If some tournaments start enabling Auto L-Cancelling, how would you feel?

[Lamesama]

Can't delete, removing all my posts for privacy.

 

[Vigilante]

Vigilante's statement - that we shouldn't divide the community into ALC and MLC factions - is only valid if both viewpoints are valid, which they are not

when you observe the arguments made in favor of MLC, it boils down to "I want it", and the fact remains that, in any context, those who'd sacrifice the stability of a community to support their own stubbornness and stupidity have no place in that community

I've already stated my argument:

It is an excellent offensive and defensive pressure tool. It adds to the game by punishing players who are slipping up and rewarding those that keep their heads in the game. That argument has yet to be refuted.

Your desire for an auto-cancel ruleset is entirely subjective and in no way is more justified than people's love for L-canceling. I'm sorry that I have to word it like this, and I have tried to avoid it as much as possible, but it is not up to the game to adapt to lower skill levels. It is up to people to work to gain the skills needed to perform this technique with consistency. People deserve to be rewarded for playing well and removing manual L-canceling would make Project M a lesser game than Melee. Project M was made with manual L-canceling in its design, and while you may certainly have the right to remove it and play it that way with your friends, it has no place in tournaments. Project M as a community must unite, not divide itself. 3.6 is the final version of Project M and will be the version people play in official tournaments. You'll have to live with this if you want Project M to continue to exist in ten years from now.

 

[Narpas_sword]

I've already stated my argument:

It is an excellent offensive and defensive pressure tool. It adds to the game by punishing players who are slipping up and rewarding those that keep their heads in the game. That argument has yet to be refuted.

Your desire for an auto-cancel ruleset is entirely subjective and in no way is more justified than people's love for L-canceling. I'm sorry that I have to word it like this, and I have tried to avoid it as much as possible, but it is not up to the game to adapt to lower skill levels. It is up to people to work to gain the skills needed to perform this technique with consistency. People deserve to be rewarded for playing well and removing manual L-canceling would make Project M a lesser game than Melee. Project M was made with manual L-canceling in its design, and while you may certainly have the right to remove it and play it that way with your friends, it has no place in tournaments. Project M as a community must unite, not divide itself. 3.6 is the final version of Project M and will be the version people play in official tournaments. You'll have to live with this if you want Project M to continue to exist in ten years from now.

Your initial paragraph has had many posts addressing it.

How is a non decision 'keeping your head in the game'?
If PM was made with MLC in it's design, was it included as an appeal to tradition? If not, What are the reasons?
Could those reasons apply to other moves getting L-Cancelling added to them?
What would the game be like if every move needed to be L canceled?


3.6 being the final version has nothing to do with the ruleset.
3.6 has the option to turn on ALC.

You're making statements.
You're not explaining
You're not providing examples
You are not writing convincing arguments.

Remember: Being able to take criticism, admit that you are wrong, and that your work needs to be polished further, or even scrapped can be difficult, but it’s necessary.

Imagine if smash never had L-cancelling. Infact, no one had heard of it.
Then you come to the Dev team and say 'I have a great idea to make the game better'.
What arguments would you use to convince a team of devs that including this button press is a great idea. and better than just leaving all the landing lag values as they are?

 

[Bleck]

I've already stated my argu

I don't care what you think your argument is

 

[Rᴏb]

not gonna bother reading the entire thread so forgive me if this has been said a million times over, but

MLC is obviously an appeal to tradition
the reality of this situation is that the difference between MLC and ALC is so insignificant that attempting to break away from what was/still is traditionally used would be a waste of effort and would only weaken the community by creating unnecessary arguments, confusion, etc... this is why MLC is a valid viewpoint; while the reasoning behind the mechanic's initial inclusion in the game is stupid. the reasoning for sticking with it is not

 

[Bleck]

pandering to stubborn people because they are stubborn is not a valid viewpoint

 

[Rᴏb]

when those stubborn people make up the vast majority and when the dispute is about something this minor, I think looking past it for everyone's sake is a completely valid stance to take

 

[Bleck]

how widespread a viewpoint is has no bearing on its validity

 

[Rᴏb]

I know. my point is, accepting the lesser of two evils is a valid decision to make.

