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

[GHNeko]

Damage buffers arent the way to go imo. :V

 

[timothyung]

Maybe increasing the hitbox size a bit? The kicks will be easier to connect, and he will gain a bit disjointed hitbox to help his aerial priority.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

What Captain Falcon could use, in my opinion, is something to make up for getting comboed, gimped and chainthrown relatively easily by a lot of the roster. Better comboability or less ugrav, maybe?

But I'd rather consult people who play the good Captain before crying for buffs, so I'll just keep out of this particular issue.

 

[The Night Cat]

No, Falcon is not a priority character. Falcons Nair has always felt off to me as well and I thought it was a misized hitbox that made his feet often miss the enemy. For me I only got solid Nairs if the enemy was inside of my knees at least and all the way up to crotch is still good(...). But now I hear that each kick only comes out for 2 hurt frames that makes me think perhaps tweaking that could fix it.

Edit: Also I think in melee he had a more unnaturally solid sustained kicks as he alternated.

 

[ChronoTrigga]

I think Brawl+ needs a little bit more speed for everyone. Just a little. A smidgen one might say.

 

[Shell]

Are you referring to dash speed? Falling speed?

The actual frame data for many attacks is pretty comparable to Melee, and landing lag is about the same, too.

 

[timothyung]

I think he is referring to something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM_kb8S_YJw

 

[Shell]

We discovered when we applied a universal speed up to throws that it can cause a lot of problems with strange side effects, such as hitboxes disappearing.

While I'm not personally opposed to the game being faster universally, I don't think that code is the way to do it.

 

[Magus420]

IMO, Falcon's nair needs a buff. 10 damage in 2 hits is pretty weak... plus, both hitboxes only last for a 2 frames.

If it's 2 frames per kick that's the same as what Ganon's n-air was before. The lack of duration on Ganon's n-air was a big reason the move was crap compared to CF's which gave him coverage the whole time his leg was sticking out and was a great spacing tool.

 

[Jimbo_G]

I believe Falcon needs buffs, but Down B jump reset isnt the kind of buff he needs. He needs a defensive, non-recovery buff to help him deal with the abundance of campy/defensive playstyles that exist in Brawl+

Once again I say this and I will continue to say this until I see for myself that Falcon has at least a single tool against all forms of playstyle. :V

And those tools dont even have to be that good. :V

Many characters, not just Falcon, don't have tools to handle everything. That's the whole purpose of counter picking. Characters have strengths and weaknesses. Captain Falcon has an amazing close-up game. Allow him get close enough to smell what kind of shampoo you used this morning, and you're in for some pain. Because of that, his ranged game is mediocre. That's all what makes characters different and unique. If they all had a tool for everything, there wouldn't be a need for 35 characters. =/

 

[Arkaether]

Arkaether.

GHNeko.

The problem with that though, you're factoring skill into that scenario. When you factor that out, between two good characters, the character with more reliable options is the one that will generally come out on top majority of the time. That's how CPs are generally made. A comparison of options.

The problem with that, though, is that there is no situation in which skill is removed. Different characters hold different options at different levels of play. Back when I first picked up Melee, my Jigglypuff was a CP to Marths because they would spam fsmash and I could run up and rest. Once I got better, Marth was a CP to Jigglypuff because he ***** her, no questions asked. Not only that, these option advantages are not universal. G&W has a majority of bad matchups, but he ***** Jigglypuff like no tomorrow because there is simply nothing Jigglypuff can do against his wall of priority. How CPs are made are not a comparison of which character has better options, but rather which character's options hold an advantage over theirs. Each option is not the same. Some characters have techchases, some have priority, some have range, some have range and priority; the list of traits is endless, and each character option is used in a different scenario and is differently effective depending on the opponent. You can't say that one character having three options will be better than a character with one option; not if that one option completely overrides the other three options.

You say a smart player will keep himself unpredictable, but if both players are equally smart in general and match ups, then having less reliable options is a bad thing. When your reliable options are figured out and shut down, then what.

