Escape from chain grabs.

[Biz_R_0]

That's not a chain grab, that's just having another grab as a follow up option.

 

[-LzR-]

They were called chaingrabs in Melee so I see no reason for them to be not called chaingrabs in Smash 4 as well. In Brawl throws with set knockback and no nontumble DI allowed inescapable chaingrabs.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with something like Falcos chaingrab. It only works on low % and it really works well around his character design. Ice Climbers still need to have both climbers nearby without lag the moment they grab to make it work so it's fine, retardedly implemented, but fine.
Chaingrabs need more conditions and they are perfectly fine. Or we could rather not be fools and legalize stages other than 5 different versions of Battlefield the Melee stagelist is nowdays? How can you chaingrab someone when the stage flips, moves, interrupts or doesn't give you the room to perform it?

 

[Biz_R_0]

They were called chaingrabs in Melee so I see no reason for them to be not called chaingrabs in Smash 4 as well. In Brawl throws with set knockback and no nontumble DI allowed inescapable chaingrabs.

If you can get out of the chain grab with DI and not just having to wait until they get you to a higher percent or they drop, I don't see a problem with it.

Or we could rather not be fools and legalize stages other than 5 different versions of Battlefield the Melee stagelist is nowdays? How can you chaingrab someone when the stage flips, moves, interrupts or doesn't give you the room to perform it?

That's another thing we could have in Smash 4, more non BF/FD clone stages that aren't horrible garbage. In Melee, there's Pokefloats, PS1, Mute City, and Cruise. In Brawl, there's PS1, Cruise, Delfino, Lylat, and Frigate. That's ~13% per game.

 

[-LzR-]

Brawl has Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, PS2 and possibly more. It mostly depends on how far you are willing to go.

 

[Biz_R_0]

PS2

Not horrible garbage, I said.

 

[-LzR-]

Clearly I am talking to someone who lacks knowledge about this game. Sorry, wasting my time here.

 

[John12346]

Just as far as chaingrabs go, I can think of a few ways to tone it all down reasonably.
- Adjust knockback and knockback angles
- Increase DI angles for thrown opponent
- Increase the startup time for throws
- Reduce the hitstun for throws
- Go the way of traditional fighting games and make it so you cannot be grabbed out of hitstun

Obviously, you don't have to apply ALL of these changes in order to take care of chaingrabs, as you could fix it completely by even implementing ONE of these changes, but it would probably be better overall if character-specific chaingrabs were handled on a case by case basis... w/e, just thought I'd put that out there.

For those of you who care, I'm not against chaingrabs or anything. I condone their usage in the current Smash games and believe that one should use all of the tools at their disposal to win and all that, but my ideals are in line with that things like chaingrabs, infinites, etc. are really bad exploits of a game's bad mechanics and should not exist in said game in the first place.

And as far as IC infinites are concerned, someone suggested to just make it so Nana can't grab or footstool anyone, and I thought that was a pretty cool idea, actually.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Why are you assuming that this would get rid of all combos, and that grabs will be useless? You main PT, you should know better. edit: to clarify, I meant that Charizard has a phenomenal grab game without chain grabs and Squirtle has many combos that aren't just the same move 5 times. Also to clarify:



The number would be different for each move, it wouldn't be a fixed value that applied equally to everything.

The number of opportunities to land grabs would be greatly reduced. Weak attack -> grab would no longer be a thing, as "hitstun + time" before you're able to be grabbed immediately after, say, a landing B-Air with Squirtle, so the opponent will have enough time to stick out an attack of his own, roll, spotdodge, jump, etc. As a result, fast characters lose their most reliable way of landing grabs, which takes away a good deal of their general usefulness in close range.

As far as Squirtle goes, most of his combos are made up of the same couple moves repeatedly...U-Tilt repeatedly, U-Air repeatedly are his most powerful and reliable ones. Still, combos being less valuable was mostly in relation to the idea of hitstun scaling, though low-percent comboing would probably be much riskier for most characters without the threat of a grab lingering after each hit.

