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

[timothyung]

No, it's not pointless to suggest something, if you have good and sensible reasons to support it.

 

[FrozenHobo]

so i took B+ to tourney so we could play some friendlies and try it out. everybody had lots of fun and it was all fine, except that D3 has a fair chain on charizard (maybe others, but we saw it on charizard). with auto canceling he can just keep jump -> dair -> jump -> dair. i don't know if you would want to find a way to fix this (we didn't care. actually thought it was funny) but it was unescapable till i got to ledge and could di out.

again, not a big deal, but just something i noticed.

 

[CloneHat]

I've come to the conclusion that it's pointless to try to suggest anything. We might as well go back and play vBrawl, lol.

Stop complaining. The fact that we don't take every idea that pops into peoples' heads is the reason Brawl+ is not a totally ridiculous game. There will always be somebody who has a different opinion, and ideas should always be settled through debate.

 

[SymphonicSage12]

@ frozenpopo: they cut off lag off of dedede's dair on purpose to help him with comboing. removing it would just defeat the purpose.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

so i took B+ to tourney so we could play some friendlies and try it out. everybody had lots of fun and it was all fine, except that D3 has a fair chain on charizard (maybe others, but we saw it on charizard). with auto canceling he can just keep jump -> dair -> jump -> dair. i don't know if you would want to find a way to fix this (we didn't care. actually thought it was funny) but it was unescapable till i got to ledge and could di out.

again, not a big deal, but just something i noticed.

Can you not SDI out? If not, that certainly needs some work.

Giving Dedede complete stage control again sounds incredibly unappealing.

 

[SymphonicSage12]

Well, as I said earlier, Tatsuman, it was intentionally made to be less laggy to allow for better comboing with Dedede, seeing as before this, Dedede thought the word "combo" meant a big fried chicken. >.>

Although, they went way too far, and now it's just insane. I once got like a 40 hit combo on a fox with dair alone; that would translate to be like 80+ damage. @_@



Just a point to notice: You can only make a long, inescapable chain of dairs on fatties and fastfallers. Jigglypuff, Peach, Pit, etc. you can only get maybe two dairs on.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

Well, as I said earlier, Tatsuman, it was intentionally made to be less laggy to allow for better comboing with Dedede, seeing as before this, Dedede thought the word "combo" meant a big fried chicken. >.>

Although, they went way too far, and now it's just insane. I once got like a 40 hit combo on a fox with dair alone; that would translate to be like 80+ damage. @_@



Just a point to notice: You can only make a long, inescapable chain of dairs on fatties and fastfallers. Jigglypuff, Peach, Pit, etc. you can only get maybe two dairs on.

Yeah, I know that. I play Dedede a lot. He was my vBrawl main.

However, most characters can simply DI out of a dair chain. If certain characters can't, then the move needs work.

 

[SymphonicSage12]

Yes, certain characters, PARTICULARILY FOX AND FALCO, are basically R@p3d by D3's dair. Like, they have no hope against it. The move definitely needs to be easier to escape from. But, not so much that you can't combo with it; he needs to be able to combo with his dthrow chain gone.

 

[Revven]

You should be able to SDI out of the Dair, there's no reason why you wouldn't be able to as we didn't make any specific changes to make it link better.

It's not a specific chain on Charizard, Popo, you just failed to SDI the move. =\

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

Yeah, it's DIable. Just tested it.

Whew, I thought we were going to have an issue with the dair. I didn't want to have to mess with that thing, it's ****.

 

[grim mouser]

What is the cause of the strange animation of MK's d-tilt? I'm pretty sure it never looked like that before... o.O

 

[Arkaether]

Because of the speed changes they made.

 

[Raoh]

Does Brawl+ have that crazy controller port priority?

 

[timothyung]

Yes, the port priority is still there. IIRC it cannot be fixed because of how the Wii works.