Then you figure out THEIR reliable options and shut THEM down. If both players are equally smart and equally skilled, what wins out is not the amount of options they have, but the quality of the options they have. Once a Falcon figures out how to get close into a Marth and breaks through his range and spacing, Falcon wins. Once Marth figures out how Falcon gets through his range and spacing, Marth wins. Falcon has the option of close-range combat and combos, but he can do that in any number of ways; cancelled one-hit nair, side-b, dthrow, uthrow, dtilt, uair, etc. Marth has the option of range, which boils down to fair and dtilt. Falcon's numerous options are great...in other scenarios. Marth's options will override Falcon's merely because he has little to no way of dealing with them, even though Marth has fewer options. Not because he has more options, but because he has better options. At least, better options for the scenario he's in.

Two good options when uses to their fullest potential > 1 Great Option. At least imo. Your going to have a harder time predicting 2 moves than you are one. So when you mix up properly, the overall effect is greater.

Not necessarily. Back to the G&W vs Jiggly scenario (yeah, I use this a lot), you could say that G&W's wall of priority is one great option. Against characters other than G&W, Jigglypuff's bair, fair, and nair are all good options, useful, powerful, comboable, etc. They're good moves in general. However, her good options are worthless compared to his one GREAT option, which she cannot get around unless HE screws up. I don't NEED to predict my opponent's moves as Jigglypuff; I already know what he's going to do. My problem is getting around it. I doubt players at high level melee would go "oh, I don't know if Marth is going to nair or fair me right now", I bet they're going "he's going to nair, how do I respond". Each move has a situation in which they're best, and skilled players understand that. The problem here is getting around that, because when you use a great move properly, there are no easy weaknesses.

But the issue at hand is that using methods other than reliable methods puts you at risk for being punished. Being unpredictable works because uses the shock factor to overcome your opponent. That works against people who dont play your or dont know the match up. And you know what trounces that? Playing that match up. When you learn a match up, you learn answers for things tossed at you. When this happens, the cost of being unpredictable can be steep. That's why you dont use bad options in the first place and you stick to what works, but when what works is already limited in the first place, being unpredictable can be costly. Being unpredictable against a player of equal skill and match up knowledge can hurt more than help.

Not...quite. By playing a matchup, I can get used to when and how G&W will use his good moves. I know when he'll usually use bair, when he usually uses nair, and when he usually uses dtilt. I know when he grabs and when he shields and when he retreats and how he recovers. When he goes crazy and pulls out dair in a situation that I thought he would airdodge and go for a grab, I get hit by it because I'm not expecting it. Once I get used to his unexpected, unpredictable, crazy antics, he pulls out his reliable moves and suddenly he's against totally unpredictable.

And of course you're at a risk of being punished. When you KNOW that you will be punished by using your predictable reliable moves, compared to when you COULD be punished depending on whether or not they predict your random move, which would you choose?

For the important part here is that even if you DO give a character multiple options, you can't give him an ultimate solution to every situation or he lacks weakness. I can give G&W six more high-priority disjointed moves, but that does not in any way help him against someone with the range to obliterate him. He will still be reliable because Marth can still easily get around his approaches and his moves, and he can still be beaten the same exact way. Quantity of options has no effect in this scenario. And, of course, once you give him range, better approach options, projectiles, etc, you start eliminating his character weaknesses. Character weaknesses are how the opponent defeats you.

You're only providing an overabundance of options when you make it like that, but 1-3 tradeoffs dont do this. You cannot develop depth with a character when the move in question doesn't even retain the potential at its core. The reason wh you never saw jiggs in Melee use dtilt, dsmash, ftilt is because they didn't even have the potential to positively add depth to the character's metagame because they contract how jiggs was made to play. They're ground moves when jiggs is solely an aerial character. Fair would fall into the category of moves that could potentially benefit from a trade off and add depth to the character because it has the potential to do so. A move with no potential, when buffed through trade-offs is not a good idea because it would serve no good purpose towards teh character overall and make the player use an off the wall move as you've said, but when a move has the potential to do something like that, when buffed, wont be anything less than natural when used right.

The thing is, I doubt melee vets would be overjoyed to be offered a bair tradeoff for a better fair. Fair would not add "depth" to the character. Jigglypuff would not "benefit" from such a tradeoff, because you're essentially completely nerfing her one, major, solid playstyle (WoP) for a better fair that would, what? Give her some crappy fair combos that could just have easily worked with bair before the nerf? Jigglypuff has the advantage in the air, and she has the really good move of bair. Jigglypuff players understand this and capitalize on it. By nerfing bair and buffing fair, you are adding artificial depth by forcing players to use it when they normally would not have because it is not a good move. By making it a good move, all you serve to do it severely damage her one major playstyle and strength while giving her an option which is, essentially, completely equivalent to bair and has no major differences. Jigglypuff comes off worse in this tradeoff, since she loses her strength while being given a move that she will still never use anyway, because you simply cannot buff fair to be a good move used separately from bair. All you can do is buff fair to be better than bair, at which point everyone switches to fair and bair won't be used anymore.