Also, Charizard's grab game isn't all that great (it's maybe SLIGHTLY above-average because of the range when not running). Because he sticks his neck out to the distance of his grab while he's running, it's really easy to force him to shield before he gets into grab range. He has some neat grab-release stuff if he grabs you (mostly because of a mix-up involving either a strong attack of A POTENTIAL RE-GRAB), but outside of B-Throw -> running grab on bigger characters at 0% (again, a chaingrab), none of his throws really do anything useful outside of dealing average damage.

EDIT: Before anyone suggests it, D-Throw is NOT a KO move. If you DI optimally, this throw will not KO below something like 170%. Almost all of the time, U-Throw will kill SLIGHTLY earlier and will be the go-to KO throw if you need it.

If you can get out of the chain grab with DI and not just having to wait until they get you to a higher percent or they drop, I don't see a problem with it.

Unless you're suggesting some sort of throw mix-up (say, if they DI D-Throw optimally, they get out, but if they DI B-Throw unoptimally, they can be grabbed again, and vice-versa, with optimal and unoptimal directions being different for both throws), you're taking out a potential follow-up in the game and limiting weak-knockback throws to throw -> single attack set-ups, which would be taking a potential dynamic for throws out for no good reason.

That would still allow for "guess wrong between these throws and I either get another grab or a D-Smash if I guess correctly," but that doesn't really force any pressure until higher percents. I'd rather reward the player who chose to take the inherent risk of going on the offensive than make it especially easy for the person who wasn't able to avoid the offensive maneuver.

 

[Yodery]

Chaingrabs are only gay in Brawl, tbh.

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

That's not a chain grab, that's just having another grab as a follow up option.

So tech-chase based chaingrabs aren't chaingrabs? lol

I see absolutely nothing wrong with something like Falcos chaingrab. It only works on low % and it really works well around his character design.

If you're talking about Brawl Falco, then you're the dumbest person on Earth. Falco can 0 to death with his chaingrab and it takes absolutely no skill.

Chaingrabs need more conditions and they are perfectly fine. Or we could rather not be fools and legalize stages other than 5 different versions of Battlefield the Melee stagelist is nowdays? How can you chaingrab someone when the stage flips, moves, interrupts or doesn't give you the room to perform it?

I think it's perfectly clear where you stand when it comes to Smash knowledge in general, and that's the "I know don't know anything, but I sure act like I do."

Melee counterpick and some neutral stages already interrupt chaingrabs the way you mentioned. And the banned stages are banned for a good reason.

"How can you chaingrab someone when you can't even move/catch your opponent/gameplay is cut in half/have to protect yourself at all time from hazards?"

That's another thing we could have in Smash 4, more non BF/FD clone stages that aren't horrible garbage.

In Melee, there's Pokefloats

Wow.

Brawl has Rainbow Cruise, Brinstar, PS2 and possibly more. It mostly depends on how far you are willing to go.

Clearly I am talking to someone who lacks knowledge about this game. Sorry, wasting my time here.

I'm pretty sure that most rational people will classify PS2 as absolute garbage even if it's a legal counterpick sometimes.


Watching you two debate is like watching two ugly kids seriously arguing about who of them deserves the cutest girl in class.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

If you're talking about Brawl Falco, then you're the dumbest person on Earth. Falco can 0 to death with his chaingrab and it takes absolutely no skill.

No, he can't, at least not any more than Dedede can D-Throw chaingrab -> F-Smash for a 0-to-death; anyone who dies to it just doesn't understand a very important part of the game, and is therefore not very good at it. SDI makes it so that Falco's chaingrab should never end with a kill.

Also, as far as skill is concerned Falco had to get the grab to start it in the first place; what were you doing letting him grab you? He earned something; that's all that matters. What's this sliding scale from high-skilled moves to low-skilled moves, and should every option take great skill to use?

 

[Biz_R_0]

The number of opportunities to land grabs would be greatly reduced. Weak attack -> grab would no longer be a thing, as "hitstun + time" before you're able to be grabbed immediately after, say, a landing B-Air with Squirtle, so the opponent will have enough time to stick out an attack of his own, roll, spotdodge, jump, etc. As a result, fast characters lose their most reliable way of landing grabs, which takes away a good deal of their general usefulness in close range.

