Final Smash Meter, will it be tourney legal?

[GUIGUI]

Except she didn't hit, and if you can gain meter by whiffing attacks, it's significantly worse than if it just generates passively, as you can just camp and spam fast moves to gain meter extremely quickly.

That's actually better, seeing that if it just generate passively, You can just pick a fast & mobile character and outran the opponent up until it is charged. That it only fill if you attack means that you are forced to stop to build it.

Anyways, it still means that passive charging is out.

3. Final Smash meters seem to reward dealing damage... no matter how you deal it. Matches swiftly boil down to spamming items/projectiles from far away until you have meter, then walking up to your opponent and using Final Smash. I know this because I've watched recent footage of people winning a tournament doing this.

Must not been the link you wanted to post, this one link to a direct (currently) of several hours. Anyway, seeing that receiving damage fill more your FS than dealing them, such a tactic can not work, as spamming from away without being hit means your opponent's Smash Meter will fill faster. I'd like you to post the actual link to the video you wanted to show with timestamp, because I am really curious to see how spamming from afar would actually turns to be a paying strategy.

 

[Rakurai]

I didn't recall any instances of the meter final smashes being the major game changers in the tournament.

It was mostly the items that threw things off (Brood getting killed at 0% off of Konbu's down throw > smash ball Critical Hit frame trap and the S flags being the most notable instances of this).

 

[Beatrice]

Spanish invitational really showing how degenerate FS meter is.

 

[GUIGUI]

Spanish invitational really showing how degenerate FS meter is.

So far, it hasn't really shown to be an issue, imo. At worst, people are still new at dealing with it, but I wouldn't say it skew the matches in a unfair way. Now the actual question to ask is : is it fun to use ? Does it make the game more interesting ?

 

[ParanoidDrone]

So far, it hasn't really shown to be an issue, imo. At worst, people are still new at dealing with it, but I wouldn't say it skew the matches in a unfair way. Now the actual question to ask is : is it fun to use ? Does it make the game more interesting ?

I'd say it made the game less interesting. Zelda's final smash does 44.something% and auto-kills at 100 so she can literally kill anyone from 56%. Call it 60% for insurance. Daisy's final smash is fullscreen, up to 60% healing, and a free charged smash for a finisher. (It also apparently works on offstage targets? Zelda died to it before the camera zoomed back out at one point.) Meanwhile Ness's is bootycheeks despite looking badass -- only 7-8% per star hit, which I found extremely weird. Mewtwo and Gunner have screen-wide projectile hits. I could go on.

Like, the instant someone got their final smash (except for Ness lol) you could tell how the game immediately shifted to fishing for/escaping from final smash opportunities, which just isn't thrilling to watch nor can I imagine it's fun to play through.

 

[Jexulus]

I'd say it made the game less interesting. Zelda's final smash does 44.something% and auto-kills at 100 so she can literally kill anyone from 56%. Call it 60% for insurance. Daisy's final smash is fullscreen, up to 60% healing, and a free charged smash for a finisher. (It also apparently works on offstage targets? Zelda died to it before the camera zoomed back out at one point.) Meanwhile Ness's is bootycheeks despite looking badass -- only 7-8% per star hit, which I found extremely weird. Mewtwo and Gunner have screen-wide projectile hits. I could go on.

Like, the instant someone got their final smash (except for Ness lol) you could tell how the game immediately shifted to fishing for/escaping from final smash opportunities, which just isn't thrilling to watch nor can I imagine it's fun to play through.

These are all valid criticisms, with the caveat that this is Day -32 of its competitive life cycle at a pre-release event. This is something new that needs to be evaluated hands-on after release once we have a better sample size. Everyone's new to this, just like everyone was new to Mewtwo after his popularity exploded at Pound. His air-dodges were just different enough that it took players time to adjust to him before they figured out the nuances and how to combat his kit. Same with Bayonetta. These are all different kinds of circumstances (character match-ups vs. a new game mechanic), but the principle remains.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

These are all valid criticisms, with the caveat that this is Day -32 of its competitive life cycle at a pre-release event. This is something new that needs to be evaluated hands-on after release once we have a better sample size. Everyone's new to this, just like everyone was new to Mewtwo after his popularity exploded at Pound. His air-dodges were just different enough that it took players time to adjust to him before they figured out the nuances and how to combat his kit. Same with Bayonetta. These are all different kinds of circumstances (character match-ups vs. a new game mechanic), but the principle remains.

