Divinokage
Smash Legend
Ya but anytime you define anything with a sense of self behind it.. there will be ego. However, I guess the real goal is finding the proper observation where it's universally true. It's definitely not that obvious though.
-
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!
Important Carefully Ask PPMD about the Tiara Guy
- Thread starter Cactuar
- Start date
D
Deleted member
Guest
kage you are definitely the deepest and most philosophical person i've ever met.
Smooth Criminal
Da Cheef
Now I call bull****. "I post for me" seems egocentric enough, but I guess we're gonna wind up splitting hairs if we keep going at this topic.
It's whatever. There's a difference between being an ******* and being an ******* about something, in which case you squarely fall into the latter, based on the fact that the internet is the only thing I have to go off of concerning your personage. Your posts about the game make sense, Umbreon. Most importantly of all, I'm learning from them.
Nix that: I think it's win-win for both of us.
Smooth Criminal
~Twitch~
Smash Master
DuckPimp
Smash Ace
umbreons posts are peppered with trash talk, arrogance, and constant reminders of his nonchalance
but once you get past the hard, crusty surface, you get some pretty good posts
but once you get past the hard, crusty surface, you get some pretty good posts
I'm sensing sarcasm in this text.
Divinokage
Smash Legend
Idk.. I could say a lot of things about what it means to be a peaceful warrior however those kinds of concepts doesn't necessarily mean anything for someone else. But like a singer can be awesome but they dont need to be strong.. I guess that's what it boils down to.
D
Deleted member
Guest
i kinda wish it was, but he actually posts at least something introspective nearly every single time. whether or not i understand it is a different story though lol. but yeah no sarcasm. i also agree with some of his philosophies, although i don't check all of his posts.
trash talk yes, although i don't think my posts are particularly arrogant i could see them being taken that way. i usually try to go for brutal honesty, with respect for the honesty and the brutal part is just implicit.
edit: clearly we should focus our posts on marth's neutral game philosophies over me being stupid. if you guys want to step back a bit, this weekend i could write up something on the importance and application of theory, and we can just go from the groundwork up. let me know if that sounds good or if we can just skip the warm-up.
DuckPimp
Smash Ace
i didnt mean my statement as an insult
or a compliment really
a neutral observation
or a compliment really
a neutral observation
D
Deleted member
Guest
no it's a good and accurate one. you won't hurt my feelings it's ok.
i think we should start focusing on disjointed incrementalism with regards to movement and positioning in the neutral game in relation to the opponent's movement and positioning based on their character's projected range within one's own personal reaction time. The ability to flirt right on the edge of your opponent's capacity to threaten you should maximize your tight play on a micro level while allowing you to go for a conversion whenever your opponent presents an opportunity for you to go for it. given marth's weakness in landing in aerials, i think this is mostly an exercise in ground movement and spacing, so some combination of DD, WD, CC use in and out of each other, good dtilt and grab and landing fair > buffer dash use to stay threatening, and keeping spatial control once you gain positional advantage.
we could probably use some visuals to convey this run-on sentence of an idea better. eggvdfsgvreshbtrgf
i think we should start focusing on disjointed incrementalism with regards to movement and positioning in the neutral game in relation to the opponent's movement and positioning based on their character's projected range within one's own personal reaction time. The ability to flirt right on the edge of your opponent's capacity to threaten you should maximize your tight play on a micro level while allowing you to go for a conversion whenever your opponent presents an opportunity for you to go for it. given marth's weakness in landing in aerials, i think this is mostly an exercise in ground movement and spacing, so some combination of DD, WD, CC use in and out of each other, good dtilt and grab and landing fair > buffer dash use to stay threatening, and keeping spatial control once you gain positional advantage.
we could probably use some visuals to convey this run-on sentence of an idea better. eggvdfsgvreshbtrgf
SpiderMad
Smash Master
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 4,968
Yes. I've read your past posts so far on that mumbo jumbo, and to me it's very much mumbo jumbo; or that it's so general of just playing smart.
Divinokage
Smash Legend
Lol, oh you...
