Don't Approach: Melee's Flaw Dissected

[Battlecow]

@Battlecow: I heard about that. I'm assuming you guys don't have time limits in 64?

Normally, I defend defensive play, but stuff like that seems like someone who knows he has less skill simply just wants to run away and hope for the other player to mess up. Good thing Isai is too good.

No built-in timers; there are some provisions for the good old guy-with-a-stopwatch fix, but it's never become necessary, and the Gerson-Isai matches, while very serious, didn't follow any specific written-down ruleset.

And I'm not hating on defensive play at all- Gerson is a *insert hyperbolic stuff here* FANTASTIC player who took 8 out of 21 games from ****ing ISAI (WTF WHO DOES THAT?) by playing to win. More power to him. It would just suck for spectators (and I would think players, although Isai seemed not to mind) if top-level 64 meant 15-minute campfests with 02D's thrown in every minute or so (I don't think it does; hyrule just sucks).

 

[Mew2King]

actually its worse than .24 sec. i don't know how to improve it, i've tried a lot. I read it's mostly genetic

then again ive always had bad reflexes. But i have good trained reflexes (to different situations)

 

[ShroudedOne]

No built-in timers; there are some provisions for the good old guy-with-a-stopwatch fix, but it's never become necessary, and the Gerson-Isai matches, while very serious, didn't follow any specific written-down ruleset.

And I'm not hating on defensive play at all- Gerson is a *insert hyperbolic stuff here* FANTASTIC player who took 8 out of 21 games from ****ing ISAI (WTF WHO DOES THAT?) by playing to win. More power to him. It would just suck for spectators (and I would think players, although Isai seemed not to mind) if top-level 64 meant 15-minute campfests with 02D's thrown in every minute or so (I don't think it does; hyrule just sucks).

That's right, no built in timers...

Yeah, I guess you gotta play to win. But when it gets like that, is it a true display of being better? I'm not sure.

And my reaction time is better than M2K's? There may be hope for me yet...(if reaction time were the most important thing in this game...)

 

[Hax]

What Hax feared actually happened in 64. Don't know if anyone watched the Genesis 2 Isai/boom stuff, but there were a lot of 8 and 9 minute matches. At the time it seemed like a one-time bummer, because boom hates hyrule and camped the **** out of it to prove a point, and Isai was playing Luigi and other no-approach characters for fun.

Then Isai went to Tacna. The Tacna matches were so great that it was easy to overlook, but when Isai played Gerson (the best Tacnian player) he got his **** pushed in a couple of times, because Gerson would not approach. there were literally 3-4 minute sessions of Isai SHDL'ing mindlessly and Gerson hopping around in the **** tent until Isai got bored and approached or Gerson thought that Isai might not be paying attention and approached. Isai ended up figuring out gerson a little and winning most of the matches fairly convincingly, but at the peak of the homosexuality the matches were taking 12-13 minutes- I would literally fast forward a minute, look to see if anyone had lost stock, then either fast forward another minute or go back and watch the 0-death combo. **** sucked. Now, I blame dumb stage rules for a lot of that, but it showed what happens when defense > offense.

Not gonna lie, the prospect of top-level 64 or melee turning into that exclusively frightens me a lot.

this was the scariest **** i've ever read

if Isai lost in 64 then my theories about smash's evolution are true

social haxism!?

 

[Acryte]

Wouldn't happen. Because most players don't have the patience or simply don't want to play it "gay", I'd expect to see an influx in characters who CAN APPROACH vs an influx in super camping. ****, axe approaches with pika even though nair is technically a vulnerable approach, deal is, its one of pikachus better options because even if you end up on shield you have great OoS options. The rest of the time he has to find that spacing for dtilt and ftilt, use the projectile moderately and try to get below them.

First and foremost people will choose the character they want to play. Some characters may not have great approaches because they are vulnerable but they have enough tools that if they are on point with their spacing, reads and mixup, they will have an advantage... whereas they might not be able to win by playing defensively against certain other characters.

You have to find the right balance between the two. You have to try and gain control but you also can't afford to overextend.

 

[bolt.]

I timed out a couple friendlies for the first time in sheik/marth vs peach today. We both just waited so long to find openings that it took ages to get down to business. It worked though, I played a lot better when I was super patient.

