• 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!

Does rolling kill the fun?

Abyssal Lagiacrus

Fly across the high seas and mountains
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
1,698
Location
Arkadelphia, Arkansas
NNID
LugiaTheGuardian
3DS FC
2981-6257-4399
Is it an opinion that we see light? No, that's a fact. It doesn't matter if some random people think so, it simply isn't true. Same here.

Whataya want me to say? That this is a legitimate problem when it isn't? The people who think Ike is OP are just as wrong as you. How aren't they?

Discussing this does nothing when you don't listen to the ways around it. What's the point in continuing to be blind to the truth? There's no reason for this to exist, especially when there are indeed people readying the pitchforks.
............

I can't even understand where you're coming from anymore, alienating anyone who has a different opinion as you as "wrong"

We can't think that rolling is annoying to fight against or else we're wrong? Enlighten me please on your reasoning, because this all absolutely is opinion, and rampaging in here with your self-righteousness on how we're all wrong isn't helping your case. Especially since you still refuse to see that the main point is that it's annoying and unfun. Sure there are people who say it's OP, but the main point is that it's not fun to fight against.
 

Liam_Butler

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
75
Location
Macomb, Michigan
3rd Strike had DEFENSE problems? Are we on something? 3rd Strike had some of the campiest play I've seen in my life before SF X TKN, and we do realize that parries are a defensive mechanic, right?
Not sure what Third Strike you played, my friend, but camping in Third Strike is not a viable option. Defense in Third Strike is like playing Bowser in Melee. Not viable if the person you're playing has any kind of competitive skill. And Parrying isn't solely a defensive mechanic. It does both. Parrying destroys zoning, if you can play defensive in Third Strike, congratulations. You have the best Remy in the world.

Sure there are people who say it's OP, but the main point is that it's not fun to fight against.
I don't think it's game breaking at this point, it just annoys me.
 

Raijinken

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
4,420
Location
Durham, NC
Two people rolling around til one gets punished is exactly the same as two wavedashing around until one gets punished. The only difference is that the read is slightly harder due to rolling providing brief invincibility, and a lot of projectiles got nerfed, making them a poor choice of approach.
 

Road Death Wheel

Smash Champion
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
2,149
Location
Canada,Ontario
NNID
Kairos-Xman
3DS FC
2406-5636-9789
well as long as its been clairified that rolloing aint game breakingly op than im done here. i don't argue opinionated subjects.
 

Liam_Butler

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
75
Location
Macomb, Michigan
Two people rolling around til one gets punished is exactly the same as two wavedashing around until one gets punished. The only difference is that the read is slightly harder due to rolling providing brief invincibility, and a lot of projectiles got nerfed, making them a poor choice of approach.
It's like footsies in other games, but footsies in Melee (dashdancing, wavedashing, etc.) is much more in depth and rewarding, than in 4. I know what you're saying, but Melee does that sort of thing better, and it is not as annoying.
 

Quillion

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
5,628
That's what made them USELESS. Good defensive options are balanced ones. What's the point of giving me the ability to block if it sucks at higher level play?
Because one of the express points of Super Smash Bros is to make a fighting game that can enjoyed without having to repeatedly get familiar with the controls. When I say that defensive options are "noob options", I mean that they allow less serious players to enjoy the game by having a maneuver that is easy to execute and useful.

Inviability of the Mighty Glaciers aside, Melee was the PERFECT balance between serious and casual play because while it was fast and had techniques, it also had these noob options that allowed the game to be perfectly enjoyable by non-serious players. What Sakurai has been doing since Melee is to remove the enjoyability of high-level play and strengthen the noob options.

Why is this NOT FUN? Because all your practice with your combos and approaches becomes ALL FOR NOTHING if all the noob can do is dodge and be safe.

If you actually have fun having your match's pace being controlled by the defending player, then you're just a really good casual player who understands nothing about why this is so upsetting to more serious players. Egoraptor made an insightful video about Zelda where he explained that defense-controlled fight is not fun that could easily be applied to other games. Watch it:


Even though I'm taking the side of "rolling is unfun to fight against", I believe that this rolling to dodge lingering hitboxes is an exaggeration.

If someone has video proof about how rolling allows you dodge normally roll-punishing attacks, post it now.
 