I have said that some characters are shallow and that's fine. Not every character should be filled to the brim with depth, but what is wrong with adding a little more to a character?

Because what you are adding is not "depth". "Depth" is player skill. Changing a character for more options is "artificial depth". "Depth" of a character is determined by the evolving and changing metagame and extent of options which are discovered through the evolving metagame. A metagame develops not by handing out homogenizing changes to a character, but through exploiting and utilizing those unique properties given the restriction of a character's weakness and the unflexible rigidity of an unchanging, finished game. There is no way you can accurately predict the development of a metagame; metagames are completely unpredictable for a reason. By adding "artificial depth", you are hampering the development of "true depth", which is the metagame.

Keep the change.

I have no change left after I gave you my two cents. I'm poor.

:V

v:

lawl10chars.

 

[Hyrus]

Many characters, not just Falcon, don't have tools to handle everything. That's the whole purpose of counter picking.

Characters have strengths and weaknesses. Captain Falcon has an amazing close-up game. Allow him get close enough to smell what kind of shampoo you used this morning, and you're in for some pain. Because of that, his ranged game is mediocre. That's all what makes characters different and unique. If they all had a tool for everything, there wouldn't be a need for 35 characters. =/

Idealistically, a person would be able to sit down and play as any character vs any character and do well without character choice having a significant impact. While that won't realistically happen, it's still something that should be strived for. If we're just to accept Rock-Paper-Scissors as the norm for balance, then the game would be nothing more than the counter picker winning every time.

There are 35 characters in the first place because people want to play THEIR favorite Nintendo character. Trying to give characters extreme playstyles and abilities is disastrous since it will start to create a Rock-Paper-Scissors effect. Giving Falco spammable, "laser priority" lasers that span the length of battlefield, for instance, is just made to Rock the Scissors of large, heavy characters and is idiotic to the consideration of balance (for a figher game, at least).

Falcon is a close up fighter and there's nothing wrong with that specialty, so long as he is able to overcome his weaknesses to apply his strengths. If he can't, then there's a problem.

The huge, freaking wall of crest colored text.

Giant text wall battles never end well, often with each side getting so consumed in breaking down massive paragraphs that no ground is ever gained in the discussion. You'll accomplish a lot more with fewer, more concise words.

 

[smashbro29]

I happen to think Falcon is fine and seems to be a close-up character, why is it so important he's able to do everything? Next thing you know you'll be asking for Sonic to get a gun.

 

[Arkaether]

Giant text wall battles never end well, often with each side getting so consumed in breaking down massive paragraphs that no ground is ever gained in the discussion. You'll accomplish a lot more with fewer, more concise words.

Hyrus, our goal isn't to go "ZOMG U ARE STOOPID U IS RONG I HAET U", our goal is to provide proper points and discussions while raising relevant examples to further an understanding of what exactly balance means and the proper method of doing so. By breaking down the massive paragraphs, we can address the issues one at a time. Using few and more concise words will inevitably result in the loss of proper examples and/or pertinent points which can be elaborated on. It also helps us sound smart.

 

[Yingyay]

epic depth essay

I said something similar earlier.
If players want more depth then they should request a completly new moveset.
Nerfing a good move so a not so good move becomes better isnt the best idea. Gdubz is fine as is.


Now then....about removing invisible footstolling

 

[The Night Cat]

I think Brawl+ needs a little bit more speed for everyone. Just a little. A smidgen one might say.

Try Kupo's set.

 

[ChronoPenguin]

What's being done about Ganon's U-tilt?
Can we increase the wind affect on that?

 

[Zodac]

it should kill DK at 0% IMHO, who is going to land it, WHO?

falcon kick with less after lag could be a defensive tool.

and lol at :V post count quoteing yourself

 

[Plum]

Arkaether, you are factoring in a lot of aspects that can't be applied to the game directly.