I'm not opposed to testing but I'll predict right here and now that metered final smashes are going to end up banned before EVO next year.

 

[Beatrice]

I'm not opposed to testing but I'll predict right here and now that metered final smashes are going to end up banned before EVO next year.

I'll go further and predict they're going to be banned in December/January.

 

[Untouch]

Peach/Daisy's FS puts you to sleep in the air, cannot be dodged (it can't, it's always active), and basically heals over 60%.
Your ONLY chance of surviving is camping the ledge.

 

[J0eyboi]

That's actually better, seeing that if it just generate passively, You can just pick a fast & mobile character and outran the opponent up until it is charged. That it only fill if you attack means that you are forced to stop to build it.

Allow me to introduce you to this fascinating, revolutionary tactic known as: AERIAL ATTACKS!

With AERIAL ATTACKS, you can attack while moving! Whiff things while running away all you like!

But that's not all! Order a set of 5 AERIAL ATTACKS now and we'll throw in 4 SPECIAL MOVES! What SPECIAL MOVES you might get can vary drastically, but some SPECIAL MOVES can also be used while moving! Some SPECIAL MOVES even cause you to move! It's the greatest thing since sliced bread!

I'm still not done yet, folks! If you're one of the first 80 fighters to call in, we'll even throw in a JAB! While they can't be used while moving, JABs are extremely low commitment, making them perfect for whiffing attacks without even taking to the air!

Order now at 1-800-CAMPING and get your set today!

Anyways, it still means that passive charging is out.

It actually doesn't, though. Further investigation shows no indication of Daisy gaining meter for whiffing any of her other attacks, meaning it was probably just passive generation.

 

[Ryu_Ken]

I don't think the problem with Final Smash meter should be "OMG INSTA-KILL MOVE." It's more to do with whether or not the other player can dodge the attack. Ryu/Ken, Link, and Mario are good examples because you have to position/time the attack correctly or else the opponent will either dodge or jump over it. Bowser Jr., Peach/Daisy, and Diddy Kong are problematic because their Final Smashes affect the whole screen. If you could actually BLOCK some final smashes (like you can block some Super moves in other fighting games), even if that resulted in your shield being broken, that would be WAY more balanced, and I think we'd accept them more.

However, from what I've seen at the recent Spanish Invitational, I'm gonna have to say no to them. It sucks because I was so hyped for the Final Smash meter, but I don't want this to leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth like how custom moves did in Smash 4.

 

[Purple_Anteater]

I think FS meter would be a great addition to competitive play if used with 3v3 Squad Strike. Here are some notes and reasons why

• Characters seem to build full meter about 1 and a half stocks into the match, and lose about 1/3 or 1/4 of their final smash meter when KO'd. Because of this we would often not see a final smash until into the second character/stock of a match. This creates different ways to build your squad. The lead off character could just be a good character with a bad/poor final smash, while everyone's middle character would usually be the first character to be able to use a final smash, so you'd want to pick one with a good FS. While your anchor character could have a good FS for comebacks (one that heals, ect). This could create a really interesting squad building metagame.
• Final Smashes in general move the game forward. Because you build meter when you get hit and when you hit your opponent it encourages aggressive play. Ultimate seems less campy in general with things like aerial attacks being safer for pressure, so I doubt we would see people attempting to run away and "spam" final smashes (because it wouldn't be effective). Final Smashes also help to close out stocks, in Squad Strike this is particularly good because you could use it strategically to deal with a bad match up for one or your characters.
• Final smashes as a comeback mechanic works really well in general, BUT some characters have FSs that are clearly too powerful. With Squad Strike you wouldn't need to worry about dealing with the same BS FS multiple times in the same match because after you kill your opponents character they have to switch to a different one with a different FS. (This helps reduce "Final Smash Spam")
• Whiffing a FS is obviously detrimental, but does not guarantee a loss. You start building your FS again immediately.
• Holding on to a FS to threaten your opponent isn't necessarily always a good strategy because you can't build meter while you have full meter. So if your opponent is building meter and you're just holding onto your FS for the sake of an advantage ("FS camping") then your opponent is getting ahead on meter. (As they say in other fighting games "SPEND THAT CASH)