Mechageo

Smash Ace
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
626
Location
Utah
Robin has a good dash attack to punish rollers with. He sits there holding the weapon out for a long time and their roll ends with them entering its hitbox.
 

Raijinken

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
4,420
Location
Durham, NC
Robin has a good dash attack to punish rollers with. He sits there holding the weapon out for a long time and their roll ends with them entering its hitbox.
If you miss that punish, though, you're the one getting punished. Endlag for days.

It's like footsies in other games, but footsies in Melee (dashdancing, wavedashing, etc.) is much more in depth and rewarding, than in 4. I know what you're saying, but Melee does that sort of thing better, and it is not as annoying.
In depth, I agree. Rewarding, I would disagree, as the result is the same for both. Unless the reward for wavedashing comes from the relative difficulty in actually performing the maneuver repeatedly and properly. In which case, yes, rewarding, but also more difficult than needs be for a Smash game.

But the question isn't whether or not Melee's footsies are better, it's whether or not rolling kills the fun. And I'd personally say it doesn't, as, especially when compared to Brawl, it's more punishable and thus doesn't force the game into defensive play. Here, at least in my experience and observation, the footsies here are less a perpetual waiting game like Brawl, and closer to a proper spacing game like in Melee.

But it also helps that, since we lack character-dependent wavedash/dashdance strength and viability, rolling is a much closer to universally equal maneuver, which I believe is better for balance in the long run.
 

Amiibo Doctor

Smash Ace
Writing Team
Joined
May 30, 2014
Messages
756
Location
U.S.A.
NNID
AmiiboMD
If your character has a long-reaching dash attack, then even with lag you should be able to hit them coming out of the roll. Be sure you have a combo you can set up out of that, or you'll be open.
 

LancerStaff

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
8,118
Location
Buried under 990+ weapons
3DS FC
1504-5709-4054
............

I can't even understand where you're coming from anymore, alienating anyone who has a different opinion as you as "wrong"

We can't think that rolling is annoying to fight against or else we're wrong? Enlighten me please on your reasoning, because this all absolutely is opinion, and rampaging in here with your self-righteousness on how we're all wrong isn't helping your case. Especially since you still refuse to see that the main point is that it's annoying and unfun. Sure there are people who say it's OP, but the main point is that it's not fun to fight against.
How is is not a fact that rolling is easily delt with?

How is complaining helping? Furthermore, how is it not expected that people will spam rolls after three games of it?

Because one of the express points of Super Smash Bros is to make a fighting game that can enjoyed without having to repeatedly get familiar with the controls. When I say that defensive options are "noob options", I mean that they allow less serious players to enjoy the game by having a maneuver that is easy to execute and useful.

Inviability of the Mighty Glaciers aside, Melee was the PERFECT balance between serious and casual play because while it was fast and had techniques, it also had these noob options that allowed the game to be perfectly enjoyable by non-serious players. What Sakurai has been doing since Melee is to remove the enjoyability of high-level play and strengthen the noob options.

Why is this NOT FUN? Because all your practice with your combos and approaches becomes ALL FOR NOTHING if all the noob can do is dodge and be safe.

If you actually have fun having your match's pace being controlled by the defending player, then you're just a really good casual player who understands nothing about why this is so upsetting to more serious players. Egoraptor made an insightful video about Zelda where he explained that defense-controlled fight is not fun that could easily be applied to other games. Watch it:


Even though I'm taking the side of "rolling is unfun to fight against", I believe that this rolling to dodge lingering hitboxes is an exaggeration.

If someone has video proof about how rolling allows you dodge normally roll-punishing attacks, post it now.
Melee wasn't perfect. Everything about Melee lead to fragile speedsters coming out on top, and as PM has shown, the only way for other characters to catch up is to make them faster. Melee's entire structure prevents any semblance of balance without spacie-fying everybody.

You complain about lacking offense in the new SSB. Can I complain about lacking defense?
 

Liam_Butler

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
75
Location
Macomb, Michigan
In depth, I agree. Rewarding, I would disagree, as the result is the same for both. Unless the reward for wavedashing comes from the relative difficulty in actually performing the maneuver repeatedly and properly. In which case, yes, rewarding, but also more difficult than needs be for a Smash game.
Certain rewards are better for each character. If you land a grab as Marth out of footsies, in Melee, you could get the kill. In 4 or Brawl, you get a little bit of damage. Yes, the rewards are the same, but it varies, you know? That's what I meant, in case I was too vague.