You seem to be completely mistaken. You think that I'm saying that after you do ANYTHING, grabs will whiff until hitstun + time. No, I'm saying that after you do a certain move a certain number of times, ONLY THAT MOVE will whiff until hitstun + time. Weak attack -> grab will absolutely work. I honestly don't even see how you got this idea.

Still, combos being less valuable was mostly in relation to the idea of hitstun scaling, though low-percent comboing would probably be much riskier for most characters without the threat of a grab lingering after each hit.

The point of that is to stop "combo off of stage -> strong move" or "combo really far off stage" to gimp people. Obviously the scaling wouldn't be gigantic on the level of only getting in two hits, and once again you have the grab thing completely wrong.

Unless you're suggesting some sort of throw mix-up (say, if they DI D-Throw optimally, they get out, but if they DI B-Throw unoptimally, they can be grabbed again, and vice-versa, with optimal and unoptimal directions being different for both throws)

Yes, that's what I meant.

That would still allow for "guess wrong between these throws and I either get another grab or a D-Smash if I guess correctly," but that doesn't really force any pressure until higher percents. I'd rather reward the player who chose to take the inherent risk of going on the offensive than make it especially easy for the person who wasn't able to avoid the offensive maneuver.

But if there's no way to escape than the offensive player gets a large reward for what's really a small accomplishment. What honestly sounds more fair, "I grabbed you once, instant 60%" or "I grabbed you, I will put on a variable amount of damage that relies on how well you predict me and how well you DI"?

Clearly I am talking to someone who lacks knowledge about this game. Sorry, wasting my time here.

Clearly it's you who knows nothing, for you have disagreed with my opinion and my word is the truth!

 

[TheReflexWonder]

You seem to be completely mistaken. You think that I'm saying that after you do ANYTHING, grabs will whiff until hitstun + time. No, I'm saying that after you do a certain move a certain number of times, ONLY THAT MOVE will whiff until hitstun + time. Weak attack -> grab will absolutely work. I honestly don't even see how you got this idea.

The point of that is to stop "combo off of stage -> strong move" or "combo really far off stage" to gimp people. Obviously the scaling wouldn't be gigantic on the level of only getting in two hits, and once again you have the grab thing completely wrong.

But if there's no way to escape than the offensive player gets a large reward for what's really a small accomplishment. What honestly sounds more fair, "I grabbed you once, instant 60%" or "I grabbed you, I will put on a variable amount of damage that relies on how well you predict me and how well you DI"?

Because the thread is about chaingrabs and how to prevent them from being a problem, not making other moves less useful.

All the same, much like stale moves, all it does is turn what might be the optimal move into a less optimal move. If U-Tilt -> U-Tilt -> U-Tilt -> U-Air would normally be most reliable, what good comes from taking away potential options and making U-Tilt stop working? Part of the interesting thing about Smash is that combos naturally become less or more reliable based on the percent they have. If my U-Tilt combination only starts working at 20-35%, I'd say that I'm pretty smart for being able to land it, especially since the opponent knows it only works at that percent. That's my being good or their being bad, and it has nothing to do with ease of use.

What's wrong with a decent string into a strong move? Again, if I managed to set it up just right, I should be rewarded for that.

As far as "get grabbed, take 60%" is concerned, that's fine as long as the window is small to take it. If you knew that the window for that was between 0 and 15 percent, why would you let him grab you at that percent? The only reason it's a problem in Brawl is because the defensive options are so ridiculously good that there's little room for reliable spacing, so pseudo-random spotdodging and enormous hitboxes will make it a risk no matter what. There just needs to be a better balance between strong pressuring offense and reasonable universal defense.

 

[Biz_R_0]

All the same, much like stale moves, all it does is turn what might be the optimal move into a less optimal move. If U-Tilt -> U-Tilt -> U-Tilt -> U-Air would normally be most reliable, what good comes from taking away potential options and making U-Tilt stop working?