There are obviously a lot of arguments against final smash meter for competitive play. I understand how people would fear it would become degenerate. I believe arguments like "Its too powerful" have no basis. In a 2 stock match having a way to instantly kill and opponent over 60% would probably warp the game too much. But in 3v3 squad strike FS meter would remain powerful, while also being fun, interesting, and not too gameplay warping. Final Smash meter IS like a Cloud Limit or a Little Mac KO Punch, and that isn't a bad thing. Those characters still get to keep their abilities, while all of the characters also get an exciting new powerful tool.

 

[S_B]

Well, people have pointed out the fact that characters who have a difficult time killing for balance purposes would lose that very important weakness were FSMs to be legal and no one seems to be listening.

However, none of the people who aren't listening are TOs so it doesn't matter.

Also, I suggested to my local TO who regularly runs 40+ person tournaments that we should have FSMs turned on for our first tournament on Dec 8th and he laughed.

Sorry folks, but it ain't gonna happen...

 

[Zoa]

There's absolutely no way this is going to happen in serious competitive play. I had read and skimmed through like seven pages of this a few hours before posting this. Just throwing my hat into the ring for a moment:

-This is NOT at all like giving every character a K.O. Punch. The attacks are fundamentally different in almost every way. The only thing they have in common is the meter aspect. Stage wide attacks, constrained rushes, large focused beams, etc. Aside from damage, several attacks have more functionality like Peach's Final Smash healing damage, inflicting damage, and getting a free set up off on your targets. Not to mention the FS have intangibility/invincibility for the most part. They're unblockable. They cannot trade. They are literally ultimate attacks with practically next to no counterplay depending on the attack. Some are much more avoidable, while others literally trap you unable to do anything. K.O. Punch eventually disappears on its own from no use, or you can easily camp away from Mac till it is gonna. A stray hit means death for him off stage. And Mac becomes practically useless in the air while even nerfing the damage and knockback of K.O. Punch ridiculously. There's more counterplay against this type of move than basically any FS, and it's on a character with crippling flaws.

-"You can dodge Final Smashes." Then as the one making the claim, give us a complete list of every single one, and detail to us how they are able to be dodged. The burden of proof lies with you. And then you have to take into consideration if you have all your options available to dodge the attack, and the character who can supposedly dodge in relation to the stage (whether they're on or off it). Then you have to hold up your argument based on one other merit: consistency. You cannot expect a player to always dodge a Final Smash. Whether the person on the defensive has all their options available or not, combo-ed into a FS, baited into it, or even punished across the stage for launching a projectile. And given the lack of counterplay involved, especially since the match will slow to a crawl to not get hit with the FS, it leads to a stalemate until one person will either launch the Final Smash, or gets knocked off the stage.

-Comparing a Final Smash to supers or meters in other fighters is inherently flawed. Meter in other fighters serves other uses in gameplay. The Final Smash meter doesn't. Comparing both in a vacuum is a disingenuous argument. You cannot directly compare and contrast Final Smashes and supers, or even meter applications in other fighters, without comparing and contrasting the environments in which they are used. Typical fighters are basically 2D with not much room for movement, and have walls in them. Smash doesn't have these constraints. It is a platform fighter with a wide open stage, platform game, recoveries, off stage, etc.

-The consistency argument is another inherently flawed in this type of game. The arguments for FSM always assume the player who does not have the FSM is always able to do something to avoid it, or prevent the game from reducing to a slow, crawling stalemate until one person is either knocked out, or launches the FS. This is not true.

J0eyboi and blackghost hit on the other points already made. This is not gonna happen. It WILL kill this game's competitive scene if it gets big.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

That's actually better, seeing that if it just generate passively, You can just pick a fast & mobile character and outran the opponent up until it is charged. That it only fill if you attack means that you are forced to stop to build it.

Anyways, it still means that passive charging is out.


Must not been the link you wanted to post, this one link to a direct (currently) of several hours. Anyway, seeing that receiving damage fill more your FS than dealing them, such a tactic can not work, as spamming from away without being hit means your opponent's Smash Meter will fill faster. I'd like you to post the actual link to the video you wanted to show with timestamp, because I am really curious to see how spamming from afar would actually turns to be a paying strategy.