Melee wasn't perfect. Everything about Melee lead to fragile speedsters coming out on top, and as PM has shown, the only way for other characters to catch up is to make them faster. Melee's entire structure prevents any semblance of balance without spacie-fying everybody.
True, Melee isn't perfectly balanced like that, but I think he meant the balance between Casuals and Serious players, not the character balance. My 4 year old brother can play Melee and have fun, and I can go to tournaments and have fun. It's balanced like that, you know?
 

LancerStaff

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
8,118
Location
Buried under 990+ weapons
3DS FC
1504-5709-4054
True, Melee isn't perfectly balanced like that, but I think he meant the balance between Casuals and Serious players, not the character balance. My 4 year old brother can play Melee and have fun, and I can go to tournaments and have fun. It's balanced like that, you know?
If it were suited for serious play, it'd allow more then one type of character to be viable.
 

Abyssal Lagiacrus

Fly across the high seas and mountains
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
1,698
Location
Arkadelphia, Arkansas
NNID
LugiaTheGuardian
3DS FC
2981-6257-4399
If it were suited for serious play, it'd allow more then one type of character to be viable.
Anyone is viable if you can use them well. "Low tier" characters are used in tournaments too.

There's no denying that a large chunk of the winners are "top tier" characters, but even then, that doesn't mean that those are the only characters used. So please don't try and use that. Heck, even if only top-tiers were used, their playstyles are very different from one another. Fox/Falco are the same of course, but then you have Shiek, Marth, Captain Falcon, Jigglypuff, Ice Climbers, and Peach. Pretty sure those characters aren't "one type of character."
 
Last edited:

Abyssal Lagiacrus

Fly across the high seas and mountains
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
1,698
Location
Arkadelphia, Arkansas
NNID
LugiaTheGuardian
3DS FC
2981-6257-4399
'Tis a logical fallacy. One's skill at a game can only be so high. When it caps, it comes down to matchups. Which the better characters obviously win.
That doesn't negate the fact that they're still used, and viable. Just look at aMSa and his Yoshi. But I digress because this isn't even the topic of dicussion anymore.
 

chipndip

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
439
NNID
Chiptendo
3DS FC
4098-3083-1621
Because one of the express points of Super Smash Bros is to make a fighting game that can enjoyed without having to repeatedly get familiar with the controls. When I say that defensive options are "noob options", I mean that they allow less serious players to enjoy the game by having a maneuver that is easy to execute and useful.

Inviability of the Mighty Glaciers aside, Melee was the PERFECT balance between serious and casual play because while it was fast and had techniques, it also had these noob options that allowed the game to be perfectly enjoyable by non-serious players. What Sakurai has been doing since Melee is to remove the enjoyability of high-level play and strengthen the noob options.

Why is this NOT FUN? Because all your practice with your combos and approaches becomes ALL FOR NOTHING if all the noob can do is dodge and be safe.

If you actually have fun having your match's pace being controlled by the defending player, then you're just a really good casual player who understands nothing about why this is so upsetting to more serious players. Egoraptor made an insightful video about Zelda where he explained that defense-controlled fight is not fun that could easily be applied to other games. Watch it:


Even though I'm taking the side of "rolling is unfun to fight against", I believe that this rolling to dodge lingering hitboxes is an exaggeration.

If someone has video proof about how rolling allows you dodge normally roll-punishing attacks, post it now.
1) Complexity for no reason =/= a better game, or Virtua Fighter would be more popular than Tekken and 3D fighters would outshine 2D fighters all the time.

2) So, in order to play proper defense in a game, rather than allowing me to play well by mastering intended mechanics like rolling and shielding, you think it's better for the franchise to rely on a movement exploit that was extremely taxing on the fingers, very difficult to learn, master, and utilize properly, and wasn't even meant to be in the series. All for the sake of proper defense? Yea...no. This isn't MvC. If you want to block with hit-boxes and schizophrenic movement, go play Capcom crossovers.