Once again you don't understand. The whiff after x amount of times is a failsafe to stop inescapable infinites or zero-kill % combos. The point of doing this instead of changing the properties of the moves would be that changing the move properties could also change other things whereas this would be just removing the bad parts. Obviously if you can do three U-tilts without getting the guy to kill %, x would be much more than three, probably around 15. For grabs I'm thinking around five.

What's wrong with a decent string into a strong move? Again, if I managed to set it up just right, I should be rewarded for that.

Because you get an entire stock for a single combo. That's too big of a reward. Also characters with subpar recoveries will become underpowered.

As far as "get grabbed, take 60%" is concerned, that's fine as long as the window is small to take it. If you knew that the window for that was between 0 and 15 percent, why would you let him grab you at that percent?

I meant "I grabbed you once, now you will be at at least 60%".

The only reason it's a problem in Brawl is because the defensive options are so ridiculously good that there's little room for reliable spacing, so pseudo-random spotdodging and enormous hitboxes will make it a risk no matter what. There just needs to be a better balance between strong pressuring offense and reasonable universal defense.

If you have a solution that isn't the classic "no more defense make everything like Melee again" I'm all ears.

 

[Big-Cat]

But if there's no way to escape than the offensive player gets a large reward for what's really a small accomplishment. What honestly sounds more fair, "I grabbed you once, instant 60%" or "I grabbed you, I will put on a variable amount of damage that relies on how well you predict me and how well you DI"?

I would actually prefer the former. I was never fond of the idea that you could easily escape a "combo" because you DI'd a certain way on every single attack. Just suck it up and take the damage.

 

[Biz_R_0]

But then combos would take the other player's skill completely out of the equation.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Once again you don't understand. The whiff after x amount of times is a failsafe to stop inescapable infinites or zero-kill % combos. The point of doing this instead of changing the properties of the moves would be that changing the move properties could also change other things whereas this would be just removing the bad parts. Obviously if you can do three U-tilts without getting the guy to kill %, x would be much more than three, probably around 15. For grabs I'm thinking around five.

Because you get an entire stock for a single combo. That's too big of a reward. Also characters with subpar recoveries will become underpowered.

I meant "I grabbed you once, now you will be at at least 60%".

If you have a solution that isn't the classic "no more defense make everything like Melee again" I'm all ears.

No, I get it. Jeez. However, you're just throwing out numbers. In the case of knockback happening to be similar, my U-Tilt deals 5% and another character deals 10%, and the number of hits will be skewed toward the character that deals more damage. That's not fair, and making it based on damage instead of number of hits will just get players stretching it out as much as possible. Same with grabs; one grab might deal 6% and the other might deal 12%.

Either way, it still affects some characters more heavily than others, and as long as attacks have reasonable SDI modifiers, individual hits should never be an issue. The reason Sheik F-Tilt is a thing is because opponents can't reasonably SDI it. If you try a U-Tilt lock with Squirtle, it's easy to SDI out. This is also why attack-based combos aren't of much concern--DI and SDI will always give people the ability to get out if they choose wisely.

That's what I said. Falco can do that in Brawl, but only if he grabs you below 25%. Just don't let him grab you at low percents. It wouldn't be an issue if his spotdodge had more than two vulnerability frames after it starts, or if more characters had decent spacing options that take less time to complete than a spotdodge.

Something as simple as making airdodges incur the same amount of landing lag as if a character had used their Up-B would help significantly. Give spotdodges significantly fewer invincibility frames and/or make the total animation longer. Make moves safer on hit at low percents. A lot of little things make multiple scenarios turn to "go back to neutral position or accept the luck of the draw."

 

[Yodery]

Wow, noirscythe, for the most part, speaks condescendingly towards others, just to get his point across.

He must be so smart, and logical.

 

[Biz_R_0]

No, I get it. Jeez. However, you're just throwing out numbers. In the case of knockback happening to be similar, my U-Tilt deals 5% and another character deals 10%, and the number of hits will be skewed toward the character that deals more damage. That's not fair, and making it based on damage instead of number of hits will just get players stretching it out as much as possible. Same with grabs; one grab might deal 6% and the other might deal 12%.

