Do you think Smash Bros should have casual and competitive balance separated?

[kii]

How do you think Smash should be balanced?

One of the biggest issues with Smash seems to be that characters have strengths and weaknesses, but in high level play players have skills that devalue certain character's strengths it to the point where the character's weaknesses make it unviable. Yet, to give some characters the buffs they would need, some characters would be overpowered in casual play because the average player may not have the skills that make the character balanced to face.

Of course, there's more to Smash than 1 V 1, and so with balancing for multiple modes in mind, it seems hard to believe that it would be possible for every character to be viable in 1V1 at a high level.

How would you handle it? Would you try for something in the middle or would you prioritize one level of play over the other, or even neglect one completely?

 

[NotAnAdmin]

I think that's unnecessary, if casual players were playing a "competitive version" of a game, it wouldn't make a difference because they are going to play the game the same way as before anyway. Even if "X character 's fair comes out 3 frames faster in this version." They were never interested in that to begin with. A deep game has it's surface.

I can see if there were a different mode where the mechanics are completely overhauled not just balance changes.

 

[LancerStaff]

Problem numero uno is that you'd have to balance what's effectively two different games.

Second problem is inevitably getting people to switch. I mean, even when PM was going strong the majority of the Melee community stuck with Melee.

Right now it's pretty obvious they're balancing for FFAs primarily and making changes for 1v1s when it doesn't disrupt FFAs.

 

[Red Shirt KRT]

This is a contradicting question.

If you are playing casually then there should be no reason to balance or change anything at all, because these players are just playing to have fun.

Ex. Most casual players would still be fine with version 1.00 with diddy being OP. If they said anything about diddy being OP or switch to him so they can win more means they are no longer a casual player.


So patches should only be for competitive reasons anyways.

 

[Raijinken]

This is a contradicting question.

If you are playing casually then there should be no reason to balance or change anything at all, because these players are just playing to have fun.

Ex. Most casual players would still be fine with version 1.00 with diddy being OP. If they said anything about diddy being OP or switch to him so they can win more means they are no longer a casual player.


So patches should only be for competitive reasons anyways.

In all my years of experience, I've never known a casual player to not care if a character has a laughably easy way to destroy all opposition at any skill level. Just because someone doesn't enter tournaments doesn't mean they don't care about balance, hazards, matchups, etc. It just means they won't make or lose money based on it.

I still think it should only be balanced for competitive, and while I love 2v2 most, I feel like 1v1 competitive gets the most attention and would make the most sense to balance for.

 

[LightLV]

The thing i don't understand about people who think Melee needed a direction change is that when Melee was the most recent Smash game, none of this was ever a problem. It was still reviewed and sold as an easy, accessible game. And it was. And it still is.

I don't understand why people think "hardcore" and "casual" players cant occupy the same space and still have fun. If hardcore players want a challenge, your only job is to allow enough flexible options to :

1) Allow the Hardcore player not hold ANYTHING back while playing, and
2) Allow the Casual to exist in this space and still feel like they have a chance to win.


And the way to do this has always been handicaps. Melee had the best handicap options IMO, since it left damage untouched but simply boosted/reduced the KB that the player recieved/outputted. This way, you can always have a game focused towards solid, competitive play, while allowing casuals some degree of a fighting chance.

You shouldn't have to force someone to study a game for 12 months before they're able to enjoy playing in the same space as you. It's like game developers have been moving backwards in logic in the last few years. A slider that increases their damage/KB. A slider that increases their character's weight value. An option to give specific characters extra stocks. A slider that provides them extra Rage effect. you don't have to put tripping, or rage, or remove ATs, or other dumbass changes that DIVIDE the community in ways nobody can control.

It's the simplest concept in the world. But everyone acts like casual players are required to believe they're on the same level as everyone else.

 

[T0MMY]

At first I thought this was going to be a topic about the distinct boundaries between Competitive and Casual within the community. In which case, yes, making sure everyone knows the difference between the two and keeping the philosophies separate would be the single best thing for the community.