3) You realize Zelda is a single-player game, right? Of course you want to go wild in a single-player game. Who cares what the AI thinks? However, in a multi-player game, both sides have to be fun: offense and defense. If I get put in 75-100 percent health combos all day without being able to move, that's not fun for me. Also not fun for people if they don't have the tools necessary to engage an opponent who's just running away all day. It takes a balance of both to make a fighting game work, and this game has plenty of chasing options available to the cast that rolling isn't killing the fun of someone that knows how to play and isn't overly attached to Melee.
 
Last edited:

Liam_Butler

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
75
Location
Macomb, Michigan
1) Complexity for no reason =/= a better game, or Virtua Fighter would be more popular than Tekken and 3D fighters would outshine 2D fighters all the time.

2) So, in order to play proper defense in a game, rather than allowing me to play well by mastering intended mechanics like rolling and shielding, you think it's better for the franchise to rely on a movement exploit that was extremely taxing on the fingers, very difficult to learn, master, and utilize properly, and wasn't even meant to be in the series. All for the sake of proper defense? Yea...no. This isn't MvC. If you want to block with hit-boxes and schizophrenic movement, go play Capcom crossovers.

3) You realize Zelda is a single-player game, right? Of course you want to go wild in a single-player game. Who cares what the AI thinks? However, in a multi-player game, both sides have to be fun: offense and defense. If I get put in 75-100 percent health combos all day without being able to move, that's not fun for me. Also not fun for people if they don't have the tools necessary to engage an opponent who's just running away all day. It takes a balance of both to make a fighting game work, and this game has plenty of chasing options available to the cast that rolling isn't killing the fun of someone that knows how to play and isn't overly attached to Melee.
1: It doesn't make it better, it makes it more enjoyable to some, though. Virtua Fighter has a learning curve that is about 90 degrees or so, Smash has a pretty even learning curve, which helps make the game accessible. But I digress. Yes, complexity doesn't determine how amazing a game is, but it can make it more fun to some.

2: The thing is: While the intended methods of defense are alright, the exploits are better for defense (Arguably), which is why it's brought up all the time.

3: This doesn't matter, so I'm ignoring it.
 

Darkzephr

Smash Cadet
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
52
Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba
3DS FC
4012-4533-2435
1: It doesn't make it better, it makes it more enjoyable to some, though. Virtua Fighter has a learning curve that is about 90 degrees or so, Smash has a pretty even learning curve, which helps make the game accessible. But I digress. Yes, complexity doesn't determine how amazing a game is, but it can make it more fun to some.

2: The thing is: While the intended methods of defense are alright, the exploits are better for defense (Arguably), which is why it's brought up all the time.

3: This doesn't matter, so I'm ignoring it.
While I have no intention of telling you what you think is fun, but I think you may be thinking of depth and complexity as mutually exclusive. I feel that the concept of complexity is the concept that VERY few people find fun. Specifically the people who enjoy complexity are the people who are interested in studying exact specifics of each piece of frame data.

I think many people equate complexity with depth, and attribute complexity to their actual enjoyment of depth.
An example to keep in mind: Chess is not very complex, However, it has an extremely high amount of depth. I feel like the new smash has stuck a very good balance between complexity and depth (granted this is my first smash, I'm comparing to other fighting games).

I am curious though, if it is the complexity alone that you find fun; I wouldn't mind hearing some examples of it being fun for you in other games.
 

chipndip

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
439
NNID
Chiptendo
3DS FC
4098-3083-1621
1: It doesn't make it better, it makes it more enjoyable to some, though. Virtua Fighter has a learning curve that is about 90 degrees or so, Smash has a pretty even learning curve, which helps make the game accessible. But I digress. Yes, complexity doesn't determine how amazing a game is, but it can make it more fun to some.

2: The thing is: While the intended methods of defense are alright, the exploits are better for defense (Arguably), which is why it's brought up all the time.

3: This doesn't matter, so I'm ignoring it.
1) And less fun to others. The point is balance, which Melee wasn't the pinnacle of either.

2) They weren't "alright". Advanced play didn't allow one to utilize shielding and rolling in a way that was influential. You avoided damage through wave dashing and piled on damage through wave dashing. All it did was take multiple aspects of the game and made them all revolve around an unexplained exploit with a high barrier of entry. That isn't good game design, no matter how vocal the minority is. To boot, you only had one air dodge. How on Earth are you getting out of a situation where multiple people are putting pressure on you if you only have a mediocre roll, stationary dodges, and one air dodge before being entirely helpless? This isn't just a 1v1 fighter, guys.