You say you get it but you don't, otherwise you would've known that it varies from move to move. Meaning where Squirtle's U-tilt would end at 15, a stronger U-tilt might end at 10. With grabs, I'm referring to the actual action of grabbing, not the throws themselves.

Either way, it still affects some characters more heavily than others, and as long as attacks have reasonable SDI modifiers, individual hits should never be an issue. The reason Sheik F-Tilt is a thing is because opponents can't reasonably SDI it. If you try a U-Tilt lock with Squirtle, it's easy to SDI out. This is also why attack-based combos aren't of much concern--DI and SDI will always give people the ability to get out if they choose wisely.

I said pretty much exactly this earlier, there's no problem if you can reasonably DI out of a move without taking, like, 70% damage.

It wouldn't be an issue if his spotdodge had more than two vulnerability frames after it starts, or if more characters had decent spacing options that take less time to complete than a spotdodge.

Something as simple as making airdodges incur the same amount of landing lag as if a character had used their Up-B would help significantly. Give spotdodges significantly fewer invincibility frames and/or make the total animation longer. Make moves safer on hit at low percents. A lot of little things make multiple scenarios turn to "go back to neutral position or accept the luck of the draw."

Why do you think that spot dodges are so OP? You can't just do them rapidly and doing one at the wrong time leaves you extremely vulnerable. Someone in the L Cancelling thread explained this better than I did, I'll try to find it.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

You say you get it but you don't, otherwise you would've known that it varies from move to move. Meaning where Squirtle's U-tilt would end at 15, a stronger U-tilt might end at 10. With grabs, I'm referring to the actual action of grabbing, not the throws themselves.

I said pretty much exactly this earlier, there's no problem if you can reasonably DI out of a move without taking, like, 70% damage.

Why do you think that spot dodges are so OP? You can't just do them rapidly and doing one at the wrong time leaves you extremely vulnerable. Someone in the L Cancelling thread explained this better than I did, I'll try to find it.

You threw out a number for "grabs," so it was easy to assume you meant "all grabs should have a limit of 5." You can't be general and tell people they shouldn't have assumed you meant more than that.

Where do you draw the line, though? Is it okay for Fox to take 50% because of his fall speed or Bowser because of his fatness, compared to 35% for Mario or something? A set number would be skewed toward helping certain characters, and variable numbers would be difficult to balance for the whole cast.

The issue with spotdodge is that the good characters all have really good options that take up the space that an opponent must be in to punish a predicted spotdodge. If you wait on Snake, you might just end up taking 21% from F-Tilt. Wait on Falco or Ice Climbers and they grab you. That's why you rarely see people throw out nearby pokes against the good characters in Brawl--Too much risk for too little reward, which is the same for things like fastfall airdodge mix-ups, etc. Watch a really successful Snake or Falco do their thing; Razer, Ally, or DEHF will spotdodge for half of their close-range game because of this. This is pretty much the primary reason competitive Brawl matches drag on for so long.

 

[Biz_R_0]

Where do you draw the line, though? Is it okay for Fox to take 50% because of his fall speed or Bowser because of his fatness, compared to 35% for Mario or something? A set number would be skewed toward helping certain characters, and variable numbers would be difficult to balance for the whole cast.

This was the point of knockback scaling, so that kind of stuff doesn't happen either. Or, at the very least, that stuff doesn't have too big an effect.

The issue with spotdodge is that the good characters all have really good options that take up the space that an opponent must be in to punish a predicted spotdodge. If you wait on Snake, you might just end up taking 21% from F-Tilt. Wait on Falco or Ice Climbers and they grab you. That's why you rarely see people throw out nearby pokes against the good characters in Brawl--Too much risk for too little reward, which is the same for things like fastfall airdodge mix-ups, etc. Watch a really successful Snake or Falco do their thing; Razer, Ally, or DEHF will spotdodge for half of their close-range game because of this. This is pretty much the primary reason competitive Brawl matches drag on for so long.