I don’t understand why any of these strategies are ok. Even if it doesn’t charge on its own, are you really alright with the games strategy devolving into throwing out moves in a distance just to get a final smash, and then watch as the opponents camp in fear of a final smash just occurring at any moment?

I’ve watched several hours of footage, and from what I can conclude, the inclusion of final smashes induces camping and standoff-ish gameplay. Look at the Spanish invitational. There are cases where if Zelda had her Final Smash when the opponent is above 70% you literally lose. It sucks opponents in from a distance and there’s nothing you can do about it.

I don’t even know why people are entertaining the idea when smash balls are already banned. A meter and an insignificant reduction in strength is not enough to make these legal, or entertaining after a certain point.

Yeah I love comboing my opponent then getting grand crossed mid string and losing! I love final smashes!

 

[Bobert]

I know I'm not the first one to say it, but after seeing Daisy crush everybody with that full screen Final Smash, I'm even more against them than I was before. Actually put Rosalina to sleep in mid air and threw her out of the water and back onto the stage to get smacked, and then healed Daisy for more than 50% of her damage. Really disappointed that FSM is going to be banned, but with how strong some of them blatantly are, it's unavoidable. FSM pretty much takes Peach and Daisy and slaps them at top tier for pressing B. On top of that, I haven't even mentioned how campy the gameplay gets when somebody gets an FS.

 

[Izanagi97]

Pretty sure it's safe to say that Diddy killed any chance of Final Smash meter being in competitive play that isn't a side event or a fun thing since it's full screen, basically unblockable and unavoidable, and almost killed King K Rool at about 10%, though that one could also be due to the 1v1 multiplier and Diddy having rage, but even then, K rool is likely heavy as **** (dunno exact figures, but I'm betting top 5 in weight) so it makes no difference

 

[Union of Darkness]

I am convinced meter won't and shouldn't be legal. The recent events have shown us that it encourages playing lame which no one likes to watch. But most of all the Final Smashes are all imbalanced. Some characters have objectively better Final Smashes which would drastically affect their viability. For example, Zelda's FS auto-kills at 100% and is virtually undodgeable at close range. Meanwhile Jigglypuff's FS is the same trash it's always been.

 

[S_B]

Here's a pretty good example of why final smash meters are bad for competitive play:
https://youtu.be/YNXcAm1gWM8

Daisy's FS is so much better than Rosa's that it's laughable, and Rosa suffers horribly throughout the match as a result.

With FSMs legal, you're making certain characters top tier and others garbage tier, and no amount of individual player skill will usually be able to compensate for it.

If Sakurai and co went through and did a better job of balancing the FSM final smashes, maybe, but I'd still be surprised if they even gained traction as a side event.

Side events at tournaments would need to be played on Switch consoles like any other event, and most tournament organizers are using all of their consoles most of the time. When they're not, players will generally wind up playing friendlies on a few of them here and there, but there's a reason why singles and doubles brackets aren't run at the same time.

Also, side events never show up on stream, if they do happen. You'll either be watching players play singles or doubles at the average tournament. There won't ever be a time FSMs appear on stream.

 

[Bobert]

I am convinced meter won't and shouldn't be legal. The recent events have shown us that it encourages playing lame which no one likes to watch. But most of all the Final Smashes are all imbalanced. Some characters have objectively better Final Smashes which would drastically affect their viability. For example, Zelda's FS auto-kills at 100% and is virtually undodgeable at close range. Meanwhile Jigglypuff's FS is the same trash it's always been.

Spain Invitational GF's were basically a perfect example of how imbalanced they are. You have Rosalina trying to use her Final Smash to kill Daisy, but it's extremely situational and extremely hard to connect because it's slow and the initial hitbox appears above her...but then you have Daisy putting her to sleep from full screen, mid-air, and then proceeding to kill her and heal 50+%. Daisy pretty much won Doubles and Singles because of her Final Smash being godlike for utility and setting up free kills for her and her teammate.

 

[PichuMain]

Wanted to throw my tiny bandana in the ring.

FSM is terrifying.