3) Idk who brought up Egoraptor, but that was me explaining why that was a bad example. Single player game expectations =/= multi-player game expectations.

True, Melee isn't perfectly balanced like that, but I think he meant the balance between Casuals and Serious players, not the character balance. My 4 year old brother can play Melee and have fun, and I can go to tournaments and have fun. It's balanced like that, you know?
Gonna have to disagree with that notion. A 4 year old hardly even knows what's going on, nor does he understand how it feels to actually want to win the game, not just play it. My little bro used to be 4, and it was enough to just make fun looking stuff happen. Eventually, he started wanting to win, and now I hardly play anything with him, and if I do, he's constantly pouting or just sucking the fun out. Casuals don't appreciate playing with competitive players unless competitive players handicap themselves, but then that's taking from my enjoyment in turn.

Worst part is that he can tell when I'm just letting him win, so I can't do that either...
 
Last edited:

Quillion

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
5,628
3) Idk who brought up Egoraptor, but that was me explaining why that was a bad example. Single player game expectations =/= multi-player game expectations.
I brought Egoraptor up, and it's perfectly fine.

I linked a video to the right time about a subject that could be easily applied to any game and the point is that:

WAITING TO DROP DEFENSE AND PUNISH ERRORS IS NOT FUN. To use another Zelda example, Skyward Sword's combat allowed you to bypass a Bokoblin's blocking once you get good. Sure, you could do a wait-and-punish play, but once you learn how they block, you could pretty much rush and get in sword combos like it's nothing, making the combat a lot more fun.

Let's apply that to Super Smash Bros. In Melee and even 64, you need to be more creative with your defense at high-level play. And even then, you need to mix that in with offense otherwise you'll get knocked out.

In Brawl and 4, it is, just like Egoraptor said, a game of WAITING. You need to wait for those moments when the opponent doesn't air dodge (Brawl) or roll (4), then punish it. Even then it becomes tedious since you only have a little window to punish, and because combos are virtually nonexistent minus Brawl's :metaknight:, there's nowhere to go except punish the next defense.
 

chipndip

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
439
NNID
Chiptendo
3DS FC
4098-3083-1621
I brought Egoraptor up, and it's perfectly fine.

I linked a video to the right time about a subject that could be easily applied to any game and the point is that:

WAITING TO DROP DEFENSE AND PUNISH ERRORS IS NOT FUN. To use another Zelda example, Skyward Sword's combat allowed you to bypass a Bokoblin's blocking once you get good. Sure, you could do a wait-and-punish play, but once you learn how they block, you could pretty much rush and get in sword combos like it's nothing, making the combat a lot more fun.

Let's apply that to Super Smash Bros. In Melee and even 64, you need to be more creative with your defense at high-level play. And even then, you need to mix that in with offense otherwise you'll get knocked out.

In Brawl and 4, it is, just like Egoraptor said, a game of WAITING. You need to wait for those moments when the opponent doesn't air dodge (Brawl) or roll (4), then punish it. Even then it becomes tedious since you only have a little window to punish, and because combos are virtually nonexistent minus Brawl's :metaknight:, there's nowhere to go except punish the next defense.
The difference is that solid play always beats someone over-relying on rolls. If anything, anyone with an extremely fast dash like Zamus is way more effective just dashing around than rolling anyway. Single player game expectations just simply do not fit in a multi-player game, and your example sucks because it doesn't take into consideration the guy getting wailed on because his defensive options are garbage in comparison to the offensive ones.
 
Last edited:

Liam_Butler

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
75
Location
Macomb, Michigan
While I have no intention of telling you what you think is fun, but I think you may be thinking of depth and complexity as mutually exclusive. I feel that the concept of complexity is the concept that VERY few people find fun. Specifically the people who enjoy complexity are the people who are interested in studying exact specifics of each piece of frame data.

I think many people equate complexity with depth, and attribute complexity to their actual enjoyment of depth.
An example to keep in mind: Chess is not very complex, However, it has an extremely high amount of depth. I feel like the new smash has stuck a very good balance between complexity and depth (granted this is my first smash, I'm comparing to other fighting games).