 

[Yingyay]

Sadly yes. And invisible footstolling. If possible I think they would change it tho.
On that note, why, how and since when was it a good idea to put port priority in a fighting game? Even if its not supposed to be competitive (sakurai's excuse for screwing up the game) why would anyone add something like that? It takes little effort to program attacks to hit the person facing the attack imo.

 

[crazycrackers]

ugh. lol @ people failing to DI.

Peach: I don't think she needs anything at all, but if people want to buff sideB thats fine with me.

G&W: Why is this such a big deal? I don't see what the problem is with tradeoffs

 

[Swordplay]

Yes, the port priority is still there. IIRC it cannot be fixed because of how the Wii works.

I've lost tournament games from port priority. I might even hate it more than tripping........

 

[leafgreen386]

Ok children, listen up. Why do any of you care if the mains of a character that is already very solid want to do a trade-off to enhance their character's depth? Get off each other's case already and shut up. A good trade-off will enhance a character's depth while largely leaving their relative level of power to the rest of the cast the same. If it doesn't involve the character getting any worse or better, why do all of you care so much? All I see is whining about how some people want to do some trade-off and then other people coming in and shooting it down because "the character is fine." Well, obviously the character is fine. Otherwise, we would be looking into buffing the character instead of having trade-offs being suggested. If the mains of a character want to get together and rally for a change, then so be it. Let them do so. The WBR will review the change, test it out, and if it's legit, it will be kept. Otherwise, it will be rejected. You all really need to chill on this stuff.

Also, just because a WBR member proposes something, does not mean that it is law. If it's something that the WBR has actually discussed and have come to a final conclusion on, then yeah... that's prob not gonna change, but suggestions for changes are not written in stone. We go through many ideas in the WBR. Some get kept. Others are thrown out. Posting an idea to the forum doesn't mean it's official. It simply means it's an idea one WBR member thought of.

Right, but I already kind of assumed that was the problem, and I do take my time when going back to the CSS. Whatever, I'll just... get a drink after ever match... or something. Apparently a good 10 seconds isn't enough

If you just rapidly press start, no matter how long you wait between when the match ends and when you press start, it will probably freeze. You have to press start, pause, press start again, pause, press start again, letting each new screen load. At least that's how it was in my experience.

Yes, the port priority is still there. IIRC it cannot be fixed because of how the Wii works.

Actually, it should theoretically be fixable. Just as spunit was able to set up a teching window based on frames as opposed to distance like is normally seen in brawl, it should also be possible to set up the various actions that invoke port priority to follow a different engine. Although I'm sure that it would not be at all easy, it should still be possible... eventually.

 

[Arkaether]

leafgreen, you realize that if we DIDN'T have god knows how many people asking for buffs and god knows how many people b****ing about the people asking for buffs and etc, etc, we'd be left with "whatever changes the WBR sees fit".

And that doesn't really sound much like a community project to me.

 

[SymphonicSage12]

Yeah, all the arguing is kinda necessary. I mean, it's not like any country that has gained independence did so by frolicking through pretty pastures of flowers. There is, and will always be, some disagreements, and some fighting involved. It's all part of the project.

Thank you for your time.

~SymphonicSage12

 

[leafgreen386]

leafgreen, you realize that if we DIDN'T have god knows how many people asking for buffs and god knows how many people b****ing about the people asking for buffs and etc, etc, we'd be left with "whatever changes the WBR sees fit".

And that doesn't really sound much like a community project to me.

Because people who don't play a character are totally the people we should be listening to, right? The WBR is set up to work with the mains of a character. How the community giving input and discussing their character(s) with the WBR doesn't make this a community project is beyond me. I simply don't get why people have to complain about a character getting changed that they don't even play, when it's only a trade-off being suggested, not a buff or a nerf. Trade-offs are subjective and should be decided by those who actually play the character, as long as the trade-off is actually fair.

 

[Wingflier]

Leafgreen, trade-offs sound great on paper, and you make it sound like the jesus incarnate of game balance - but behind what you think is your perfect argument that should never be contested, there are plenty of flaws:

First of all, there is no such thing as a perfect trade-off. The mains of a character would not want the trade-off to happen in the first place if it wasn't going to improve the quality of the character to begin with. The trade-off, by it's very nature, serves as a "buffer" to the character, by improving moves that are useful, and nerfing moves that you can live without.