Okay then, just make the cooldown for spot dodges larger, no need to nerf them into oblivion.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

This was the point of knockback scaling, so that kind of stuff doesn't happen either. Or, at the very least, that stuff doesn't have too big an effect.

It's not that simple, though. Fox would still have trouble getting out of a situation past that because of his weak horizontal aerial mobility, while Bowser doesn't have any options to protect himself from underneath, so it won't change much as far as how vulnerable they are.

 

[Biz_R_0]

It's not that simple, though. Fox would still have trouble getting out of a situation past that because of his weak horizontal aerial mobility,

Double jump away and shine on landing.

while Bowser doesn't have any options to protect himself from underneath, so it won't change much as far as how vulnerable they are.

Make his Dair good.

 

[Akenero]

You will never escape properly executed chaingrabs.period.

 

[Biz_R_0]

And that's the problem we're trying to fix.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Double jump away and shine on landing.



Make his Dair good.

For Fox, it's usually not as simple as that, especially if you were frame trapped into getting your double jump taken away mid-combo.

For Bowser, you're suddenly advocating changing much more of the game in order to fit one thing. That's way outside the scope of this topic, as a lot of the cast suddenly needs new tools to make up for your change.

 

[Biz_R_0]

For Bowser, you're suddenly advocating changing much more of the game in order to fit one thing. That's way outside the scope of this topic, as a lot of the cast suddenly needs new tools to make up for your change.

But Bowser's Dair is already ****, that's its own problem. Also, none of these characters need tools for my change, these situations you're bringing into question arise from an already existing problem. I think that you already know this but want to "win" the argument so you had to say something. If this is the case then I really don't feel like discussing this anymore.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

But Bowser's Dair is already ****, that's its own problem. Also, none of these characters need tools for my change, these situations you're bringing into question arise from an already existing problem. I think that you already know this but want to "win" the argument so you had to say something. If this is the case then I really don't feel like discussing this anymore.

The characters' moveset weaknesses are mostly fine. The issues with things like Bowser D-Air only come into play when certain characters are screwed over by your proposed infinite prevention system; it hurts some characters a great deal more than others.

That said, you're not acknowledging the problems I'm bringing up, so I'm unsubscribing. Enjoy your assumed victory. :/

 

[Biz_R_0]

Dude, I did acknowledge the problem. When I did, you then blamed an existing problem on my solution. It's rather disheartening seeing someone I used to respect do stuff like that to win an argument.

By the way, nice job with the "walking away" tactic. I know how it works; you create a false air of maturity by dismissing the other person through insulting and usually untrue accusations and then leave, ending the discussion before they can refute your point, making it look like it's true. What you're basically doing is insulting someone and then saying "game over, I win". The real mature thing to do would be to just not respond at that point if you don't want to continue the discussion.

Enjoy your assumed victory. :/

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

No, he can't, at least not any more than Dedede can D-Throw chaingrab -> F-Smash for a 0-to-death; anyone who dies to it just doesn't understand a very important part of the game, and is therefore not very good at it. SDI makes it so that Falco's chaingrab should never end with a kill.

Also, as far as skill is concerned Falco had to get the grab to start it in the first place; what were you doing letting him grab you? He earned something; that's all that matters. What's this sliding scale from high-skilled moves to low-skilled moves, and should every option take great skill to use?

Oh yeah, the same way that SDI makes it so that Falco's chaingrab doesn't work? Or perhaps the way that Melee Puff's Uthrow into rest shouldn't work on spacies because of SDI? lol

At a broad range of chaingrab percentages, Falco can spike you for a kill, and not every character has good recovery, nor can you SDI into tech every situation and requires exponentially better execution than the chaingrab itself. DDD chaingrab into fsmash isn't nearly as viable.

Oh yeah, Metaknight has to hit you to kill you. What were you doing letting him hit you? lolomg oversimplified world

I don't know if you play any games other than Melee, but there's a clear line between what takes good execution and what doesn't. And if you're unable to discern such basic concepts, then that's just unfortunate.

