum]

Would that be all specials or just the projectiles?

Falcon Punch staling? Blasphemy!

Yeah, because every single player I know lands enough Falcon Punch's in a match, let alone in a row to actually stale it.

:V

 

[IC3R]

lol I figured someone would say that

I suppose staling would be fine on all specials.

 

[zxeon]

Nice. A non programmer telling all the fighting game development teams that they are wrong and don't know what they are doing. Thanks for that!

Think nothing of it.

By the way, you don't need to be a programmer to see that stale moves is a ton of horse ****. If you ask anyone that plays Melee how they compensated for stale moves you'd get blank stares. Because stale moves never brought any combo to a screeching halt you never needed to worry about it and what's the point of keeping a mechanic that fails to do it's job?

If I'm not under imminent threat of nothing less than a complete reversal you won't be able to get me to stop and a system that can would be meddling with human interaction too much.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Why would it matter to implement it if it wouldn't make enough of a difference to be noticeable (this IS what we're going for, right?)?

 

[zxeon]

Who's going for what?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Making it like melee; AKA nobody gave a ****.

 

[cubaisdeath]

once b+ becomes too much like melee people will stop playing it

 

[Mattnumbers]

I don't want any form of staling, not even on specials. Defensive playstyles should still be possible, and they aren't going to be OP after we fix AD's/Rolls/Spotdodges/make gimping easier.

 

[cubaisdeath]

I dunno, I think that damage staling is fine, but i hated the whole KB staling thing in brawl

 

[Plum]

Why would it matter to implement it if it wouldn't make enough of a difference to be noticeable (this IS what we're going for, right?)?

If the difference is so insignificant that it is virtually impossible to notice a difference in your performance because of it then why even bother with it?

What issue does it solve if you can't even notice its existence while playing?

Let's face it, Melee's stale move system served no purpose whatsoever, and nobody varied their combos because of it. Brawl's stale move system actually set out to make a noticeable change in gameplay, but it failed miserably. Melee's served no purpose. Any where in between is trying to fix something that really isn't problematic.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

If the difference is so insignificant that it is virtually impossible to notice a difference in your performance because of it then why even bother with it?

What issue does it solve if you can't even notice its existence while playing?

Let's face it, Melee's stale move system served no purpose whatsoever, and nobody varied their combos because of it. Brawl's stale move system actually set out to make a noticeable change in gameplay, but it failed miserably. Melee's served no purpose. Any where in between is trying to fix something that really isn't problematic.

This is my point.

 

[Alphatron]

Staling on smash attacks only? Not melee staling, but the way vbrawl does it. If your smash attacks are all stale when the killing percentage comes around, you've done something wrong.

If your smashes are used as damage rackers then 90% of the time, they aren't kill moves anyway. Would also make DI more important around this time.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Staling on smash attacks only? Not melee staling, but the way vbrawl does it. If your smash attacks are all stale when the killing percentage comes around, you've done something wrong.

If your smashes are used as damage rackers then 90% of the time, they aren't kill moves anyway. Would also make DI more important around this time.

Selective staling actually does sound like a good idea in some cases. Like on falcon punch. :V

 

[WheelOfFish]

*headdesk*

It would be a SUBTLE difference, not an UNNOTICEABLE difference.

It isn't to screw with killing moves, it's to lead to more extensive and diverse combos. KB staling is stupid, at least the way vBrawl implemented it. Damage staling alone is what worked for Melee, and I'm pretty sure it affected Melee's combos (though I obviously don't know how Melee feels without SMN), because doing attacks repeatedly would mean staled damage, and at a lower damage, the attacks wouldn't have as much knockback.

It would be nice to test it before deciding it's a bad idea.

 

[El Raspa]

Hi, a little question

How much time It will take to release a final Brawl+ version??

A few months ago I tought that we were close to have it, but now I don't

Regards :D

 

[Demacrez]

Funny thing is... people say this game isn't Melee 2.0 but everything is still referring to Melee for changes. Some people say to have this because Melee had it. I though this was Brawl+, a different game on its own not Melee 2.0.

 

[Dan_X]

Again... There is no need for a stale system. Furthermore, selective move staling is unnecessary. Some characters rely on their projectiles very intimately. Many of them rely on said projectiles as an important damage output. There's no reason to nerf the projectile game. If stale moves are felt anywhere quickly, it's definately projectiles. Generally they are something you consistently use, as such, you stale then very quickly. If the enemy can't deal with spam that's their problem. Not only is it easy to power shield in Brawl+, as opposed to Melee, but many characters can crawl, many characters have a means with which to reflect projectiles; Mario, Falco, Fox, Wolf, Zelda, Rob, Pit... Then, as I mentioned, some of those who can't reflect also have a 1UP on projectiles as they can crawl; squirtle, pika, ZSS, Snake, Luigi, Shiek, etc... Oh, how could I possibly forget to mention Lucas and Ness, who absorb most projectiles.