Secondly, since the WBR uses no mathematical equations, has no scientific method, or any advanced techniques used for balancing the game; and instead uses guess and check, there is no assurance for the community that said "trade-off" will be actually be fair. It is not rocket science that humans make mistakes and are flawed, and since you guys are pretty much winging every aspect of this game (guess and check), the potential for mistakes is even higher.

Thirdly, the reason that people who do NOT main the characters that people want to buff argue against it is because they are the majority. Obviously, for an individual character, you are going to have a lot more people who face that character than main it. Therefore, by the game's very nature, you are always going to have dissenting opinions when it comes to this stuff - ESPECIALLY when the character is always high tier. Sure, you can tell us, it's a trade-off, so it will be fair; but for the reasons laid out in last two paragraphs, that's probably not going to be true.

Ultimately, you need to take it a little easier on people who have problems with your perfect system on a character or characters that are already top tier. We are just trying to have a part in a game that we really care about.

Concern shows compassion; and if something isn't broken, why fix it?

Wing

 

[SymphonicSage12]

by improving moves that are useful, and nerfing moves that you can live without.



Actually, a "tradeoff" is NERFING moves that are better, and IMPROVING moves that are worse.


NINJA'D >.>


BTW, this really is no other method for Brawl Plus than guess & check. In fact, all of brawl plus itself: its textures, codes, stage, etc., ARE ALL made and edited with guess and check.

 

[Yingyay]

But those better moves will still be good moves and now the other moves will become better making the character overall Better. And to quote Wing, I've said "if it aint broke dont fix it" but since im not popular it gets ignored lol. Whatever, i dont really care as long as people get the point eventually. If a character is "top tier" aka "Good enough already" then they dont need tweaks. The WBR knows this. Just because other not so good characters are getting tweaks, it doesnt mean EVERYONE deserves them.

 

[Wingflier]

Actually, a "tradeoff" is NERFING moves that are better, and IMPROVING moves that are worse.

Okay, that sounds great and all, but the people asking for the trade-offs wouldn't be asking at all if they weren't ultimately improving the quality of their character. No matter how you look at it, a trade-off is meant to make a character better by giving them more options.

BTW, this really is no other method for Brawl Plus than guess & check

There is actually. Brawl, just like any other aspect of life, could be subjected to and scrutinized by complex scientific equations that, with testing, would make the balance perfect.

Of course, it wouldn't be easy, but it would be better than just trying things, testing them, and then implementing them into the game when they seem right. This method is called guess and check, and it is one of the most basic and rudimentary forms of balance in existence.

I am not saying the WBR needs to do anything different, I simply mean to contradict your point that winging it is the only way to balance the game. Personally, I think the WBR has done a fantastic job of balancing the game so far, but it could always be better; and always leaves a lot of room open for human error.

Wing

 

[Wolf of Ice]

@Ying- Then nerf the moves that used to be amazing a bit more or don't buff the bad moves too much?

 

[Mattnumbers]

Wing, If in the end the character is better than it was before hand, its a bad tradeoff. You can give a character more options while making its better options worse. Assuming you Nerf/Buff correctly, you will end up with a character that has more good options, but less great options. IE: G&W gets a turtle nerf, but a separate move buffed. He now has more options, but he can't spam turtle as effectively anymore (which is an effective thing to do against characters with low range/priority IIRC). This just means that he has to rely on other things besides that move, but he can no longer only focus on that move. This means G&W is more fun to play as and against without actually making him better.

BTW I'm leaving for 9 days tomorrow morning so I obviously won't be posting.

 

[Yingyay]

My point was that nerfing a good move doesnt mean making that move crappy. It'll still be a good move. And its not like G&W has horrible moves. G&W is really good, if you buff his "not-so-often" used moves then he becomes an even better character than he already was. Its like making all of metaknights moves do something to you. If MK has options already that work and is already a good character, why make him better?