I am curious though, if it is the complexity alone that you find fun; I wouldn't mind hearing some examples of it being fun for you in other games.
Interestingly enough, I am that guy who studies frame data... In Street Fighter, not Smash, though. I enjoy knowing the exact frames, so I can punish properly. Now, I don't memorize every piece of it, but I do memorize all of the things that pertain to my characters.

1) And less fun to others. The point is balance, which Melee wasn't the pinnacle of either.

2) They weren't "alright". Advanced play didn't allow one to utilize shielding and rolling in a way that was influential. You avoided damage through wave dashing and piled on damage through wave dashing. All it did was take multiple aspects of the game and made them all revolve around an unexplained exploit with a high barrier of entry. That isn't good game design, no matter how vocal the minority is. To boot, you only had one air dodge. How on Earth are you getting out of a situation where multiple people are putting pressure on you if you only have a mediocre roll, stationary dodges, and one air dodge before being entirely helpless? This isn't just a 1v1 fighter, guys.
1: Just because it is in there, doesn't mean that it's forced on you. The people who have casual fun don't need that for their fun.

2: Well. Opinions and preferences. I think the game works fine in 4 player.

Gonna have to disagree with that notion. A 4 year old hardly even knows what's going on, nor does he understand how it feels to actually want to win the game, not just play it. My little bro used to be 4, and it was enough to just make fun looking stuff happen. Eventually, he started wanting to win, and now I hardly play anything with him, and if I do, he's constantly pouting or just sucking the fun out. Casuals don't appreciate playing with competitive players unless competitive players handicap themselves, but then that's taking from my enjoyment in turn.

Worst part is that he can tell when I'm just letting him win, so I can't do that either...
Oh, he wants to win. That's why I don't play with him anymore, because if I win, he gets mad. I wants to win, but he doesn't understand how to try and win. He just wants it to happen. One day, he'll learn that Warlock Punch isn't going to always hit, and he'll need to try new things. But level 1 CPUs, it doesn't really matter to them.
 

Quillion

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
5,628
The difference is that solid play always beats someone over-relying on rolls. If anything, anyone with an extremely fast dash like Zamus is way more effective just dashing around than rolling anyway. Single player game expectations just simply do not fit in a multi-player game, and your example sucks because it doesn't take into consideration the guy getting wailed on because his defensive options are garbage in comparison to the offensive ones.
But there are no good offensive options. The hitstun multiplier has been decreased drastically, and combos are barely a thing. Both rolling and air dodge are universal actions, meaning that everyone gets a good defense while only a few get a good offense.
 

Quillion

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
5,628
Both had horrible balance. Fox is used more then stinkin' MK.
Wrong, we've already come to the agreement that other High-tiers like Marth and Jigglypuff are nearly as good as the Star Fox chars.

The only reason MK wasn't banned outright from tournaments was because he was really the only character you could have fun with competitively. Everyone else had to turtle.
 

Road Death Wheel

Smash Champion
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
2,149
Location
Canada,Ontario
NNID
Kairos-Xman
3DS FC
2406-5636-9789
Wrong, we've already come to the agreement that other High-tiers like Marth and Jigglypuff are nearly as good as the Star Fox chars.

The only reason MK wasn't banned outright from tournaments was because he was really the only character you could have fun with competitively. Everyone else had to turtle.
1 dose not change the horrid balance i love bowser.

2 metaknight was banned for a while than brought back. and npt true about the turtling if you think peach, zero suit, diddy kong, and de3 were all about turtling you don't know enough about competitive brawl. its okay if you don't like it of course witch seems pretty obvious but don't make up facts.
 

Quillion

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
5,628
1 dose not change the horrid balance i love bowser.

2 metaknight was banned for a while than brought back. and npt true about the turtling if you think peach, zero suit, diddy kong, and de3 were all about turtling you don't know enough about competitive brawl. its okay if you don't like it of course witch seems pretty obvious but don't make up facts.
I should've said banned PERMANENTLY, and my point still stands. The best characters in Brawl short of Meta Knight were the ones with the best turtling.
 