Watching it feels completely campy. The moment your opponent gets a full FM, you are just trying to bait it out or until your opponent is done toying with their food to whip it out.

I'm terrified of Bayonetta, tbh. In Smash 4, I believe her's was being over 100 was a danger zone. Bayonetta doesn't need to kill you, she can stall and end it. No idea if her final smash changed in Ultimate, but I would hate for it to happen here.

Daisy and Peach seem broken. Its like fighting a cloud with a limit break in possession, except you can't bait it out unless you're near a cliff.

Rumor has it that when Pichu uses his final smash, he still takes damage, so using it is just asking for suicide.

Those characters would dominate. I honestly don't agree with that. I wish that Daisy/Peach's ult for FMS, your opponent wakes up quicker since its unavoidable, or have it a smaller radius. And crank Bayo to 140-150 to keep things fair.

Other than that, I think they would be fine, as other final smashes can be dodged or baited. Only a few, yet BIG problems.

 

[Idon]

Yeah it's ****ing awful.
Case closed, we can all go home now.

 

[ｐｓ＿]

That's actually better, seeing that if it just generate passively, You can just pick a fast & mobile character and outran the opponent up until it is charged. That it only fill if you attack means that you are forced to stop to build it.

Anyways, it still means that passive charging is out.


Must not been the link you wanted to post, this one link to a direct (currently) of several hours. Anyway, seeing that receiving damage fill more your FS than dealing them, such a tactic can not work, as spamming from away without being hit means your opponent's Smash Meter will fill faster. I'd like you to post the actual link to the video you wanted to show with timestamp, because I am really curious to see how spamming from afar would actually turns to be a paying strategy.

Skip two hours in. That video includes a Smash tournament where the finalists (particularly a Richter Belmont) spam items until they get Final Smash, then move in to use it.

That Rosalina vs. Daisy match exemplifies my argument even better.

 

[Cyclon]

I find myself pretty annoyed at how eager many of us were to prove people that call the competitive smash community close-minded right. That being said, as someone who was team "let's wait and see", well we sure have seen, and while some imbalance was to be expected and isn't a deal breaker on its own... some of them are clearly just too strong. Like, "your character went from mid to top tier" strong. That's pretty unfortunate, because realistically, this was the one and only chance for this feature, and it was a slim one at that. Now, even if they rebalance it properly(which doesn't seem that difficult really), it's too late, the community will have made up its mind by then.
I still think there was potential here, as when looking at matches where both characters had "balanced" FS, well sure they still charged too fast, but beyond that, they achieved the primary goal, aka making sets more intense without being completely luck based like items. But, alas.

That's actually better, seeing that if it just generate passively, You can just pick a fast & mobile character and outran the opponent up until it is charged. That it only fill if you attack means that you are forced to stop to build it.

Anyways, it still means that passive charging is out.

Pretty sure it was just a coincidence that she whiffed an attack at this moment, and passive charging is absolutely a thing. Just look at the Treehouse demonstration of Isabelle vs Villager, and observe the latter's bar. It increases periodically even when he doesn't get hit or attack.
That being said, it's a very low rate, so unless you're at >95% charge I doubt it'd be worth waiting it out. Especially since your opponent's meter is filling up during that time too. Unless they have a worthless final smash, I suppose, which ideally shouldn't be a thing(though it is), but yeah.

Characters seem to build full meter about 1 and a half stocks into the match, and lose about 1/3 or 1/4 of their final smash meter when KO'd. Because of this we would often not see a final smash until into the second character/stock of a match.

To be specific, you lose precisely half a bar if you get koed with a full meter. Otherwise, you lose nothing. Furthermore from what I've seen, you keep on building bar even when it's already full. That excess is lost when you use your FS, but if you die instead, it's used to replenish what you've lost, that's why the amount of bar lost is inconsistent. I think that's how it works, anyway.
Note that I don't disagree with the idea itself, just wanted to point that out.

 

[Mecakoto]

I'm going to kill the argument for this even more:

https://youtu.be/v4AzeJHOpek?t=509

In this video, I can confirm FSM isn't a nerfed version of a FS. It's just a FS:

Upon getting a Smash Ball, your meter fills. Regardless of where it was prior to the Smash Ball, it fills. If you die in this filled state, you lose half your Final Smash Meter, as if you had charged it over time. Compare the amount in the meter pre-Smash ball and post death. I think something changed during the direct that showed the feature and now. This explains why "Nerfed" FS using FSM are killing at 20%.