 

[crazycrackers]

Wing, If in the end the character is better than it was before hand, its a bad tradeoff. You can give a character more options while making its better options worse. Assuming you Nerf/Buff correctly, you will end up with a character that has more good options, but less great options. IE: G&W gets a turtle nerf, but a separate move buffed. He now has more options, but he can't spam turtle as effectively anymore (which is an effective thing to do against characters with low range/priority IIRC). This just means that he has to rely on other things besides that move, but he can no longer only focus on that move. This means G&W is more fun to play as and against without actually making him better.

Why does this sound like a good idea? Oh thats right, because it is.

 

[Mattnumbers]

My point was that nerfing a good move doesnt mean making that move crappy. It'll still be a good move. And its not like G&W has horrible moves. G&W is really good, if you buff his "not-so-often" used moves then he becomes an even better character than he already was. Its like making all of metaknights moves do something to you. If MK has options already that work and is already a good character, why make him better?

G&W has few options, but those options are very effective. This is why he is both a good character and at the same time shallow. If you make those few options so that they are not as great, and make other moves better, you end up with a character that has less great options (which promote spamming of a certain move/moves throughout a match) And more good options. This, in turn makes him more interesting and fun but doesn't make him any better. And we aren't talking about making ALL his moves good, that would be impossible to do without it being a straight buff since you have to nerf something for it to be a tradeoff.

 

[storm92]

Just to interject, I'd like to show off the Kirby trade-off we made as an example of a "good" trade-off.

His Fsmash was nerfed in KB to make it less OP, in return for having his Nair boosted from 10 BKB to 60, making it a more useful move overall.
This made a not-too-great move better, while making one which the BRoom saw the reward being much to great for the risk taken, worse, but not bad.

The point of trade-offs are to compensate a character by making a move that is seen as too good--for a variety of reasons--simply a useful, good move, and then giving that character another option--which usually means more depth--to use in return.

When used correctly, it is a great tool for game balancing.

 

[Yingyay]

Well, imma quote neko and say this. What would G&W mains want in order to make G&W less shallow without breaking him? Also the way I see it is in the same way I saw Falco's shine change. I believe its a buff because it adds more options to a move that was okay the way it was. Nerfing Falco's lasers didnt stop him from spamming them so its like nothing changed. But this is G&W we're talking about so heres my two cents about him. If you nerf his bair, its not like its priority will be removed, its still gonna **** people and how would G&W mains go about nerfing that move? Make if have a higher trajectory and make it unsafe or something? That would hurt him/her/it in the end. Buff fair in some way? What would that do? Would it be the new Bair? Or improve his ground game so he can combo into his already strong smash attacks?

 

[shanus]

leafgreen, you realize that if we DIDN'T have god knows how many people asking for buffs and god knows how many people b****ing about the people asking for buffs and etc, etc, we'd be left with "whatever changes the WBR sees fit".

And that doesn't really sound much like a community project to me.

No, but there is method to the madness. Right now, people are going ape**** crazy over a suggestion as if its definitely to be included because someone in the BR posted it as an idea. Thats the underlying difference. We read suggestions. However, just because it was suggested doesn't mean we should include it.

If we did take everyones ideas, link would fly, sonic wouldn't have any attacks at all aside from downB, and jigg's rest would be the size of the entire screen.

We listen to people's ideas, but discuss them thoroughly in the WBR & IRC. There should be no offense taken if your idea doesn't make it in. Hell, a lot of the time we make codes and try them out first before even discussing them. Just so you know, on weekdays we release about 3-5 BR sets per day of changes. Many are tossed out, polished, etc, to give you the public sets you get typically once a week.

 

[Wingflier]

G&W has few options, but those options are very effective. This is why he is both a good character and at the same time shallow. If you make those few options so that they are not as great, and make other moves better, you end up with a character that has less great options (which promote spamming of a certain move/moves throughout a match) And more good options. This, in turn makes him more interesting and fun but doesn't make him any better. And we aren't talking about making ALL his moves good, that would be impossible to do without it being a straight buff since you have to nerf something for it to be a tradeoff.