Road Death Wheel

Smash Champion
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
2,149
Location
Canada,Ontario
NNID
Kairos-Xman
3DS FC
2406-5636-9789
I should've said banned PERMANENTLY, and my point still stands. The best characters in Brawl short of Meta Knight were the ones with the best turtling.
no it dose not since other than meta knight most of the other meta use turnips samus parts and waddle dee's as offensive options. lol and of course ice climbers for bs chain grabs.
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
The main difference between fox and meta knight is with fox to make him op you would actually have to be extremely technical, fast and precise meaning his skill cap was extremely high. With meta knight it was very low and since the game was as slow as it was meta knight became a monster
 

Road Death Wheel

Smash Champion
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
2,149
Location
Canada,Ontario
NNID
Kairos-Xman
3DS FC
2406-5636-9789
The main difference between fox and meta knight is with fox to make him op you would actually have to be extremely technical, fast and precise meaning his skill cap was extremely high. With meta knight it was very low and since the game was as slow as it was meta knight became a monster
lol no meta kight is pretty damn technical it took a bloody while before people became good with him.
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
lol no meta kight is pretty damn technical it took a bloody while before people became good with him.
Are you saying he's more technical than fox? Cause he's not. Also it took a while for people to discover how broken he was not become good with him but I guess in essence they're the same thing. The time and effort you have to put into meta knight to make him competitively viable, is 100 times less than what you would have to put in with fox.
 

LancerStaff

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
8,118
Location
Buried under 990+ weapons
3DS FC
1504-5709-4054
Wrong, we've already come to the agreement that other High-tiers like Marth and Jigglypuff are nearly as good as the Star Fox chars.

The only reason MK wasn't banned outright from tournaments was because he was really the only character you could have fun with competitively. Everyone else had to turtle.
No, Fox is factually used more then MK. Didn't say how good he was. Melee's balance is horrid because only the rushdown glass-cannon-y types are remotely viable. Brawl at least had more then "SHFFL COMBO BLARG," and that's kinda important in a game about character variety.

Are you saying he's more technical than fox? Cause he's not. Also it took a while for people to discover how broken he was not become good with him but I guess in essence they're the same thing. The time and effort you have to put into meta knight to make him competitively viable, is 100 times less than what you would have to put in with fox.
An overcentralizing character is an overcentralizing character, regardless of the skill it takes.
 
D

Deleted member 245254

Guest
I think what it all comes down to is that complaining about something that will very likely not be changed is a waste of time and what would be more constructive is if we discussed sure-fire ways to counter it, if you're having so many issues with it.

Me personally, I don't see the big deal. Rolling seems the same as it was in previous games. Sure, some people like to roll their butts off all over the stage and it makes things annoying but as a result they are probably going to lose if that's the only trick in their bag.

Beating people is not always going to be fun, some people play in an annoying way, if even as a means to mind game you in to being frustrated. It reminds me of a tournament I watched lately here in Japan for a card sport named "Karuta".

It's a simple sport where you swipe cards from you or your opponents side where you have a ton of cards laying face up, and you have a reader who calls out what to swipe. It's a really simple versus game and the people who play it are super in to it, but every now and then there is a person who plays the game in a way that just makes it disastrous or annoying for their opponent. They will yell when they take cards, or hyah when they miss and do all sorts of what you might think would be totally unnecessary, and I've watched with my very eyes this sort of thing utterly wear down a player that would otherwise have defeated them swiftly without much issue. This stuff is part of the 1v1 experience in my opinion, it really is.

When I encounter people who use annoying tactics, it makes me want to focus more, so I can truly put away and pocket a relegated tactic that will work as a catch all to defeat these methods. You have to not let it bother you, and just think of it as a unique obstacle towards showing dominance over any kind of player.

In any case, that would be my advice, but personally I still don't see an issue with rolling. It's just a fact of 1v1 versus gaming that occasionally you will be frustrated with an opponent. It's how you deal with that frustration that makes you a champion, or a wannabe.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
No, Fox is factually used more then MK. Didn't say how good he was. Melee's balance is horrid because only the rushdown glass-cannon-y types are remotely viable. Brawl at least had more then "SHFFL COMBO BLARG," and that's kinda important in a game about character variety.