 

[Bleck]

accepting an invalid viewpoint because otherwise they might throw a tantrum on the internet is not a valid decision to make

 

[Rᴏb]

accepting a dumb mechanic because otherwise they might kill your scene is a valid decision to make

 

[Bleck]

not if it's a mechanic that supports a negative perception of the scene that prevents people from wanting to be a part of it in the first place

you're saying that PM needs to pander to its existing players if it wants to survive, but the reality is that it's dying as a result of the scene's inward focus

 

[Rᴏb]

Like I said, lesser of two evils. Let's be real, the people that would leave because of ALC greatly outnumber the people that would join because of it.

The reality is that PM will eventually die due to it's inward focus regardless of ALC vs MLC. Might as well keep as many people playing as we can.

 

[Bleck]

saying "let's be real" doesn't make an assumption a reality

 

[4tlas]

I've already stated my argument:

It is an excellent offensive and defensive pressure tool. It adds to the game by punishing players who are slipping up and rewarding those that keep their heads in the game. That argument has yet to be refuted.

Your desire for an auto-cancel ruleset is entirely subjective and in no way is more justified than people's love for L-canceling. I'm sorry that I have to word it like this, and I have tried to avoid it as much as possible, but it is not up to the game to adapt to lower skill levels. It is up to people to work to gain the skills needed to perform this technique with consistency. People deserve to be rewarded for playing well and removing manual L-canceling would make Project M a lesser game than Melee. Project M was made with manual L-canceling in its design, and while you may certainly have the right to remove it and play it that way with your friends, it has no place in tournaments. Project M as a community must unite, not divide itself. 3.6 is the final version of Project M and will be the version people play in official tournaments. You'll have to live with this if you want Project M to continue to exist in ten years from now.

Alright, here we go again then.

First statement: "it adds to the game by punishing players who are slipping up" Yes, that's fine. If someone misses an L-cancel, only the absolutely slowest moves can be punished on reaction (we've done the math). All other punishes of missed L-cancels cannot be 100% because of the missed L-cancel. There are many ways to punish players who are slipping up, including missed control stick inputs, slow reaction time, losing frames to inaction, and so on. We could add a bunch more to the game, but why don't we? "Punishing players who are slipping up" is not, by itself, good enough to make a game mechanic worthwhile.

Second statement: "and [its] rewarding those that keep their heads in the game" Absolutely not. There is no decision making aspect of Lcancelling, so there is no reward for keeping your head in the game.

Third statement: "desire for an auto-cancel ruleset is entirely subjective and in no way is more justified than people's love for L-cancelling" Incorrect. Practical, objective reasons for ALC have been brought forth, including an appeal to a wider audience, further enriching the player pool, and helping to ease the stress on hands.

Fourth statement: "it is not up to the game to adapt to lower skill levels. It is up to people to work to gain the skills needed to perform this technique with consistency" This is an elitist attitude. The only purpose of a game is to be entertaining. The purpose of competition is to find out who is the best. What is wrong with finding out who is the best at a different set of skills? As in, one that doesn't have L-cancelling? We are not proposing removing any other skill-based techniques from the game, only this one. Why this one? Because it is by far the most useless. It is barely a skill compared to every other aspect of the game, but it is a big deal to new players. Furthermore, it is just so POINTLESS that is is not worth being such a huge barrier for new players while barely influencing veteran players.

Fifth statement: "People deserve to be rewarded for playing well" Well sure. And there are plenty of other places players are rewarded for doing well. Should we force players to press L, A, R, and Start every time they land instead? That takes skill and you'd get rewarded with less landing lag if you can do that consistently! What if every input had to be exactly frame perfect to succeed? That would reward playing well. What you probably want to say is that "people should not be rewarded for playing poorly", but not L-cancelling is not playing poorly. Not L-cancelling when you TRIED is playing poorly. If you don't need to Lcancel, it is a choice, not a mistake.

Sixth statement: "removing manual L-canceling would make Project M a lesser game than Melee" I'm sorry, what? A lesser game? LESSER? By what measure? As I said, the only point of a game is to be fun. Just because you find something more fun does not make it inherently better than someone else's fun. This statement alone suggests to me that you are an unreasonable person and nearly invalidates every argument you've put forward in my eyes BEFORE I even read them for their own sake. This type of attitude is exactly the type of elitist bull**** that scares away even more people than L-cancelling itself. Get over yourself.