Having a variety of good moves instead of only a few great moves IS better though.

For the reasons that G&W mains have laid out many, many times before; those few moves, however good, become too predictable and easy to counter and then the character is easy to beat.

Variety is an upgrade. In Brawl+, a move doesn't have to be superpowered for it to be effective. Often times, a move can do crap damage and knockback but be good for its amazing combo ability or ability to trip the opponent or play mindgames.

Nerfing G&W's superpowered aerials won't make them useless, as I'm sure he will still be able to combo well - except, unlike before, he will have more options to do it with.

I have no problems with G&W getting the trade-off that all the mains want, just don't delude yourself into thinking that it won't be a buff for him.

Wing

 

[Mattnumbers]

Having a variety of good moves instead of only a few great moves IS better though.

For the reasons that G&W mains have laid out many, many times before; those few moves, however good, become too predictable and easy to counter and then the character is easy to beat.

Variety is an upgrade. In Brawl+, a move doesn't have to be superpowered for it to be effective. Often times, a move can do crap damage and knockback but be good for its amazing combo ability or ability to trip the opponent or play mindgames.

Nerfing G&W's superpowered aerials won't make them useless, as I'm sure he will still be able to combo well - except, unlike before, he will have more options to do it with.

I have no problems with G&W getting the trade-off that all the mains want, just don't delude yourself into thinking that it won't be a buff for him.

Wing

It will not be a buff, because of no stale damage/knockback there is nothing to keep a character from using an incredibly effective move over and over again. Once it gets predictable, sure you will have to use something else, but if you have two or three of these very effective moves, you can spam them (as well as the original move once you start to use these moves more) and avoid this.

 

[B3Brawler]

Just some observations from playing a crap load of brawl+, keeping in mind that these two have been my mains and favourites since melee so 1) i know what i'm talking about and 2) I'm probably biased, and were I in complete control of the project, these two would be the best.

Marth: Overall feels alot better, a good balance between melee and brawl. The one thing i really hate is the over B buff. The move is totally useless now and near impossible to land. i don't care if you nerf the damage, just let me hit the final attack! Also, it would be sweet if his spike got a little more love. Maybe a 45 degree on the first few frames of his sour spot?

Falco: Feels really good to play, lasers are a bit more balanced but still incredibly spamabble. (mean that in a good way) His new down B is a great combo set up and is also useful for booting people unexpectedly off the edge. The only thing i would suggest is a bit more damage and alot less cooldown for his fair so i won't cut myself everytime i accidentaly use it and a bit more cooldown for his Dair when landing to make it a bit less of a combo fest.

And on a totally random side note i think we should add the Hybrid Air Dodge back in with the Air Dodge Landing Lag cool down code to slow it down. The DI air dodge would also give more recovery options.

I just went there.

 

[Mattnumbers]

Just some observations from playing a crap load of brawl+, keeping in mind that these two have been my mains and favourites since melee so 1) i know what i'm talking about and 2) I'm probably biased, and were I in complete control of the project, these two would be the best.

Marth: Overall feels alot better, a good balance between melee and brawl. The one thing i really hate is the over B buff. The move is totally useless now and near impossible to land. i don't care if you nerf the damage, just let me hit the final attack! Also, it would be sweet if his spike got a little more love. Maybe a 45 degree on the first few frames of his sour spot?

Falco: Feels really good to play, lasers are a bit more balanced but still incredibly spamabble. (mean that in a good way) His new down B is a great combo set up and is also useful for booting people unexpectedly off the edge. The only thing i would suggest is a bit more damage and alot less cooldown for his fair so i won't cut myself everytime i accidentaly use it and a bit more cooldown for his Dair when landing to make it a bit less of a combo fest.

And on a totally random side note i think we should add the Hybrid Air Dodge back in with the Air Dodge Landing Lag cool down code to slow it down. The DI air dodge would also give more recovery options.