My point is, there are plenty of options against projectiles, there's no reason for them to stale as it would greatly reduce the effectiveness of said projectiles. If say Fox's or Falco's lasers dropped to their weakest after 4-6 shots, which would happen quickly, how is that not an outright nerf to projectiles which don't need to be nerfed. Without a stale system such changes have been made to make sure projectiles weren't to good, for example Falco's lasers have dropped to 2 damage from 3. Though, he now shoots only one laser at a time as opposed to 2 in his SHDL so perhaps that damage nerf isn't even needed now.

 

[zxeon]

Why are we still talking about this? let's move on.

Hi, a little question

How much time It will take to release a final Brawl+ version??

A few months ago I tought that we were close to have it, but now I don't

Regards :D

There should be a new official set soon. At least thats the story out of the WBR.

 

[WheelOfFish]

Funny thing is... people say this game isn't Melee 2.0 but everything is still referring to Melee for changes. Some people say to have this because Melee had it. I though this was Brawl+, a different game on its own not Melee 2.0.

But that doesn't mean that we should avoid putting in good mechanics from Melee. I mean, Brawl's physics engine is too different from Melee's to ever become a Melee 2.0. Brawl+ also goes by the idea of easy to pick up, hard to master (though the hard to master part needs a little work). Melee was both hard to pick up and hard to master. These suggestions are more to improve Brawl+ than to emulate Melee.

 

[Starscream]

Funny thing is... people say this game isn't Melee 2.0 but everything is still referring to Melee for changes. Some people say to have this because Melee had it. I though this was Brawl+, a different game on its own not Melee 2.0.

Except that Melee is a better game than Brawl and Brawl+ and viewed by many as the pinnacle of the Smash series. If Melee did something well, and it would make Brawl+ a better game to add it then wouldn't it be ******** not to just because it's "too much like Melee"?

 

[El Raspa]

There should be a new official set soon. At least thats the story out of the WBR.

Thanks a lot

I'm in Mexico and one of the reasons for people not getting into Brawl+ is that they are never updated and it desyncs. (Also the Brawl+ scene is very very little but that is a different story)

I wouldn't get mad if Brawl+ turned to be a melee 2.0 the matches from melee still are more exiting

Althougth I think that "melee 2.0" should be a different project but anyone is taking that responsibility and if someone does the result may be the same that in melee, just the quickest characters would be tourney able

Sorry for my bad english

 

[thesage]

Ness and Pikachu were both pretty fast characters in melee yet neither are considered tournament viable by the majority of the cast.

 

[DarkDragoon]

._. Well, guys, if you think about it...the KB Reduction was probably responsible for the little things like not being able to [easily]DI out of Marth's UThrow-Utilt combo on Fox and other similar combos.

Just sayin', it probably did have its place.
-DD

 

[Mattnumbers]

But that doesn't mean that we should avoid putting in good mechanics from Melee. I mean, Brawl's physics engine is too different from Melee's to ever become a Melee 2.0. Brawl+ also goes by the idea of easy to pick up, hard to master (though the hard to master part needs a little work). Melee was both hard to pick up and hard to master. These suggestions are more to improve Brawl+ than to emulate Melee.

Damage staling wasn't even a good mechanic from Melee though, it was something most people knew about but didn't actually change their playstyle to fit. Usually even if your best strategy does slightly less damage after the first time your still going to do it since it's your best strategy.

Also Orca said what I was getting at earlier, Brawl+ is not too campy; there is no reason to nerf projectile users.

 

[WhalesOnStilts]

nightlies more like monthlies
lol im so clever

 

[kupo15]

There is a TL;DR for those of you who are not named Doval or don't really care.

Of course not. There was no need. Knockback didn't stale. Yes, the damage is calculated using the opponent's final % number; but the KBG was the same, and that's by far the most important detail. There was no difference between doing a 15% move at 90%, and doing the same move now staled to 13% at 92%. Same end result. Reliable.

Melee is very precise and things down to the frame matters much more. The assumption was if you hit someone at 90% with a fresh move, it would act a little different then if it was stalled at 90%. Not that a fresh move at 90% would yield the same result as a stale move at 93%. I could just as easily come up with the exact same scenario for Vbrawl's garbage SMN.

How's that? Not a single fighting game screws around with the reliability of combos. Different games implement all sorts of penalties to prevent long combos from being too strong, but they never arbitrarily mix up which moves will combo. I can't think of any fighter that does that besides Smash. For that matter, I can't think of any fighter that reduces a specific move's properties if it's spammed. They don't care. They simply gimp subsequent combo hits, no matter what those hits are.