Seventh statement: "Project M was made with manual L-canceling in its design" As an appeal to Melee. And they have since added in the Auto L-cancel option. What does that say about design intent? Perhaps it said that PMDT had no opinion on L-cancelling at all. Perhaps they prefer one or the other but think the option should be available. Perhaps they originally supported MLC and changed their minds? You'd have to ask, and I don't think its possible to get a concrete answer anymore.

Eighth statement: "it has no place in tournaments" Why? It is just a different way to play. This is a very strong statement. I could just as easily say Melee has no place in tournaments because the sequels have replaced it.

Ninth statement: "Project M as a community must unite, not divide itself" It can unite in moving to ALC. This is not an argument against ALC. It is an argument against doing both, which is what the thread was originally about but isn't what we've been arguing about for some time.

Tenth statement: "3.6 is the final version of Project M and will be the version people play in official tournaments. You'll have to live with this if you want Project M to continue to exist in ten years from now." Not only is this a bold statement and could easily be wrong, but I don't see what it has anything to do with this argument.

And I'm done. I responded to literally every single sentence in your post (except for the first one, which I don't even care about though I still disagree). I have refuted every. single. point. Now go ahead and tell me why my reasoning is wrong. I want to have a discussion, so I have put in the effort to individually point out where and how I disagree with you very thoroughly. Please do not ignore it.

 

[Rawkobo]

accepting a dumb mechanic because otherwise they might kill your scene is a valid decision to make

It's only "valid" because "valid" here more particularly refers to "forced."

 

[Rᴏb]

saying "let's be real" doesn't make an assumption a reality

It doesn't, but if you think my assumption is that unreasonable I'd like to know why.

It's only "valid" because "valid" here more particularly refers to "forced."

yeah basically. not a huge sacrifice to make by comparison imo.

 

[Rawkobo]

It doesn't, but if you think my assumption is that unreasonable I'd like to know why.

How does:

accepting a dumb mechanic because otherwise they might kill your scene

not imply "forced"? You're literally pointing out that if the scene wouldn't comply, it would fall in on itself faster because people would actually leave due to a mechanic we've pointed out people don't even understand the significance behind in the first place.

They get the dictionary definition behind it, if Vigilante's "argument" is anything to consider; and yes, you can't refute the definition of a mechanic. But you can refute its significance if substantial evidence isn't provided to back its theoretical objective value. Which, by the way, makes this "valid" choice rather invalid if it's built on the fear of faulty logic being maintained in an already niche community.

You would likely see why a lot of us who aren't Bleck are saying this if you read the thread, but you already said you didn't, so, I mean...well...yeah.

 

[Rᴏb]

uh, my first sentence was responding to Bleck.

 

[4tlas]

I agree with Rob that it is better to live with MLC than to let the game die by doing both. This is one reason why nobody really runs ALC tournaments yet. I also agree with him that most of the stubborn people would outright refuse to switch over, and that makes it very difficult to convince all of the people on the fence that they should too.

I am a TO for one of the biggest regions for PM. If I talked to the other big TOs and could reach some kind of consensus, its possible to make ALC the status quo and then get all the regions to switch. And yet I don't even bother talking about it, because it just isn't worth the hassle to convince people, organize the switch, and then still have outrage and dearths of people leaving the tournament scene.

Now, that being said, MLC really is a waste of space. Worse than that, it actually drives people away from the game. If I wasn't already arguing with other TOs about stagelists and rulesets, and spending my time helping out with content creation and organizing inter-region events, I might actually bother pushing for ALC. Because even though the MLC crowd is so stubborn that its a huge pain to do, MLC is such an abomination that it might be worth the effort if we were to succeed.

 

[masterpad]

I really hope the coin falls before long, but if nothing else, my prediction was on the mark.

Read my post entirely instead of stopping at one phrase that seems to agitate you and draw all your attention away from the several other lines of text below that I'd like you to respond to.

And if we focus on the "fun" of things, then you're going to have a really bad time dealing with such a subjective concept in a discussion. It changes from person to person and saying that the fun you have is more important then the bad times others might have kinda implies you think you're better and your time is more valuable.

Of course, assumptions do jack for the progression of a debate, so, again, I'll ask you to go through all my points and counter them, if possible.

for all your point i have a single counter: think out of your box! lcancel input is good thing because it is a condition for an advantage in a game situation -period!