When considering how a character performs anything that is based on the player HAS to be removed.
You have to assume that the players are going to be using the most effective option they have in every given situation, and even more importantly mindgames and skill level have to be factored out.
Skill level, is assumed to be at the absolute highest level of play for both players; one player cannot win based on their skill because the other player is at an equal level.
Mindgames can't be put into discussion because they are all player dependent, nothing is guaranteed about them, and overall they become too much of an outside factor when only facts are supposed to be considered.

Human aspects are a part of Smash, but they can't be reliably discussed because nothing is guaranteed to work player to player, and matchups are supposed to really be a discussion of the options a character has at any given time and the other character's ability to punish the use of that option.

As it stands, G&W has very few options at any given time, and they are very much punishable; some of them can be punished by EVERY character in the game, such as Bair which can be SDI'd out of then the character can easily hit G&W. My computers do it fairly regularly; if they can so can any player.

 

[Arkaether]

Plum, don't get me wrong. I'm using G&W merely as an example since he is commonly regarded as 2D, in more ways than one (har har pun I funny). I have nothing against him and I actually support the suggested chef buff you guys are pushing for. I would definitely put him on the lower end of the power spectrum, and I think he needs a bit of work.

...still doesn't change the fact that he ***** Jigglypuff, though.

 

[KayJay]

Samus needs 1 almost not noticeable buff -> her regular 2 hit Jab combo (A -> A) the time between the 2 jabs is too long, at low % the enemy can simply shield or grounddodge after he got hit from the first jab. This is really something we should fix.

 

[Wingflier]

Samus isn't the only character with a jab that can be punished at lower percentages; however, it is 500 times better than it was in vBrawl.

And honestly, when they are anything past like 25%, it has enough hitstun to allow the second one to connect. Add this to the fact that the first jab allows YOU (Samus) enough time to follow up with a quicker attack before the opponent, and there's really no reason to change it.

Wing

 

[timothyung]

No attack should be punished during it's cool down when it is landed correctly. Her jab is supposed to link to her second jab, so that would just be a fix to what the move is supposed to do.

 

[KayJay]

Samus isn't the only character with a jab that can be punished at lower percentages; however, it is 500 times better than it was in vBrawl.

And honestly, when they are anything past like 25%, it has enough hitstun to allow the second one to connect. Add this to the fact that the first jab allows YOU (Samus) enough time to follow up with a quicker attack before the opponent, and there's really no reason to change it.

Wing

Which regular Jab combo has the same problem? (No auto-multiple hit Jabs)

 

[HeroPenguin]

No attack should be punished during it's cool down when it is landed correctly. Her jab is supposed to link to her second jab, so that would just be a fix to what the move is supposed to do.

Not to split hairs, but one could argue that if you're jabbing as Samus before 25%, you're NOT using the move correctly. She still has missiles and aerial zair and other aerials to accumulate early game damage while staying safe. As other people have pointed out, a lack of a solid GTFO move is one of Samus's character weaknesses.

That being said, I doubt that some combination of reducing the lag on her first jab and speeding up her second jab would be OPd.

 

[KayJay]

Not to split hairs, but one could argue that if you're jabbing as Samus before 25%, you're NOT using the move correctly. She still has missiles and aerial zair and other aerials to accumulate early game damage while staying safe. As other people have pointed out, a lack of a solid GTFO move is one of Samus's character weaknesses.

That being said, I doubt that some combination of reducing the lag on her first jab and speeding up her second jab would be OPd.

Well, if you're in a situation where u sheild or dodge an attack, and the opponent is at low %, Samus's safest quick option for getting rid of the attacking opponent is to jab. So it screws more than you think it would. It's not even worth to try the regular Jab combo in that situation when it doesn't connect like all other characters regular jab combos does, because Jab to dtilt or ftilt is at almost the same speed and has more uses / does more dmg / does setup for combos (but the tilt still gets blocked like a jab) so there is no reason to do the regular jab if it wont even connect more safely.

A quicker startup for the second jab should be no deal.

 

[Deleted member]

First of all you guys need to stop quoting each other and responding inside the quotes. It makes it difficult for third parties to jump in.

You need to respond in a quote-requote-quote format.

Arkaether, as much as the word depth is being thrown around, and while it does sound like one of those buzz-words, imagine if a character literally only had one move. This character, who I'll name Captain Bland, can only jump, run, and dash attack. If he only has one move to use, there aren't many combinations on how the player will utilize dash attack.