With that now said, anyone advocating for this in a tournament setting is advocating for each player to get 2-3 FREE smash balls per game. Even to casual players just barely entering into competitive, this should be obvious why this isn't a good thing.

 

[Ryu_Ken]

I'm going to kill the argument for this even more:

https://youtu.be/v4AzeJHOpek?t=509

In this video, I can confirm FSM isn't a nerfed version of a FS. It's just a FS:

Upon getting a Smash Ball, your meter fills. Regardless of where it was prior to the Smash Ball, it fills. If you die in this filled state, you lose half your Final Smash Meter, as if you had charged it over time. Compare the amount in the meter pre-Smash ball and post death. I think something changed during the direct that showed the feature and now. This explains why "Nerfed" FS using FSM are killing at 20%.

With that now said, anyone advocating for this in a tournament setting is advocating for each player to get 2-3 FREE smash balls per game. Even to casual players just barely entering into competitive, this should be obvious why this isn't a good thing.

I fail to see how the way the meter fills up explains why FSM isn't a nerfed FS. You make a great point about how absolutely broken it would be to have both FSM and Smash Ball on at the same time (since it gives you double the access to a FS), but nothing in the video shows a FS killing at around 20%. Heck, Richter uses Grand Cross on Pit at 27% and he still survived.

I'm (definitely) not saying I'm advocating for Final Smash Meter now, just showing how you were a little bit fast to the punch, buddy.

 

[S_B]

I fail to see how the way the meter fills up explains why FSM isn't a nerfed FS. You make a great point about how absolutely broken it would be to have both FSM and Smash Ball on at the same time (since it gives you double the access to a FS), but nothing in the video shows a FS killing at around 20%. Heck, Richter uses Grand Cross on Pit at 27% and he still survived.

I'm (definitely) not saying I'm advocating for Final Smash Meter now, just showing how you were a little bit fast to the punch, buddy.

I think the real problem is that some characters have properly nerfed FSMs while others either don't or they work in such a way that it it barely matters.

 

[QrowinSP]

Alright guys, I'm not going to disagree with every point people are bringing up or actively advocate for final smashes, but one thing that I absolutely hate about what I'm seeing is the same thing we saw in the custom moves debate, and that's that "Certain final smashes are better than others". I mean...... yeah? Of course they are? We don't ban characters from using aerials just because Bayonetta's aerials are busted to hell and back. People use the comparison of Daisy's final smash being better than Rosa's, but you could make the argument that just bridges the gap between them. The person later switched to ZELDA and had an easier time.

Sure, final smash meter would change the tier list, but the game never had perfect balance to begin with. You could say it throws the balance out of wack, you could say not having it throws the balance out of whack. It's all relative. You guys will be able to make an argument from balance when a character's ability to win a tournament is determined by just their final smash, and characters like daisy reign supreme getting no-skill kills on all the sheiks and rosalina players who stuck with their mains even after final smash meter made them low tier.

Until we see that happen, I'm going to have a hard time being convinced by appeals to balance. Arguments based around things like camping are a lot more weighty in my eyes, (Though even then I'd argue we need time for the meta to develop).

 

[S_B]

Alright guys, I'm not going to disagree with every point people are bringing up or actively advocate for final smashes, but one thing that I absolutely hate about what I'm seeing is the same thing we saw in the custom moves debate, and that's that "Certain final smashes are better than others". I mean...... yeah? Of course they are? We don't ban characters from using aerials just because Bayonetta's aerials are busted to hell and back. People use the comparison of Daisy's final smash being better than Rosa's, but you could make the argument that just bridges the gap between them. The person later switched to ZELDA and had an easier time.

Sure, final smash meter would change the tier list, but the game never had perfect balance to begin with. You could say it throws the balance out of wack, you could say not having it throws the balance out of whack. It's all relative. You guys will be able to make an argument from balance when a character's ability to win a tournament is determined by just their final smash, and characters like daisy reign supreme getting no-skill kills on all the sheiks and rosalina players who stuck with their mains even after final smash meter made them low tier.