An overcentralizing character is an overcentralizing character, regardless of the skill it takes.
So what are you arguing? How is it the games fault people pick fox? Especially if he's extremely hard to use over other characters. Also of course he's factually used more than meta knight is, the games been out for nearly 8 years longer than brawl
 

Darkzephr

Smash Cadet
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
52
Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba
3DS FC
4012-4533-2435
Interestingly enough, I am that guy who studies frame data... In Street Fighter, not Smash, though. I enjoy knowing the exact frames, so I can punish properly. Now, I don't memorize every piece of it, but I do memorize all of the things that pertain to my characters.
Oh interesting. So my question doesn't really apply anymore, but I have a way to rephrase it because I am curious about your thoughts on the subject given that I don't talk to many people who are that in depth.

I'll start with an example where I compare moving units from Brood War, to Starcraft 2:

In Brood War you were restricted to unit control groups of under 12. In SC2, your control groups are much larger(don't know offhand). Lets say we have an army of 15 marines, we want to move these marines from one point on the map to another, each marine following the same path at three distinct points in the game..

In Starcraft 2 There are many ways to do this, but the most efficient is placing all 15 of your units in a single control group. When movement is required, navigate to the place you want to move the army, select your control group, and right click.

In Brood War, using control groups is also the most efficient way, though it is more complex than in SC2. To do this, we will need to group our 15 marines into 2 separate control groups. the exact proportions of the control groups are irrelevant for this example, but the fact that there are 15 marines across 2 control groups is what is important. Now, when I want to move my 15 marines, I navigate to the place I want to move my army, select my first control group, right click, select my second control group, and right click.

In Brood war, the method of moving units is inherently more complex (it requires 5 actions to the 3 required from SC2). Though, I would argue for the sake of the movement alone it adds no depth to the game. it does however raise the mechanical skill ceiling, and mechanical barrier for entry for the game.

to Summarize, For moving 15 marines using control groups in BW/SC2 presents these changes in the fllowing categories

Complexity: Brood War > Starcraft 2
Depth: Brood War = Starcraft 2
Mechanical Skill Ceiling: Brood War > Starcraft 2
Mechanical Barrier for Entry: Brood War > Starcraft 2.

My question is, Which of these two systems do you prefer? (Remember, we are only speaking about the movement of 15 marines. There no other factors or considerations to be made)

What would your pros and cons be about each system?

SIDE NOTE: To those who think I may be trolling with this post, I am completely serious. This is a discussion that goes in within the Starcraft community to this day, and I am specifically asking this person due to the fact they identified as the kind of person who feels complexity in and of itself adds to their enjoyment of the game.
 

Darkzephr

Smash Cadet
Joined
Sep 29, 2014
Messages
52
Location
Winnipeg, Manitoba
3DS FC
4012-4533-2435
I think what it all comes down to is that complaining about something that will very likely not be changed is a waste of time and what would be more constructive is if we discussed sure-fire ways to counter it, if you're having so many issues with it.

Me personally, I don't see the big deal. Rolling seems the same as it was in previous games. Sure, some people like to roll their butts off all over the stage and it makes things annoying but as a result they are probably going to lose if that's the only trick in their bag.

Beating people is not always going to be fun, some people play in an annoying way, if even as a means to mind game you in to being frustrated. It reminds me of a tournament I watched lately here in Japan for a card sport named "Karuta".

It's a simple sport where you swipe cards from you or your opponents side where you have a ton of cards laying face up, and you have a reader who calls out what to swipe. It's a really simple versus game and the people who play it are super in to it, but every now and then there is a person who plays the game in a way that just makes it disastrous or annoying for their opponent. They will yell when they take cards, or hyah when they miss and do all sorts of what you might think would be totally unnecessary, and I've watched with my very eyes this sort of thing utterly wear down a player that would otherwise have defeated them swiftly without much issue. This stuff is part of the 1v1 experience in my opinion, it really is.

When I encounter people who use annoying tactics, it makes me want to focus more, so I can truly put away and pocket a relegated tactic that will work as a catch all to defeat these methods. You have to not let it bother you, and just think of it as a unique obstacle towards showing dominance over any kind of player.

In any case, that would be my advice, but personally I still don't see an issue with rolling. It's just a fact of 1v1 versus gaming that occasionally you will be frustrated with an opponent. It's how you deal with that frustration that makes you a champion, or a wannabe.
I wouldn't say it's a waste of time. While I disagree with the OP, I find it very interesting to see how other smashers approach game balance and mindset. Plus, when something is pissing you off it can make you feel better to know you're not alone.
 
Top Bottom