 

[Mew2King]

pikachu is like the best character at approaching dude (or one of the best), you can just land behind them with him and its UNPUNISHABLE FROM BLOCK unless you predict the pikachu's next attack and he can just mix it up

marth and sheik can't really approach (without being at disadvantage). Best thing marth can do is randomly run up down tilt

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

In the "getting pushed to the end of the stage" part of the OP you strangely forgot that that's how people die in this game.

 

[Anth0ny]

actually its worse than .24 sec. i don't know how to improve it, i've tried a lot. I read it's mostly genetic

then again ive always had bad reflexes. But i have good trained reflexes (to different situations)

I think you're overestimating other fighting games.

I can't speak for SF4, but in Marvel, if you have a good enough reaction time/execution skills to be godlike at Melee, you have the potential to be godlike at Marvel.



what I'm saying is, M2K you should pick up marvel, **** everyone, and troll the FGC. Kinda like how Justin Wong trolled the MK community by winning the first MK9 national, despite never playing MK competitively

 

[Mew2King]

yeah but MK9 is more like fighters he is used to than previous MK installments

and my reaction time is not good enough for other games, I just have REALLY good understanding of smash and what the best options are, because I'm a nerd that spent hundreds/thousands of hours thinking of many different situations and countering them.

 

[Acryte]

Right, its safe when you nair through and land behind but I'm talking about it's hitboxes. It really has to be used correctly because its a punishable approach. A lot of characters moves will outprioritize it, but on shield it can be spaced safely.

 

[Mew2King]

btw, the new metagame in melee is be-able-to-****-a-fast-faller and you can beat 90% of players

falcon fox and falco are like the only 3 chars people play anymore, besides like 1 or 2 people for other characters

 

[t3h Icy]

Great read Hax! :D

To add to the Gerson/Isai matches, Gerson 4-stocked Isai when Isai was trying to approach him. Match here.

 

[JPOBS]

btw, the new metagame in melee is be-able-to-****-a-fast-faller and you can beat 90% of players

falcon fox and falco are like the only 3 chars people play anymore, besides like 1 or 2 people for other characters

new? when was that ever not the metagame?

Hell, the reason people like you so much m2k is because of those years you spent rollin' on spacies with your sexy 02Ds and edgeguards.

If anything, I'd say melee has sort of moved away from that, with a lot of top players now using lots of different characters.

 

[Pi]

64 - melee comparison is iffy....
the combo's in 64 are...devestating, doesn't give you much time to figure how how your opponent reacts to ur approaches, if u mess up it could very well be a stock

in melee it's not so, well, not as severe at least.

 

[Kal]

Yeah, I guess you gotta play to win. But when it gets like that, is it a true display of being better? I'm not sure.

I don't want to come off as a guy who's constantly pushing Playing to Win, but you have to understand that, within the rules, this guy played to win. That's what skill is: being more likely to win than your opponent within the rules of the game. If you have a problem with the technique the opponent used (assuming he did not "cheat"), it's a problem with the game itself, not the player. You're imposing notions of skill that do not exist within the current game when you make subjective judgments about what a "true display of being better" is.

To make a Melee example, let's suppose you go to a tournament run by scrubs, and they play with Hyrule on. Would you expect anyone to fault you for counterpicking Hyrule and camping? I would not, because you're simply maximizing your chances of winning. Yes, the technique itself is broken and derivative, but that's a problem with the game itself (in this case, the game is Melee with Hyrule on), not something you should fault the player for.

As for the topic discussion, as much as I want to get into it, I think I'm way too aggressive a player to have an unbiased perspective. I do, however, personally think there are plenty of viable approaches, and that hyper-defensive gameplay only works in certain situations. For some characters, these situations occur more often, but they're situational none-the-less. I would never recommend camping with Marth against Falco, for example, because the strategy is, in my opinion, unviable.

 

[Winston]

64 - melee comparison is iffy....
the combo's in 64 are...devestating, doesn't give you much time to figure how how your opponent reacts to ur approaches, if u mess up it could very well be a stock

in melee it's not so, well, not as severe at least.

Considering how easy it is to hitconfirm everything in 64, and the lack of crouch canceling, the reward for successfully approaching is approximately as good as the reward for beating their approach. So I don't see this being the key factor...

The bigger difference I think is the general floatiness/high short hops.

It's like if every character had Sheik's short hopping physics... not so good for approaching into defensive aerials or dashdance.