Until we see that happen, I'm going to have a hard time being convinced by appeals to balance. Arguments based around things like camping are a lot more weighty in my eyes, (Though even then I'd argue we need time for the meta to develop).

Joey already covered this under the heading of "the game doesn't have perfect balance so let's unbalance it further!"

He switched to Zelda and his FS could actually kill at that point. That match is everything we need to show us why FSMs just ain't gonna work.

 

[QrowinSP]

Joey already covered this under the heading of "the game doesn't have perfect balance so let's unbalance it further!"

He switched to Zelda and his FS could actually kill at that point. That match is everything we need to show us why FSMs just ain't gonna work.

You're missing the point. You're argument is based on the idea that the game was, before, closer to this idea of perfect balance and that final smashes take us further away from that. When all I see in this match is that now characters who were once considered low tier are able to compete in tournaments at the beginning of the meta. And sure, maybe Rosalina went down some pegs on the tier list. Is that "more unbalanced"? How are you defining that?

These premises need to be proven and I almost never see that happening. If I missed some proof about this on an earlier page, I apologize.

Edit: For example, let's consider that Sakurai balanced the game with final smashes in mind. He intentionally gave Rosa a ****ty final smash to balance out her strengths. Wouldn't I then be able to make an argument that banning meter final smashes is further unbalancing the game? It's all relative.

 

[S_B]

You're missing the point. You're argument is based on the idea that the game was, before, closer to this idea of perfect balance and that final smashes take us further away from that. When all I see in this match is that now characters who were once considered low tier are able to compete in tournaments at the beginning of the meta. And sure, maybe Rosalina went down some pegs on the tier list. Is that "more unbalanced"? How are you defining that?

These premises need to be proven and I almost never see that happening. If I missed some proof about this on an earlier page, I apologize.

I mean, this is a brand new game and we have no idea how the tier list is going to shake out yet, but we can clearly see that if FSMs were enabled, no one is going to want to play Rosa because hers sucks.

Also, Diddy and Sonic's appear to be unavoidable, and Sheik's is ridiculously good at killing, which negates her primary weakness.

But honestly, I don't think it'll matter because I don't think any of the proponents for FSMs even play in tournaments, nor do they run them.

"Side events" at tournaments also don't get streamed, meaning the only way anyone would even see these alleged side events is if they were at the tournament to watch them in person.

So this is a pointless discussion until organizers of large tournaments start expressing interest in using FSMs.

 

[QrowinSP]

I mean, this is a brand new game and we have no idea how the tier list is going to shake out yet, but we can clearly see that if FSMs were enabled, no one is going to want to play Rosa because hers sucks.

And no one wants to play Zelda in Smash 4. A character not being viable is not grounds for declaring a game as broken. And even if it was, you could make the exact same arguments for removing final smash meter and how it invalidates characters who rely on their final smash as part of their kit. Once again, it is all relative.

Also, Diddy and Sonic's appear to be unavoidable, and Sheik's is ridiculously good at killing, which negates her primary weakness.

"It's really good for dumb reasons" wasn't a reason to ban Bayo. You're not going to be able to make an argument from this point of view until a character becomes as dominant as Bayo was in smash 4 or something similar. So maybe sheik becomes top tier. That **** can happen.

But honestly, I don't think it'll matter because I don't think any of the proponents for FSMs even play in tournaments, nor do they run them.

"Side events" at tournaments also don't get streamed, meaning the only way anyone would even see these alleged side events is if they were at the tournament to watch them in person.

So this is a pointless discussion until organizers of large tournaments start expressing interest in using FSMs.

Probably true, doesn't mean it's a good thing.

I'm not saying there are no good counter arguments to this. I'm just saying that making appeals to the balance of the game is a landmine of logical fallacies and is something people only do to justify their intuitive distaste for them. It's not a rational counterargument, ESPECIALLY when we have like, no actual experience with the game's meta developing.

 

[Pazzo.]

A poll at the top should read:

"Should FS meter be legal?"

1. No.

2. Hell no.

3. Aw, hell no.

 

[staindgrey]

I didn't recall any instances of the meter final smashes being the major game changers in the tournament.