Well from the looks of it, i'd say it's only right to say something meaningful if a person would be curious about refining himself in someway, I can definitely help anyone that wants to have a better lifestyle or tries to seek to be more happy with their lives. I guess I'd be one to train someone to have a good spirit and you obviously have trained a lot of people to play properly within game. It's amazing. =) Anyhow, ya Marth and stuff..
D
Deleted member
Guest
as much as i like vague or misleading blanket statements, which is a lot, the idea is to define and quantify what it means to "play smart".
knightpraetor
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2005
- Messages
- 2,321
QFT. Just because you win a set in grand finals of a tournament using a suboptimal option, this does not make it correct. Playing correct will increase your win rate and consistency overall. However, there are certain other considerations such as if you are down a high variance option may grant you a chance of winning the match while taking the low variance stuff may not be able to bring you back enough from the deficit you are at.
It should also be noted that realizing which of your opponents lack knowledge about particular options ends up making suboptimal decisions optimal against opponents that do not know how to deal with something (for example mahone ****** lozr's marth using ridiculous high fair spacing plus rushdown with jiggs because he didn't know how to respond well out of his dashdance and was unwilling to slow down the match to a speed he could work at. repeated hard reads into fsmash on your scrubby friend who shield grabs 90% of the time when he shouldn't)
there is a risk of course that the opponent may just be conditioning you by acting stupid, but i don't believe anyone does that except in friendlies
honestly it's really only relevant against people near your level that don't know the matchup they are playing though. Cause against people much worse than you it's safer to just use the statistically best options and assume you will win just with superior spacing and general knowledge.
Marth has an inherent weakness in landing aerials, but this is only so if they are his staple option. Combined with wavelanding and his ground game and proper zoning throughout neutral, Marth can land plenty of air hits(see Mango for examples of largely air hits.)
I'm going to be a big pain to discuss this with because I want people to have a broad scope of what they can or can't do. This game allows for multiple ways to successfully play even within your supposed "efficient" method of playing imo.
This is all directed at Umbreon btw.
I'm going to be a big pain to discuss this with because I want people to have a broad scope of what they can or can't do. This game allows for multiple ways to successfully play even within your supposed "efficient" method of playing imo.
This is all directed at Umbreon btw.
pewpewyou
Smash Journeyman
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2007
- Messages
- 206
Sup Kevin. Let's say you get up smashed by Fox on FD at 60%.
You're helplessly tumbling down back to the stage, you have your jump, your sword dance and everything. What do you think is the best way to get back on to the stage?
You already know that Fox is waiting for you to come down and burn your jump, counter his aerial, or descending down air like a scrub. What's your best method of getting down from being tossed in the air?
Do you come down brave-mode with a dair? Or do you float to the corner of the stage, and come down with a fair? Just a thought, because I think a lot of Marths have trouble with this.
You're helplessly tumbling down back to the stage, you have your jump, your sword dance and everything. What do you think is the best way to get back on to the stage?
You already know that Fox is waiting for you to come down and burn your jump, counter his aerial, or descending down air like a scrub. What's your best method of getting down from being tossed in the air?
Do you come down brave-mode with a dair? Or do you float to the corner of the stage, and come down with a fair? Just a thought, because I think a lot of Marths have trouble with this.
Bones0
Smash Legend
Vs. Armada I recall him doing a lot of side-B stalls and then dairing when he got closer to the ground. Idk if he treats Fox much differently though.
I actually find getting down with Marth to be a fun mental exercise once I'm feeling confident.
I have roughly 3 favorite ways to get down but there are a TON of mixups here I don't think Marths really realize.
1. Side B'ing high/multiple times. High side Bs slow your descent and force the Fox to either move more than they want to(tiring them) or stay in place(they quit trying to move and slow to your pacing.) Multiple side Bs produce similar results. The mixup is to then side B once/not at all/close to the ground.
2. Side B'ing/doing stuff close to the ground. Yeah it's a mixup from before, but it also has tons of variables. Most people won't jump into Marth recovering I find but if they do then you get more license to swing/go offstage so they get conditioned to wait. People like to shield/DD punish Marth's landing because that's where his lag is and he usually can't help himself from swinging while airborne. Side B'ing at a crucial juncture when you may want to normally Fair/airdodge or even OMG DO NOTHING OMG has actually helped me almost autopilot recovery at times.