 

[Biz_R_0]

Oh yeah, Metaknight has to hit you to kill you. What were you doing letting him hit you? lolomg oversimplified world

I...agree with you? I'm confused, that usually never happens. "Don't get hit" is the least helpful and most nonsensical advice you could give to a person. Realistically you're probably only going to not get hit if you're playing someone leagues below you. Hell, Isai has only had one perfect recorded match and he's the god of 64.

I don't know if you play any games other than Melee

He plays Brawl, he's considered by many to be the best PT in the world (him or T-Block, although I don't think I've ever seen his).

 

[Big-Cat]

But then combos would take the other player's skill completely out of the equation.

Actually, you could argue that it makes each player's skills all the more important. By putting a higher risk and higher reward on everything, players have to make every action count and hope for the best when they've got to take gambles - but this mean you can't have things like jabs and pokes though. If you make it where a player can get out with any given attack dealt to them, that takes away a lot of the risk and in some cases, makes the attacks usless.

This is why I never liked the idea of there being an optimal DI for escaping certain attacks because that can mean there is no counter to that escape method. I am personally in favor of DI being on CERTAIN moves, not all, and that the options for the direction of DI be limited to certain directions depending on the attack.

 

[Biz_R_0]

Actually, you could argue that it makes each player's skills all the more important. By putting a higher risk and higher reward on everything, players have to make every action count and hope for the best when they've got to take gambles - but this mean you can't have things like jabs and pokes though. If you make it where a player can get out with any given attack dealt to them, that takes away a lot of the risk and in some cases, makes the attacks usless.

After getting hit, DI-less combos take the skill of the other player completely out of the equation. inb4 "don't get hit".

 

[Big-Cat]

After getting hit, DI-less combos take the skill of the other player completely out of the equation. inb4 "don't get hit".

Well, that's the thing. Don't get hit. No need to turn every combo into one of King's chain grabs - now that is pure guessing when it comes to escaping.

If you get hit, you deserve the punishment. Simple as that.

 

[Biz_R_0]

You're going to get hit. You will probably never have a perfect game at a tournament. "Don't get hit" is horrible advice because never getting hit is borderline impossible. Isai is the god of 64 and he's had a total of one recorded perfect game.

 

[-LzR-]

If you're talking about Brawl Falco, then you're the dumbest person on Earth. Falco can 0 to death with his chaingrab and it takes absolutely no skill.

I'm pretty sure that most rational people will classify PS2 as absolute garbage even if it's a legal counterpick sometimes.

Falco can only chaingrab you at lower %. You know, like he can't kill you off of it or anything. The first 60% are also the least meaningful in the game as it's not hard to reach for like any character so it's fine. If he could do it from 60%-120% it would change everything.
And if you die to Falco's chaingrab you are seriously horrible at this game.

And I guess your argument against PS2 is "but, but, but I don't want to adapt". The best argument I've heard against PS2 is that it's dumb. I don't expect you to do any better.

But then combos would take the other player's skill completely out of the equation.

Welcome to fighting games. I hope you enjoy your time.
Remember it's the first hit that counts.

The issue with spotdodge is that the good characters all have really good options that take up the space that an opponent must be in to punish a predicted spotdodge. If you wait on Snake, you might just end up taking 21% from F-Tilt. Wait on Falco or Ice Climbers and they grab you. That's why you rarely see people throw out nearby pokes against the good characters in Brawl--Too much risk for too little reward, which is the same for things like fastfall airdodge mix-ups, etc. Watch a really successful Snake or Falco do their thing; Razer, Ally, or DEHF will spotdodge for half of their close-range game because of this. This is pretty much the primary reason competitive Brawl matches drag on for so long.

I hate spotdodges. It's probably the dumbest thing in any fighting game ever, not counting Xfactor obviously. You turn invincible for half a second without any real lag. What the hell? Especially considering how stupid the reward for doing so is. It needs to be either removed or nerfed to last like an airdodge.