It was mostly the items that threw things off (Brood getting killed at 0% off of Konbu's down throw > smash ball Critical Hit frame trap and the S flags being the most notable instances of this).

In the best-of-three between Zelda and Daisy, their final smashes both proved they could be game changers if the character were paired against someone without as good of a FS.

Zelda's seems to pop a character out of existence if their damage is high enough. It doesn't launch you off stage; it just poofs you. No chance for DI, and it has a very large area of effect. Daisy's takes over the entire screen and forces the camera away from the other player, making it great to use when they're offscreen. Twice the Zelda player missed his recovery because he couldn't see where he was going. And if he did make it back but still landed on the ground, he'd be asleep for Daisy to walk up, charge an Fsmash and kill him anyway.

I'm not strictly anti-final smash, but some characters definitely have much, much better FSes than others. Deciding one way or the other will heavily affect the meta for certain.

 

[QrowinSP]

In the best-of-three between Zelda and Daisy, their final smashes both proved they could be game changers if the character were paired against someone without as good of a FS.

Zelda's seems to pop a character out of existence if their damage is high enough. It doesn't launch you off stage; it just poofs you. No chance for DI, and it has a very large area of effect. Daisy's takes over the entire screen and forces the camera away from the other player, making it great to use when they're offscreen. Twice the Zelda player missed his recovery because he couldn't see where he was going. And if he did make it back but still landed on the ground, he'd be asleep for Daisy to walk up, charge an Fsmash and kill him anyway.

I'm not strictly anti-final smash, but some characters definitely have much, much better FSes than others. Deciding one way or the other will heavily affect the meta for certain.

Yeah, for sure. It's two very different metas with two very different tier lists. I personally like the risk reward game of stuff like Zelda's. She's not the best without it, but with it she has a very powerful and interesting tool that both people need to plan around by taking into account their percentages and final smash meter. I actually like that a lot.

I don't, however, like Daisy's. I think it's strength is a bit overhyped: it won't kill at any percent much below 100%, and its healing, while extreme, isn't going to do much to keep someone from being steamrolled by a significantly better player. But it is pretty no skill and ****ty to watch, plus it's really strong. I hope that it gets nerfed hard in some way and that Peach/Daisy get some buffs elsewhere to make up for it.

 

[Peachach]

View attachment 156297

So, There is finally a non-random way to use the Final Smash. Let's say it actually make the game more pleasurable to play, even in competition, is there a chance it will become Tourney Legal, or will force of habit impose itself and still ban it "on principle".

Unless it make the game too unbalanced, make things too unfair, I don't see no reason to turn this off.

Absolutely and obviously not. It's a party/casual feature.. way too unbalanced for normal play.

 

[QrowinSP]

Absolutely and obviously not. It's a party/casual feature.. way too unbalanced for normal play.

Citation needed.

 

[S_B]

Probably true, doesn't mean it's a good thing

It doesn't matter.

If the people who run or compete in tournaments aren't the ones who want to see the FSM in tournaments, this entire thread is irrelevant.

And you're continuing on with the argument of "the game is already not balanced so we shouldn't feel bad about making it further imbalanced" which no one is going to get on board with.

 

[QrowinSP]

It doesn't matter.

If the people who run or compete in tournaments aren't the ones who want to see the FSM in tournaments, this entire thread is irrelevant.

And you're continuing on with the argument of "the game is already not balanced so we shouldn't feel bad about making it further imbalanced" which no one is going to get on board with.

That is not my argument. My argument is not that it is fine to make it further unbalanced. My argument is that you have yet to prove that it will make things further unbalanced.

You're doing the logical equivalent of this:

"You shouldn't be beating your wife"
"You have no evidence I am beating my wife"
"Are you really defending the fact that you are beating your wife?"

 

[S_B]

That is not my argument. My argument is not that it is fine to make it further unbalanced. My argument is that you have yet to prove that it will make things further unbalanced.

You're doing the logical equivalent of this:

"You shouldn't be beating your wife"
"You have no evidence I am beating my wife"
"Are you really defending the fact that you are beating your wife?"

Bruh, did you not see what Diddy's FS does?

"Press B to kill your opponent anywhere on the screen" is never going to be allowed in tournaments. There's no discussion to be had.