You say that other fighting games have all sorts of penalties to prevent long combos from being too strong, well, how is Melee's SMN any different than that but tailored to work for its game? Smash combos are nothing like Traditional Fighting combos. You can't do the long inescapable combos like them (excluding waveshines ect) so it wouldn't make any sense to have that sort of system in smash. You seem to accept this form of Stale moves in traditional fighters, why don't you accept that maybe this is so that your smaller staple combos are not too strong just like the other games?

And sigh. How can I make this any clearer. Reliable combos are a good thing and stale moves won't suddenly and arbitrarily force reliable combos to not work. It won't make combos like stomp to knee impossible, but the unpredictability of how to execute that combo will matter. A fresh stomp might send them x high but a stale one will send them slightly lower in which you need to be on your toes to adjust for it.

Again, Melee's stale move system was practically pointless. There was no need to adapt; it didn't change the combos. It just moved the ranges at which a combo would work (or a move would kill) marginally. If a combo worked from 20 to 40, a 2% (arbitrary number here) reduction in the move's damage shifted the combo range from 22 to 42%

What is your basis that it was pointless? As it stands, you just stated an opinion.

IMO, you did adapt to the stale moves system in melee, sorta subconsciously. You didn't think "Ok, now this move is a little stale, so according to my calculations, I have to adapt like this." No. You had to be quick to identify any differences that you encountered and if you could, the combo would still work

However, I return that inquiry with the other side of that coin - how does Stale Moves introduce new combos? In nerfing a move's knockback, all you're doing is enabling the player to use a combo starter that only works at a lower %, at a higher %'s. The follow up will be the same; it's not like the move's trajectory has been changed or anything.

Remember, combos are not just what happens during hitstun, but they are also made up of strings. If you have a stale move, the knockback will be less than without SMN therefore you will can close the gap and pressure in the air better because they are closer. So you are correct in how it can effect staple combos, but it can also help with zoning a little better for strings which are also "combos."

More importantly, how is applying a universal mechanic a good way to address specific flaws? I think this is the key issue here. It's not like applying Stale Moves is the only way to increase combo diversity.

I can't answer this because it all depends on what is deemed a specific flaw and why its labeled as such

Rather than attacking the root causes that make Brawl+'s combos not as varied as Melee's - gravity, the stun constant, and the characters' moves themselves, you're proposing screwing around with the way ALL combos work in the hopes that this blanket change will trigger new combo possibilities and no unbalances. But something will break, I think we all know that. You don't expect to implement a change that permeates every move every character has and expect nothing to break somewhere.

I don't see how stale damage will screw up and imbalance the entire game. Staple combos will still work and strings will get a little bit of help. I consider SMN just one of several ways to diversify the combo game along side of the other things you mentioned like gravity ect..

That's extra rebalancing work just to fix moves that weren't broken.

Not my fault that the WBR decided to spend a bunch of time doing extensive character balancing before all the game mechanics were in place.

But projectiles seldom participate in combos, and practically never combo into themselves. Whatever sort of Stale Moves was applied to projectiles in Melee is totally irrelevant as to what that same Stale Moves implementation would do to combos.

Really? I can think of loads of projectiles that participate in combos, in both true combos and to help zoning for strings (you know, the other form of comboing you apparently keep forgetting about!)

Falco: Lasers can combo into themselves which sets up for fsmash as one example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND8B-hiNIZ4

YLinks arrows and boomerang can combo into just about any of his primary kill moves.

Link: See that one clip in "You must recover" where the up b finisher failed

Samus: Missle canceling. Dair to charge shot. Missle to attack

Doc: His pills are so effective with zoning, can be spammed and you can combo off of pills if you are close enough

Pika: The jolt in the air. See: SSB Metagame

Ectetera..

Not all projectiles are equal, and not all characters use them for the same purposes. Yoshi's Egg Toss is nowhere near as easy to use as, say, Fox's Lasers. Why should the Eggs be penalized the same, then?

Well, Yoshi's eggs do knockback and can combo into kill moves whereas Fox's can't. I feel that projectiles are pretty balanced for the most part due to how they are used. Fox's lasers don't set up for kill moves and can't kill by themselves but its easy damage. Yoshi's eggs can set up for other moves and gimp offstage as well. You wouldn't want easy damage (lasers) not to stale out just like you don't want gimping and comboing projectiles (eggs) to not stale out as well. (lulz 64 eggs)

Why would it matter to implement it if it wouldn't make enough of a difference to be noticeable (this IS what we're going for, right?)?

Subtle, not unnoticeable. The point I was trying to make when I said unnoticeable was that the stale system wouldn't be as noticeable as Vbrawl's where it would get in the way. I see people are taking it too far.

Let's face it, Melee's stale move system served no purpose whatsoever, and nobody varied their combos because of it. Brawl's stale move system actually set out to make a noticeable change in gameplay, but it failed miserably. Melee's served no purpose. Any where in between is trying to fix something that really isn't problematic.