3. Going Offstage. Or at least acting like you will. You can still side B/aerial/airdodge/whatever mixup but going offstage also allows the opponent to potentially swing first and that's almost always what you want when you're recovering I've found(esp as Marth with his huge disjoints lol.)
Special mention to airdodging for always being good and giving Marth amazing fall stats.
Which I use most is largely dependent on where I was when I got Usmash'd, momentum, the type of player I've played, and conditioning.
To answer your question: if it was my first time going up and I was hit in the middle of FD, then I'd probably do multiple high Side Bs and potentially take the hit or be content with a knick/trade in order to observe their habits.
@Bones: I'd change my recovery vs AR now and do my side Bs higher if he could get under me or drift offstage a little more otherwise until he quit rushing me so much. I nubbed up.
D
Deleted member
Guest
I don't disagree with your first paragraph, but let's find the basis first and then expand on it. Starting people off with a bunch of finesse cases and exceptions that require a lot of experience is going to get confusing quickly.
It's not about having a broad scope of what you can and can't do past the theoretical level, it's about what you should or shouldn't do and much more importantly why. Success in a given scenario is taken implicitly operating in the short term. My stuff is all long term to maximize win rate. If we're talking long term, there can only be one "most successful" option and we should find out what it is.
Let's make a broad but easy example. Why don't you approach armada with only marth's dair? I'm guessing because you say "that's awful" and it is, but I say it's going to give you some low success rate. I'll make up some arbitrary numbers to illustrate our example. Let's say armada is playing with his eyes open that day so your success rate is 0%. Now we can safely say "you shouldn't try to land on peach with marth's dair" and we already do this type of analysis every day. Now you could say that either dtilt or grab is more successful, and that allows you multiple ways to successfully play. However, one of your 2 options is going to be more successful than the other. We need to find out what they are, and why.
So can you dtilt him with 80% success rate? Yes, but you shouldn't, because grab is a 90% success rate instead. That 10% margin is going to cost you game loses, sets, time away from school/work, improvement rate, affection from your lover, and scary enough even your money. All in the long term. You are a strictly worse player for using dtilt over grab in this situation. So can you use multiple ways to be successful? Actually, no, at least not compared to how good you could be. You are wrong.
Bones0
Smash Legend
This approach seems to ignore that mixing up options can be more effective overall than using the most effective option on its own. Let's say you approach with move A 50% of the time, and move B 50% of the time. A works 90% of the time, and B works 80% of the time. Why would you ever use B? Using B forces your opponent to defend against both A and B. If A is really good against shielding and the only thing the opponent can do to stop B is shield, then using them in combination could very well yield a higher success rate than using A or B on their own. If you only use B, they will just shield all the time, and if you never use B, they will never shield (making A less effective).
I'm with you up until you start giving percents. What contributes to the percentage effectiveness of a given tool? Is it how consistently it works vs that character's hitboxes? How well a player can use it and abuse the threat of it? Is it because of the move's statistics(startup, cooldown, IASA frames, etc)? I agree we should start with ruling out what GENERALLY doesn't work and what GENERALLY does work and of course WHY we believe those things to be true, but to say a tool is statistically better over another gives me great cause for hesitation, ESPECIALLY given that opponents can expect you to use one tool over another if you begin thinking this way.
Efficiency, to me, is knowing your BEST options(let's say anything over 75% success rate since you like percents) and knowing how to harmonize them with movement(if we consider that separate from tools which I think we should since it's what tools come from and should be worked on its own) to produce the highest possible rates of reaction time, difficulty to read, and hopefully ease of inputs....which all sounds like what I'd say my definition of efficiency is anyway. To say Dtilt is ALWAYS 80% or grab is ALWAYS 90% is silly, regardless of good movement setups but especially factoring in opponent awareness(I'm aware your example was thrown together but I believe my point is still valid even in-depth.)
Again, I am with you for the beginning and probably middle part of your ideas, but towards the end of it we seem to disagree somewhat fundamentally....or at least somewhat misunderstand each other.
Elyssa Xey Hexen
Broken!
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 19,345
I find it hard to apply this mentality to moves when I feel there are few situations where you could directly compare two moves solely on success of being landed. You would agree there are other factors to consider V move over U move due to if it lands, you end up in a more favorable position or not.