While we're on the subject of 64 comparisons...

It's curious that the lack of frame-safe shield pressure (from non-spacies) is a key part of Hax's argument, while in 64 shielding is miserable and you get almost auto-***** if you shield a move against any character... and yet the game is more defensive, not less. I don't think this disproves his point in any way, but I feel that it's not the root cause of the problem.

As far as I can tell direct OOS retaliation isn't a big problem for any of the characters that are commonly played. It's not like Jiggs, Sheik, and Marth live in fear of getting shieldgrabbed if one of their huge, low lag aerials gets blocked. They aren't at frame advantage, but the fact that moving out of shield takes some amount of time gives them a slight advantage usually.

 

[Jellyfishn]

The more I think about Melee, the more I think you have got something figured out. Obviously I think approaching is necessary, but Melee is a game in which any failed approach will be punished, and will probably cost you a stock or a lot of damage, if your opponent can read you.

 

[Deleted member]

What Hax feared actually happened in 64. Don't know if anyone watched the Genesis 2 Isai/boom stuff, but there were a lot of 8 and 9 minute matches. At the time it seemed like a one-time bummer, because boom hates hyrule and camped the **** out of it to prove a point, and Isai was playing Luigi and other no-approach characters for fun.

Then Isai went to Tacna. The Tacna matches were so great that it was easy to overlook, but when Isai played Gerson (the best Tacnian player) he got his **** pushed in a couple of times, because Gerson would not approach. there were literally 3-4 minute sessions of Isai SHDL'ing mindlessly and Gerson hopping around in the **** tent until Isai got bored and approached or Gerson thought that Isai might not be paying attention and approached. Isai ended up figuring out gerson a little and winning most of the matches fairly convincingly, but at the peak of the homosexuality the matches were taking 12-13 minutes- I would literally fast forward a minute, look to see if anyone had lost stock, then either fast forward another minute or go back and watch the 0-death combo. **** sucked. Now, I blame dumb stage rules for a lot of that, but it showed what happens when defense > offense.

Not gonna lie, the prospect of top-level 64 or melee turning into that exclusively frightens me a lot.

this is pretty much why i quit 64, great game to play for fun but horrible competitively due to a combo of pretty bad stages/ camping

 

[N.A.G.A.C.E]

I dont feel like reading all of this so let me just ask, when u say approaching is not as good as defending you r talking about the spacies,sheik,marth,cf? I ask this b/c i feel the slower more floaty characters such as peach and jiggs have to approach. If a peach is fighting a fox the peach will always have to chase down the fox to stand a chance. with this being true its not really approaching is not going to happen its more certain characters can play def while other have to approach.

If this is a little unclear i am sorry but its very early were i am and i should be sleeping

edit: also smash 64 is very different then melee and comparing the two doesnt really work in this discussion

 

[Jolteon]

Thread summary: Let's all play Smash64.

 

[AXE 09]

To be completely honest, I disagree with the whole message of this thread. I strongly believe that knowing how to approach effectively and catching your opponent is the most powerful tool you can learn.

You can't do fading air attacks against an aggressive constantly approaching opponent forever, because there's only so much room you have on the stage before you reach the edge where you can no longer fade your arials, otherwise you're forced offstage where you're in danger of an edgeguard especially against an aggressive player.

Too many people choose the defensive route because they're too afraid to approach and mess up and get punished. If people would could just learn to approach and minimize their mistakes rather than just being too afraid to approach period, I believe they would be much better players. Mango is the prime example of someone who is not afraid to approach, and has his approaches down to where he barely makes any mistakes at all. All of his characters that I've seen are like this. However, he does still make mistakes from time to time, but he is just an example of someone who effectively approaches.

I think a lot of us just need to learn how to approach the right way, rather than being too afraid to approach all together and just be completely defensive. I think the rewards of approaching effectively are a lot greater than you think they are

 

[Battlecow]

While we're on the subject of 64 comparisons...

It's curious that the lack of frame-safe shield pressure (from non-spacies) is a key part of Hax's argument, while in 64 shielding is miserable and you get almost auto-***** if you shield a move against any character... and yet the game is more defensive, not less. I don't think this disproves his point in any way, but I feel that it's not the root cause of the problem.