If you give bad moves a viable buff, the player can then incorporate entirely different strategies. Even adding a jab to Captain Bland's moveset would diversify his character exponentially.

 

[Wingflier]

No attack should be punished during it's cool down when it is landed correctly. Her jab is supposed to link to her second jab, so that would just be a fix to what the move is supposed to do.

According to who? God?

And the move DOES do what it's supposed to do, you're just doing it wrong.

Wing

 

[GHNeko]

What DeLoRtEd1 and artificial depth is nothing more than depth/versitility you know from the start because you put it there. :V

In other words, its baloney. :V

In the end its still depth. And when tradeoffs for depth is used CORRECTLY AND RATIONALLY IE NOT WILLY NILLY on a Character by Character basis, you're wont end up with too many options for every situation. You're giving them enough to utilize towards that characters strengths ie use trade-offs to add depth to moves that work with the character double-ie dont buff ground based attacks on jiggs because she is an aerial character or don't mess with angles on Snake's aerials to make him combo in the air better. :V

You guys ever heard of the saying, "Too much of anything is never a good thing." :V?

That applies to depth as well. I want more depth, but only enough. The right amount. But since we dont know that from the start, we have to test until we find the right amount. :V

I'd reply to the wall of text, but I dont have enough time. :V

</timejohns>

Also,


:V

 

[Skip2MaLoo]

((skip is posting seriously yet again omg too ****ing good this guy is mad beast))
how many definite "spikes" are in the game/how many meteor smashes are in the game?
(and who has which, is there a list for this?)

 

[Wingflier]

A)That question does not belong in the "Nightly Builds" thread.

B)http://lmgtfy.com/?q=brawl+meteor+smash

 

[metaXzero]

@skip
I thought everyone had a meteor or spike in this game. At least I hoped (it was stupid in Melee how Marth and Falco got spikes while mostly everyone else got a dinky meteor).

 

[KayJay]

Uhm about Samus's jabs again:
My friend often does up B (Marth) when my Samus jabs, and he actually hits me sometimes, so i thought i was to slow every time.
Now i tried to reconstruct it in trainingmode at 1/4 speed to be sure that it's not my fault, so actually, the after lag from Samus first jab is so long, when the first Jab Hits the Opponent at low %, the opponent can hit her back (jabs, or up b or any quick move) BEFORE Samus could even sheild.
So in theory, Samus SINGLE jab is absolutely 0% safe when the enemy is under 25%.
If that isn't enough reason to fix it i don't know.................

Remember Link's dash attack got buffed for the same reason.

 

[Wingflier]

No only about half the cast has a meteor smash. It would be ******** if characters like fox or sonic got one as they are so dam fast it would be impossible to avoid.

Captain Falcon just gets one because he's so manly ;p

Uhm about Samus's jabs again:
My friend often does up B (Marth) when my Samus jabs, and he actually hits me sometimes, so i thought i was to slow every time.

Marth's Up-B comes out on the first frame (I believe), and has a lot of knockback when it does. A good solution would be to shield right after your first jab, at which point Marth will now be slowly free falling into whatever move you decided to hit him with next.

Wing

 

[GHNeko]

IIRC, Link dtilt is a spike. Falcon has the nipple spike back. Everything else that sends down like a spike is a meteor.

 

[KayJay]

Marth's Up-B comes out on the first frame (I believe), and has a lot of knockback when it does. A good solution would be to shield right after your first jab, at which point Marth will now be slowly free falling into whatever move you decided to hit him with next.

Wing

Like I said, if he reacts fast, his up B (or simply a Jab) hits Samus before her first jab animation is over, so she can't shield it.

 

[Magus420]

If they start the up-b fast enough that you're unable to block it they're not actually doing the up-b on reaction and instead predicted your jab or were just trying to up-b you regardless.

 

[GHNeko]

Is that some logic?

I love you Magus. No homo.

Though you have to take into consideration that it might be possible to do it on reaction with buffer. :V

 

[metaXzero]

@Wing. What move does Fox and Sonic have that would be a broken spike? Shine-spike certainly isn't too good.

 

[Magus420]

Though you have to take into consideration that it might be possible to do it on reaction with buffer. :V

How would buffering allow you to react to something faster than normal?