D
Deleted member
Guest
Let's get to work. The percentages I have function as some way to quantify relative goodness in a given scenario. Of course, each scenario is specific as a case and should be treated that way. With that in mind:
In short, I'm not saying "only use A, never use B". I suppose the best way to put it would be "use A when A is better, and use B when B is better, and seek to understand why which option is better at any given time". Yes, this is obvious on paper. No, people still don't do it in practice. Perhaps articulating it will fix that.
I know this is a magnet for trolls to say "Umbreon is giving obvious day 1 advice" but this is something that really happens at every level of play. You still pick sub-optimal options too, although they are either much less frequent than other players, or my lack of knowledge with Falco allows me to miss them. But when you switched to Marth in GF, oh yeah I can accurately judge every single action you did and that's why Sensei knows that you still don't get a 100% yet even if you beat the best player in the world. For lower level players, sub-optimal decision-making is much more common and openly apparent even without a mastery of character knowledge.
One tool is almost always going to be objectively better than another. The player may not understand why, which tool is better, or how to reason through that type of judgment in a very small amount of time. That's okay. We can talk about it on discussion boards and test and practice to resolve those issues. What is not okay is to know that you have a better option and to intentionally not use it. It happens all the time.
edit: speaking of armada so much, here's what I was listening to while I wrote this post. Let's see who gets it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rHYRaJGDk4
You do use B, it simply varies with the situation. The important part here is that you understand why B is better before you use it (there must be some way that B becomes your "best option"). I'm aware of how circular this can be, just to be clear on that point. It is your judgment at a moment's notice that determines which option is better and why. This is a skill that can be practiced and eventually mastered, and will be a great source of margin for you to use against your opponents.
In short, I'm not saying "only use A, never use B". I suppose the best way to put it would be "use A when A is better, and use B when B is better, and seek to understand why which option is better at any given time". Yes, this is obvious on paper. No, people still don't do it in practice. Perhaps articulating it will fix that.
This whole mess is my way of defining "don't do bad things". What makes something bad? To me, it is anything that unnecessarily lowers your win rate. We rule out what generally doesn't work because it is readily obvious. What is not obvious is to also rule out things that don't work work as well as another option, because both of them are still bad but to differing degrees. The latter is just not as obvious, but it's still going to affect your performance and it would be in your best interest to fix it.
I know this is a magnet for trolls to say "Umbreon is giving obvious day 1 advice" but this is something that really happens at every level of play. You still pick sub-optimal options too, although they are either much less frequent than other players, or my lack of knowledge with Falco allows me to miss them. But when you switched to Marth in GF, oh yeah I can accurately judge every single action you did and that's why Sensei knows that you still don't get a 100% yet even if you beat the best player in the world. For lower level players, sub-optimal decision-making is much more common and openly apparent even without a mastery of character knowledge.
One tool is almost always going to be objectively better than another. The player may not understand why, which tool is better, or how to reason through that type of judgment in a very small amount of time. That's okay. We can talk about it on discussion boards and test and practice to resolve those issues. What is not okay is to know that you have a better option and to intentionally not use it. It happens all the time.
Bingo. You are totally valid, although you should change your percentage to 100% and play to the ideal. You're just jumping too many steps mentally because you already know this stuff I think. For example, I think we should eliminate predictability from our evaluation for now, something you alluded to in your post. We can add it later once we understand our options better.
There's many, many variables that defines one option as "the best" and knowing what your best option is should be MUCH harder than simply using it. One step at a time. Once everyone agrees that yes we should be sticking to our best options we can start to figure out what those options are and why they are the best.
edit: speaking of armada so much, here's what I was listening to while I wrote this post. Let's see who gets it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rHYRaJGDk4
Bones0
Smash Legend
I was more talking about using sub-optimal options to buff the effectiveness of your optimal options. So for instance, you could SHFFL nairs at the opponent to condition them to shield. The SHFFL nair may yield benefits only 10% of the time, and you may get punished some of the time, but if you could be capable of killing off of grabs with good consistency, then it would be worth nairing at your opponent a few times and taking the OoS punishments because it would guarantee you'd get a few run up grabs on them shielding (anticipating another nair). But it is a concept that I see in virtually every option. Of course, if you are considering the rush down nair good because it opens up other options, then maybe this is the circular logic you were referring to, but it seems misleading to call the nair effective when it's a less than mediocre option used to buff your best options.