What proof do you have that allows you to just say "Melee's stale system was pointless?" 64 was no doubt made for competition (or else it wouldn't be competitive) and it had a stale move system. Melee is also very competitive and improved a lot if not all of 64's competitive mechanics so there must have been a purpose into introducing the mechanic to the original, competitive game and I fail to believe how the SMN would be the only mechanic not set out to be an improvement over the original. It also can't be pointless if so many users in the community are saying that they want and/or are fine with Melee's damage only stale system.

//

TL;DR

Enough theory-crafting, can you guys just try it out? There is a code to adjust Vbrawl's stale system. Do me a favor and set it to a really weak system and maybe end the queue at 4 or 5 as well. This is just so you can get a better understanding of how the stale moves system effects and IMO enhances the game. Its not saying that B+ should use Vbrawls system because Melee's is still the optimal goal. You should be able to compare seeing how you have been playing without it for 6+ months. Just make sure that you have help from someone who knows how to work the code to make it very weak. I was confused by it and accidentially made it stronger than vbrawl and it obviously felt very wrong.

 

[zxeon]

nightlies more like monthlies
lol im so clever

+1 cookie to you sir

 

[timothyung]

Do you know why the stale moves system is flawed? Because lower KB or damage is not always a bad thing. It can be a good thing, as the move can combo better. And what? Stale moves is supposed to punish a player for using a move repeatedly, but it's not really punishing them...

About the Lucario/Snake/GW/Sonic up B thing, can we change that so their upB is refreshed if they enter the flinch state, but not when they are hit?

 

[Stevo]

If the difference is so insignificant that it is virtually impossible to notice a difference in your performance because of it then why even bother with it?

What issue does it solve if you can't even notice its existence while playing?

Let's face it, Melee's stale move system served no purpose whatsoever, and nobody varied their combos because of it. Brawl's stale move system actually set out to make a noticeable change in gameplay, but it failed miserably. Melee's served no purpose. Any where in between is trying to fix something that really isn't problematic.

I actuqlly enjoyed the fact that ganondorf (or others) in melee could keep trying to recover after marth continually f-smashes him away, and his f-smash starts to get stale.

and that lasers did less damage over time.

I really dont think melee's system served no purpose.

little purpose maybe, but not none.

 

[Yanoss1313]

Funny thing is... people say this game isn't Melee 2.0 but everything is still referring to Melee for changes. Some people say to have this because Melee had it. I though this was Brawl+, a different game on its own not Melee 2.0.

this! lol

I don't see how stale damage will screw up and imbalance the entire game. Staple combos will still work and strings will get a little bit of help. I consider SMN just one of several ways to diversify the combo game along side of the other things you mentioned like gravity ect..

i think you've missed my earlier point slightly, with a character like Ganondorf who really only has a few options, this stale stale system will inevitably serve to nerf him (and others, like Ike, Bowser, ect) while leaving characters like falco, fox and marth relatively unscathed, my reasoning here is that in any given combo or string, ganon absolutely MUST use one of only a few moves, most others are simply un-viable, where as someone like fox (my other main) has a plethora of other moves to mix his combo's up with. i urge you to take this into consideration, and not simply assume that such a broad change wont effect the game's basic balance.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Do you know why the stale moves system is flawed? Because lower KB or damage is not always a bad thing. It can be a good thing, as the move can combo better. And what? Stale moves is supposed to punish a player for using a move repeatedly, but it's not really punishing them...

About the Lucario/Snake/GW/Sonic up B thing, can we change that so their upB is refreshed if they enter the flinch state, but not when they are hit?

/agree... especially on that lat part. Fludd sucks.

 

[timothyung]

And I forgot about Diddy's side B... and probably ZSS's downB? I'm not sure about ZSS.

Also Brawl+ is Melee 2.0. Admit it, people. But this "Melee 2.0" doesn't mean it's an exact replica of Melee physics... but rather, what we think as a true sequel to Melee.

 

[Mattnumbers]

And I forgot about Diddy's side B... and probably ZSS's downB? I'm not sure about ZSS.

Also Brawl+ is Melee 2.0. Admit it, people. But this "Melee 2.0" doesn't mean it's an exact replica of Melee physics... but rather, what we think as a true sequel to Melee.

I just like to think that Brawl+ is what vBrawl SHOULD have been. A new and different game than Melee, but it takes the things in Melee and 64 that were great and applies them to all the new content. Also the potential for balance is amazing compared to other fighters that don't get constantly updated.

 

[shanus]

People just need to drop the whole stigma of melee 2.0 vs brawl+ vs vB, etc.

It has no bearing, nor does it change any decisions regarding the project. Calling it as such contributes nothing to this thread or any concept, and dwelling on such semantics is a waste of everyones time.

Brawl+ is Brawl+, and that is all there is to it.