Oh yeah, the same way that SDI makes it so that Falco's chaingrab doesn't work? Or perhaps the way that Melee Puff's Uthrow into rest shouldn't work on spacies because of SDI? lol

What the hell? SDI doesn't do **** to chaingrabs because the only throw I know of that can be SDI'd is Puffs Fthrow in Melee. You SDI the dair so you know, you don't die. And even if you don't, only like 5 characters die to it anyways.
And what the hell does SDI have to do with Puffs Uthrow rest? You DI it left or right to make it much harder, but I am pretty sure you can still rest, don't make my word on it though.

At a broad range of chaingrab percentages, Falco can spike you for a kill, and not every character has good recovery, nor can you SDI into tech every situation and requires exponentially better execution than the chaingrab itself. DDD chaingrab into fsmash isn't nearly as viable.

Actually you can SDI into the stage or a tech in every single situation on I can think of in a legal stage. I guess a Dedede comparison would be Dthrow -> Dash attack.

I don't know if you play any games other than Melee, but there's a clear line between what takes good execution and what doesn't. And if you're unable to discern such basic concepts, then that's just unfortunate.

Execution is not what defines a better player. Is just your ability to do certain stuff and it's not correlated to your skill in the actual game. Though it will be a must to have in higher levels of play obviously. Still doesn't make you a higher level player.

You're going to get hit. You will probably never have a perfect game at a tournament. "Don't get hit" is horrible advice because never getting hit is borderline impossible. Isai is the god of 64 and he's had a total of one recorded perfect game.

It's not horrible advice. You just have to realize what he means with it. As long as you don't get hit, your opponent can't combo, chaingrab, kill whatever you. The point is to play safe, don't take risks too much and punish when your opponent is vulnerable. Like you know, don't just run at Snake or you get tilted, bait the tilt, punish when the opponent is doing the move and stuck in lag. That way you won't get hit. Obviously it doesn't help you become a good player, but it's pretty much the simplest piece of advice that makes sense, ever.


Sorry about the huge messed up wall of text

 

[Biz_R_0]

Welcome to fighting games. I hope you enjoy your time.
Remember it's the first hit that counts.

Is that a joke or do you think that's a good thing?

It's not horrible advice. You just have to realize what he means with it. As long as you don't get hit, your opponent can't combo, chaingrab, kill whatever you. The point is to play safe, don't take risks too much and punish when your opponent is vulnerable. Like you know, don't just run at Snake or you get tilted, bait the tilt, punish when the opponent is doing the move and stuck in lag. That way you won't get hit. Obviously it doesn't help you become a good player, but it's pretty much the simplest piece of advice that makes sense, ever.

But that's almost completely different from what he said. He was saying that you deserve to get punished hard if you ever got hit, and the solution is don't get hit ever and you'll be fine.

Sorry about the huge messed up wall of text

Actually thank you, because normally your posts are way too small.

 

[Yodery]

Holy ****, you people need to relax. It will be a ****ing video game.

Satisfied?

 

[Biz_R_0]

Holy ****, you people need to relax. It's a ****ing video game.

Also it doesn't exist yet.

 

[-LzR-]

Is that a joke or do you think that's a good thing?

Neither. I don't take a stand in either way when it comes to combos.

But that's almost completely different from what he said. He was saying that you deserve to get punished hard if you ever got hit, and the solution is don't get hit ever and you'll be fine.

This is what some Meta Knight players started to do, not get hit, and the morons added several artificial and dumb rules to make sure people can't not get hit. Because you know, we need more flashy epicness action combos speed and stuff because Smash is totally a sponsored game where spectators entertainment brings us so much money we have to keep them happy.

Actually thank you, because normally your posts are way too small.

I tend to try and get my point said as fast as possible. I see no reason to make long stuff unless someone requests a longer response. Either way most of my wall of text was just quotes from other people with oneliner responses.

Holy ****, you people need to relax. It's a ****ing video game.

I wish I could tell that all hockey and football fans that it's just a ****ing game...
Shame they take it really really seriously. Why should a competitive video game be any different?
Though I think you aren't serious.