Don't get caught up in the example itself though, I'm not actually advocating rushing down opponents with nair all game to make them shield so you can grabs more easily.
I find it hard to separate predictability from the equation when evaluating tools, but it could be a fun mental exercise to work without it with you.
Juno McGrath
Smash Hero
MAN this thread is the best.
D
Deleted member
Guest
I can't honestly advocate this idea, if only because I've never seen it used correctly in X years of playing the game. I would say to shy away from it unless some reasonable examples can come to light.
For example, I remember watching this IRL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LWjDzpZork&t=21m23s
I'm not sure predictability plays much of a part if any when you have better options because your best options are fundamentally guaranteed. How many fairs is that? And why couldn't you get around it? It's not because you're stupid or inept as a player, it's just a good reliable tactic and armada was totally correct to use it X iterations until you lost to it. This is the kind of stuff we should be looking for with this character.
Again, I don't have all the answers. This is just going off of my best judgment for now and can change at any time.
edit: lol this thread is buns.
Bones0
Smash Legend
When I was watching that live, I told the person next to me, "Well, that's a stock. Armada is just going to float camp until PP comes near him and trades with a nair."
*30 seconds later*
"GAME!"
*30 seconds later*
"GAME!"
Tarv
Smash Journeyman
I'm thinking about wading through all 770 pages of the Marth boards whenever I have the time and extracting the useful bits of information and organizing them into a series of Super Helpful Marth Posts all in a neatly organized and professional looking Marth Guide. However, I need help. I can't do this on my own. So if you're interested please let me know. It's a lot of work but I feel like it could be worth it one day.
Edit: If no one wants to help, I'll probably still attempt it but I might just give up after the first ten pages or something.
Edit: If no one wants to help, I'll probably still attempt it but I might just give up after the first ten pages or something.
Bones0
Smash Legend
If you can search by post length, just search the thread for all the long posts and find which ones have some decent material. Obviously there are some gems of knowledge in short paragraph posts, but most of them come in pretty large walls of text.
Edit: Apparently all the cool search options are gone.
Edit: Apparently all the cool search options are gone.
Tarv
Smash Journeyman
Nooo, that would've been so helpful. Maybe I could just search for posts by people who actually give reliable Marth information? I would need some candidates though since you guys know these boards a hell of a lot better than I do.
Edit: From what I've seen I'd probably look for posts by Cactuar, Dr. Peepee, Bones0, Mew2king (hopefully he has some old posts in here or something), Knightraeptor (Sp?), TAI, Umbreon, Unknown, KirbyKaze, pewpewu (if he has anything that's not a question for PP) and any other top Marth. I don't know who else contributed to these or who would be a reliable source of information.
Edit: From what I've seen I'd probably look for posts by Cactuar, Dr. Peepee, Bones0, Mew2king (hopefully he has some old posts in here or something), Knightraeptor (Sp?), TAI, Umbreon, Unknown, KirbyKaze, pewpewu (if he has anything that's not a question for PP) and any other top Marth. I don't know who else contributed to these or who would be a reliable source of information.
Bones0
Smash Legend
Dr Peepee
Cactuar
Umbreon
Those are the three I would stay away from, but pretty much everyone else should have informative posts.
Cactuar
Umbreon
Those are the three I would stay away from, but pretty much everyone else should have informative posts.
Tarv
Smash Journeyman
? Somehow I have a hard time believing you.
Edit: Alright, let's get to this...
Stylez
Smash Cadet
Do you think Marth's that kind of character though? I feel like Peach can float-camp + fair safely because Falco would need to punish while avoiding a trade (which would work in peach's favor). For Marth, nothing good can come of a trade, meaning he needs to react + punish at some point. Do you agree? Am I oversimplifying things?
FrootLoop
Smash Lord
I don't get what your point is Stylez. Although I do agree that float camp + fair wouldn't work as well for marth.
knightpraetor
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2005
- Messages
- 2,321
umbreon's post seems so true, unless marth's good options aren't fundamentally guaranteed
Stylez
Smash Cadet
Well, I don't mean literally float-camp + fair as a Marth. I just don't think Marth has options as fundamentally guaranteed.