I just went there.

Both of those character are already really good and definitely do not need straight up buffs in any way. And Airdodging is fine the way it is, having MAD is a horrible idea IMO.

 

[Deleted member]

The name should be changed to "Weekly Build".

 

[leafgreen386]

Leafgreen, trade-offs sound great on paper, and you make it sound like the jesus incarnate of game balance - but behind what you think is your perfect argument that should never be contested, there are plenty of flaws:

First of all, there is no such thing as a perfect trade-off. The mains of a character would not want the trade-off to happen in the first place if it wasn't going to improve the quality of the character to begin with. The trade-off, by it's very nature, serves as a "buffer" to the character, by improving moves that are useful, and nerfing moves that you can live without.

While you cannot quantitatively have a perfect trade-off (simply due to the fact that you cannot quantitatively determine the worth of these attributes to the character), it is possible to come very close, giving a character more options in some situations while making other options worse in others. The net effect should be the character remains roughly the same in their relative level of power, although it would obviously lead to a small net nerf or small net buff (for a character just on the verge of being top 10, this is somewhat acceptable, however, for one near the very top, it is not).

Secondly, since the WBR uses no mathematical equations, has no scientific method, or any advanced techniques used for balancing the game; and instead uses guess and check, there is no assurance for the community that said "trade-off" will be actually be fair. It is not rocket science that humans make mistakes and are flawed, and since you guys are pretty much winging every aspect of this game (guess and check), the potential for mistakes is even higher.

You make it sound like we're a bunch of monkeys on typewriters that just happen to churn out shakespeare's complete works. While a lot of testing does take place, the theory behind these changes is generally very strong before even trying them. There may be no formula for game balance, but a lot of the "guess and check" that goes on is actually trying to find the right values to make a move work the way we want it to, rather than in the actual balancing of the game, itself. No, there may not be a universal formula for game balance, however, you seem to underestimate our ability to notice and correct problems. Sure, we're not perfect, but no one is. We do overlook things, but that's why this is a community project, so that hopefully what many do not notice, someone will.

Thirdly, the reason that people who do NOT main the characters that people want to buff argue against it is because they are the majority. Obviously, for an individual character, you are going to have a lot more people who face that character than main it. Therefore, by the game's very nature, you are always going to have dissenting opinions when it comes to this stuff - ESPECIALLY when the character is always high tier. Sure, you can tell us, it's a trade-off, so it will be fair; but for the reasons laid out in last two paragraphs, that's probably not going to be true.

The problem is if we were to always listen to the people who do not main the character and know their ins and outs, we would end up with some critically uninformed opinions on characters being the driving force behind a change. Only if someone has extensive experience with and/or against a character should they be arguing about things like this. The players who do not main the character being discussed shouldn't just instantly reject some kind of proposed trade-off. If they care enough to make sure it doesn't result in a net buff they should contribute to the conversation by suggesting ways to keep the trade-off balanced, which would be by far the most productive way to handle the situation.

Ultimately, you need to take it a little easier on people who have problems with your perfect system on a character or characters that are already top tier. We are just trying to have a part in a game that we really care about.

Concern shows compassion; and if something isn't broken, why fix it?

Wing

You do have a part: giving input about your character(s) and those you frequently play against. Many things have been changed subjectively due to the community deciding such. Pretty much every one of the original physics changes was arbitrary and done because that's the way the community liked it. Just because something isn't "broken" doesn't mean it can't be improved. If everyone had that mentality, then the human race would never have gotten anywhere, as they would not have sought to improve things that are already commonly thought to be "acceptable."

edit:

The name should be changed to "Weekly Build".

It probably should, considering that's what it's become.

 

[B3Brawler]

Both of those character are already really good and definitely do not need straight up buffs in any way. And Airdodging is fine the way it is, having MAD is a horrible idea IMO.

I clearly stated my bias lol.
Also MAD and HAD are different, and you probably haven't tried it with the Air Dodge Lag increase