The game is not necessarily more defensive. A lot of high-level 64 consists of very aggressive play; like I said, I personally blame a **** stage for the camping Gerson pulled off. I was just using it as an example of what happens when defense gains a concrete metagame advantage over offense in a smash game.

this is pretty much why i quit 64, great game to play for fun but horrible competitively due to a combo of pretty bad stages/ camping

It's not horrible competitively, and the only reason anyone ever quits 64 is because of a fundamental personal lack of skill.

That said, Hyrule sucks and more 3-plat stages would be nice.

 

[KishPrime]

I'm with Axe on this one. In the OP, he even says that Fox/Falco/Peach are exceptions and have no problem attacking aggressively. What? That means that 3 out of the top 7 or 8 tourney viable-characters are able to approach, and 4 or 5 of them are more favorably played in a defensive way. It's a simplificiation of the discussion, but that seems pretty balanced to me, and I didn't even come up with it. You can't worry about mid-tier and below characters in this discussion, they're inherently flawed on both defense and offense.

I don't disagree that defensive play is slightly better in Melee than offensive play, but I think that it's about as balanced of a game as I've ever seen or played. Ultimately, the terminology of attack, defense, and counterattack are pretty fluid and difficult to define in the middle of a flowing fight between players, and what we really care about is that there are a variety of interesting options available that constantly engage both players, and allow for decision-making, physical skill, and reaction time to come into play. Melee has these characteristics, and there are many options available even within the blanket categories of "attack" and "defense" that regularly become available and then disappear.

On a side note, Jeff and I both accused the other of camping last night while I was Kirby on the top platform and he was Roy on the bottom platform of Yoshi's Story. Who was right?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Haven't finished reading the thread yet, but Ice Climbers also have perfect shield pressure along with Fox/Falco/Peach/Yoshi. Popo Bair > Nana Bair > Repeat, it only leaves 3 frames for the opponent to escape (i.e. they can't without getting hit, no moves are fast enough) if done perfectly.

Are there any other characters who have perfect shield pressure?

EDIT: I've read the thread now.

As a Brawl player (yes, I know) I really don't mind matches like Gerson vs. Isai, I think the mental battle between two players attempting to space and mindgame perfectly is more entertaining than flashy tech skill and b'n'b combos that I've seen a thousand times before. It really makes the game feel more like player vs. player than character vs. character, if that makes sense.

I am sort-of in the middle of Axe and Hax in terms of my opinion, lol. I believe that defensive play is certainly safer, but I really doubt the future of the metagame will have everyone camping. Not because Melee players are too impatient or whatever, just because pure camping will get you ****ed up by anyone who can consistently apply pressure. The ideal way of playing Melee, imo, is to apply as much flawless pressure as you can without committing to anything that will get you punished without a hard read.

Axe, your Mango example doesn't really work. Sure, Mango can approach safely and often flawlessly, but it requires a lot more effort than playing defensively and thus, will lead to less consistency in the long run.

 

[Divinokage]

Playing to win huh? Well.. I'm sure no one likes to lose at all so you bet they'll find whatever tools necessary in order to win, whether it's cheap/dirty tactics or to make you impatient.. etc. Whatever comes to mind. lol.

Anyways, I personally don't mind what the player uses to win, at least not anymore. I made my peace with it and I'll still try to find holes inside whatever gameplay gets thrown at me... because there's a rule that goes.. adapt or die. If you get frustrated by defensive play then you'll most likely perish since you lost your cool already. You have to continue to grow by what's going on right now... if not it's impossible to conquer. But I mean anyone is entitled to play how they want inside the tournament whether it's for show or to win, idk. But at the very least know what the consequences of not adapting means in the end. If you lost because you went for style points instead for the kill then that's your fault, and there's no reason to get mad about that. lol.

Imo, it's pretty hard to actually define what exactly the style the player is using, I personally think it's beautiful that everyone has their own style and it should remain that way. They shouldn't be forced to play in another way they don't actually know how to do since you already trained like crazy before hand to win a certain way. If the peak is really right now, then i think it's bull****. Certain people will always counters to counters and then the game will change again perhaps.. that we don't know but that's only a matter of time and lots of caring.

 

[Roneblaster]

this one time kels shield pressured me so perfectly i couldnt roll out and he just kept going until my shield got so small he shield poked me.

but i agree with KK, theres pretty much no true block strings in this game.