I see that as a good option for peach because the fair may connect, she may trade with falco, or she may whiff and be hit by a dash attack or something. That seems 2-1 in her favor.
Marth can't trade. He has to do something to keep his opponent at bay and eventually commit, or react and punish.
Again, I think i'm oversimplifying and mostly looking for someone to tell me i'm wrong and why.
I see that as a good option for peach because the fair may connect, she may trade with falco, or she may whiff and be hit by a dash attack or something. That seems 2-1 in her favor.
Marth can't trade. He has to do something to keep his opponent at bay and eventually commit, or react and punish.
Again, I think i'm oversimplifying and mostly looking for someone to tell me i'm wrong and why.
knightpraetor
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2005
- Messages
- 2,321
all of the top tiers have options that can deal with peach's float fair..fox dodges and punishes though his punishes are less guaranteed as peach doesn't lag enough on the fair to guarantee a punish, but he makes up for it with high damage output...he also beats approaching fair quite easily even with nair....it may seems like peach's fair can win against anything..which is true, but it can't win against everything simultaneously..even though in your mind it may appear as if the peach just swings with fair and beats every move the reality is that peach anticipates and predicts your move and swings at a spacing to beat your move..so as long as you aren't predicted your success rate increases drastically.. nair is another story..peach's just swing and win, but that's when you have to try to outspace her.
I'm divided on how bad the peach matchup is for peach..i keep going between marth favored, peach favored, marth favored...As I get better I keep inventing more and more strategies to beat peach with marth. I really think marth's should just take 3 weeks and main peach while they try to understand her better as a character, it will help drastically in designing a counter, but i do think that marth can win on most stages vs peac as long as he is careful about not getting gimped/nair into nair autokilled at low percent.
sheik just gets way too much damage off of grabbing fC fair if the peach approaches with it, and so when the peach doesn't approach she gets a lot more options for dealing with the fair
falco...falco's screwed..just be PP and laser/take to the platform every time peach is likely to hit you.
jiggs wrecks peach.
But anyway, while i think peach is probably top 3, her fair isn't so godlike that you can just argue it being 2-1 in her favor..that assumes that the likelihood of her missing is the same as the likelihood of her hitting/trading..which it isn't.
marth doesn't have any cause to complain about peach, unless she takes him dreamland or pulls 2 stiches on him
I'm divided on how bad the peach matchup is for peach..i keep going between marth favored, peach favored, marth favored...As I get better I keep inventing more and more strategies to beat peach with marth. I really think marth's should just take 3 weeks and main peach while they try to understand her better as a character, it will help drastically in designing a counter, but i do think that marth can win on most stages vs peac as long as he is careful about not getting gimped/nair into nair autokilled at low percent.
sheik just gets way too much damage off of grabbing fC fair if the peach approaches with it, and so when the peach doesn't approach she gets a lot more options for dealing with the fair
falco...falco's screwed..just be PP and laser/take to the platform every time peach is likely to hit you.
jiggs wrecks peach.
But anyway, while i think peach is probably top 3, her fair isn't so godlike that you can just argue it being 2-1 in her favor..that assumes that the likelihood of her missing is the same as the likelihood of her hitting/trading..which it isn't.
marth doesn't have any cause to complain about peach, unless she takes him dreamland or pulls 2 stiches on him
I couldn't get around it because I was an idiot and spacing way too far from him <.<
Marth can beat Peach on DL. I lost because I didn't adjust my spacing flexibly enough.
That inflexibility led me to jumping into Bairs/getting hit by those and Fairs, getting dash attacked, and not taking free kills when AR had to recover. I STILL did well playing inflexibly. Marth is busted and that matchup is butt for Peach.
just on like a basic game theory level
this is either strictly wrong or so basic it doesn't merit saying
like, if you're not taking into consideration the fact that an opponent expecting a move affects how likely it is to hit, you're wrong
and if you are and you're just saying that in one specific iteration of a situation you should use the move that's more likely to hit/will yield more fruitful results on average, well, duh.
just to clarify I know nothing about melee
but the post is so abstract and SO SIMPLE that that almost doesn't matter.