Too many casuals coming to tournaments demanding that our long-held tradition of "best man wins" be changed to a Fox News regurgitation of "fair and balanced".
Likewise, too many competitive players are ruining the fun of the casual scene trying to force everyone to play 1v1 with no items and neutral stages.

Events can keep things separate, but equal.
It works.

 

[DwarfSkippy]

I feel as if balancing the game with competitive gameplay in mind wouldn't ruin casual player's experience. Melee is very fun casually while being very technical and deep. Either way it's balanced, I'm still playing tho.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I'm a believer in the general idea that balancing for competitive players is better than balancing for casuals. I say this because a developer (read: Sakurai) generally has an idea or an intention in mind when making a character and balancing their data, and while a casual player will probably adhere to this idea most of the time, a competitive player will try to push the envelope and accomplish stuff that may not have been expected, or just figure out a way to overcome their weaknesses. See: Sheik's theoretical "flaw" of low KO power. Technically true -- her smashes are certainly subpar except for sweetspot usmash. But it's clearly possible to compensate and work around this.

It's similar to how in programming, you don't want the developer to also be the tester. They know how the program should act so they tend to limit their testing to expected behavior. When you push the program out to a large number of people who begin to use it in unexpected ways...that's when the nasty bugs start to appear. And so it should be with balance -- don't go off the people who act as you expect, go off the people who do crazy unexpected things and see if it's still balanced when everything's gone off the rails.

 

[TheJolteon]

I kinda feel like its going both ways. Take Luigi for example. All anyone did was whine about his down throw combo's and they were nerfed. Benefiting the competitive community and didn't really apply to a casual. However some characters and moves get buffed that don't even make sense. Overall I think its more for FFA but its affected us as well.

 

[many37]

I think the game is capable of being appealing for both audiences. The real issue here is if Sakurai wants the game to be appealing to both the competitive and casual markets.

Sakurai has a bias towards the game to be focused on the casual market more so than the competitive market (evidenced by how he prevented wavedashing from returning in Brawl and chain grabbing from returning in Smash 4).

However, the competitive community has made quite an impact on where the game is headed. Just look at Melee. The community has kept Melee alive for more than a decade because of the design flaws found on the game. Ironically enough, these design flaws were not intended to be in the game by Sakurai but has kept the game alive and it will continue to be alive unless Sakurai implements these things to Smash officially.

Bottom line: it all depends on who Sakurai intends the game for and so far, it is intended for casuals with a little influence from the competitive community.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

As long as it doesn't go the DOTA route, rather the league balance route it will be fine.

 

[LancerStaff]

I feel as if balancing the game with competitive gameplay in mind wouldn't ruin casual player's experience. Melee is very fun casually while being very technical and deep. Either way it's balanced, I'm still playing tho.

Melee isn't balanced casually... PM definitely isn't either. Both games heavily suffer in FFAs from my experience.

 

[DwarfSkippy]

Melee isn't balanced casually... PM definitely isn't either. Both games heavily suffer in FFAs from my experience.

From my playing it, it isn't as unbalanced as 1v1, a lot of precision needed for characters like Fox can't be done as easily in a chaotic FFA.

 

[kinbobbobkin]

I'm not too sure on the casual side, because most casual players would be playing offline or on For Fun.

But as for the competitive side, I think that future patches on evolving the meta with each character would be enough. I can't see more to be done for the competitive scene, unless they bring more "tournament like" stages will be available.

 

[LancerStaff]

From my playing it, it isn't as unbalanced as 1v1, a lot of precision needed for characters like Fox can't be done as easily in a chaotic FFA.

Melee Fox is nutty almost because of Usmash alone, but then he also has good distance on his recovery (which people aren't too intent on trying to gimp because of Melee ledges) and even casually Fox is strong up close. Everything else like his blaster and reflector is just gravy.