 

[ShroudedOne]

It sounds a little odd to me that he says that Peach has no problems being aggressive. I'm not sure if having good shield pressure and being able to be good aggressively are exactly the same thing...

After further thought, I don't think that simply camping will make you successful in this game. Like Axe said, you've got to learn how to approach, and apply pressure. CC'ing and smash DI exist as reminders that you should be approaching carefully. But applying offensive pressure to your opponent (with at least the top seven characters) is never a bad thing when done correctly. There is only so much room to run.

Also, defensive play =/= camping.

 

[bossa nova ♪]

you're a ***** if you camp. period. idc what character you play. i'm not sure i can say that you're holding back mankind... because i believe that your excessive camping helps make aggressive styles stronger. no, but it is good vs. evil. and i thank Based God everyday for Mangdeezy.

 

[Massive]

I'm going to agree with whoever said that melee's defensive play is more developed than offensive play.

There are some very, very good players who are highly offensive. Their offensive game is usually very evolved, fluid, and reactive. It's only natural that people who are not prone to playing offensively would develop defensive strategies in attempts to counter it. The big issue here is that offensive players are in the minority, so the majority's meta-game has become defensive.

This is likely the case because defensive strategies are far easier to implement than the offensive ones; defensive strategies cause you focus on controlling your own character rather than controlling your opponent's based on their movement. Offensive strategies are "hard" to become good at because of how difficult it is to read your opponent and how reactive and risky most of the strategies are by nature.

It's not a flaw because there's a counter to offensive play, it's just a different method of playing. Whether or not being defensive over offensive is a superior strategy remains to be seen and will probably never be truly resolved, in melee anyway.

 

[Dan Salvato]

Whether or not being defensive over offensive is a superior strategy remains to be seen and will probably never be truly resolved, in melee anyway.

"Superior" is subjective. In any game, a player can have a strategy that works well against some and not so well against others. In any case, the "superior" strategy is generally defined as the one which is widely adopted and works well. For Melee, the defensive strategy might begin to fit this definition.

 

[bossa nova ♪]

offensive is superior.


it's objective.


i'm an *******.

 

[trahhSTEEZY]

posting to subscribe

though i don't fully agree with hax, i just think it's the easier/more developed route, as others have said

offensive plays needs to be understood!

 

[Dan Salvato]

Haters gonna hate when I play offensive with Young Link.

This thread actually makes me wonder what kinds of crazy strategies we haven't thought of yet that could genuinely work if developed enough.

 

[Divinokage]

Oh there are plenty of offensive strats that work, I consider myself pretty offensive in general.. and look what happens, everyone dies.

 

[KishPrime]

Let's be clear:

Easier and/or safer = better/superior 99% of the time, assuming the ability to punish is the same for both.

Realize, though, that to use these terms is a giant generalization. I believe there is a general, slight edge to defense in those two categories most of the time. However, there are times and situations where offensive options are superior - easier and safer. Being good at this game suggests that you are good at identifying the situations for each. In this case, instead of using the categories of offensive and defensive moves, you could simply think of all moves as winning or non-winning moves.

Since both offensive play and defensive play have representative players who do well, I think it's a stretch to say that all situations favor defensive play, especially if it is universally agreed that some characters play very well offensively. Even if the majority of players and characters favor defensive play, though, that does not mean that offensive play is meaningless, and you'd have to look at how often they do have to switch to offensive play.

This is in direct contrast to Brawl, where the game is highly counterattack-based because it's defensive options heavily outweigh the offensive options. The goal becomes more about tricking the opponent into weakening himself defensively than it does about establishing oneself offensively. I don't see this same trend in Melee at all.

 

[leffen]

I basically agree with axe here- although CF can both gain space for retreating very easily and CF was also somehow mistaken for an offensive character when he should play gay as fk.

Oh, and dont forget that EVERYONE has to approach fox/falco(yoshi ;>) because of their projectiles...

 

[Divinokage]

I basically agree with axe here- although CF can both gain space for retreating very easily and CF was also somehow mistaken for an offensive character when he should play gay as fk.

Oh, and dont forget that EVERYONE has to approach fox/falco(yoshi ;>) because of their projectiles...

What makes you say he should play gay as ****? People can play a character how they want and how they think is right.. or should I show you an offensive Falcon myself?

 

[leffen]

As in if he want to win.

 

[Divinokage]

That depends vs who.