I didn't focus on the "fun of things", i precisly said that the fun part depends on poeple. You have still reply to anything but my only argument:

LCANCEL IS RELEVANT AND SHOULD NOT BE SET TO AUTO BECAUSE IT FITS IN THE GAME WITH A
SKILL-FOR-REWARD MECANIC.

LCANCELING GIVES ADVANTAGE ON THE CONDITION OF PERFORMING SUCCESFULY ITS INPUT AND THAT IS ENOUGH TO MAKE THIS INPUT RELEVANT IN THE GAME.

please don't talk for the thousand times how it The input dont have a strategic value or how there is no choice because it is always the good option and so on...BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO EVALAUTE AN INPUT IN A GAME!

Would adding l canceling to all other moves create more depth?

since you asked the answer is: yes but deepness depends on people that's the whole reason of this debate

 

[Narpas_sword]

Interesting. Why then, wasnt it added?

What about having to press both l and R to l cancel? would that be better?

 

[Ningildo]

Fun fact: Westballz is far more technical than Mango (AKA he presses more buttons and apparently since doing so is "skillful" he's "better" than Mango). Yet Mango wins more often than not, despite being less "skilled".

The point of this is to show that this whole "more button presses done = the more skill one has" claim is, in fact, false.

LCANCEL IS RELEVANT AND SHOULD NOT BE SET TO AUTO BECAUSE IT FITS IN THE GAME WITH A
SKILL-FOR-REWARD MECANIC.

LCANCELING GIVES ADVANTAGE ON THE CONDITION OF PERFORMING SUCCESFULY ITS INPUT AND THAT IS ENOUGH TO MAKE THIS INPUT RELEVANT IN THE GAME.

please don't talk for the thousand times how it The input dont have a strategic value or how there is no choice because it is always the good option and so on...BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO EVALAUTE AN INPUT IN A GAME!

So in what other way should we evaluate it, then? It's not hard, so the whole "it separates the good from the bad" is moot. It's not a choice, so it's not a tool. Due it being easy and mandatory, it is always done and never failed, so "it being failed brings interactions" falls. I guess you could argue the halved landing lag is your "reward", but it could be removed with barely anything being lost while changing no relevant interactions.

I want to see you explain why it adds depth, while accounting for above facts.

Alternatively, you could answer Narpas_sword's question.

 

[masterpad]

Interesting. Why then, wasnt it added?

What about having to press both l and R to l cancel? would that be better?

No! only pressig one input is all ready better!
Great! i am so proud of you that you finally found by yourself the true difference between a strugglin but fair input and a real useless amount of input.

Fun fact: Westballz is far more technical than Mango (AKA he presses more buttons and apparently since doing so is "skillful" he's "better" than Mango). Yet Mango wins more often than not, despite being less "skilled".

The point of this is to show that this whole "more button presses done = the more skill one has" claim is, in fact, false.

So in what other way should we evaluate it, then? It's not hard, so the whole "it separates the good from the bad" is moot. It's not a choice, so it's not a tool. Due it being easy and mandatory, it is always done and never failed, so "it being failed brings interactions" falls. I guess you could argue the halved landing lag is your "reward", but it could be removed with barely anything being lost while changing no relevant interactions.

I want to see you explain why it adds depth, while accounting for above facts.

Alternatively, you could answer Narpas_sword's question.

gooooood, now we start talking.

first of all: "more button presses done = the more skill one has" is a conclusion you made , myself, i have and would have never stated it like that.

now i will childishly re-explain myself if you can get why every move/input in a fighting doesn't have only a strategic/option/choice value. take example with many other fignting games could lead to another endless debate far from our topic,so i will stick to smash for the explanation.

You should really understand that everythings comes from landing-animation, smash64 doesn't have landing animation but melee, brawl and pm does. I don't know for SMash4.
2D Fighting games in general does not have landing animation wether you performed and areal or not. Enven if in some rare case they do have some very little frame of lag while landing.
You should understand that setting auto-l-canceling means getting back to smash64 in a certain way, i dont say that it is a good or a bad thing but it is a thing, since auto-l-canceling means no landing animation at all after an areal (the lag comes from the animation).
It is a smash specificity that i do not find wrong, because having landing animation that causing a lag make sense to me, and i think it is very logic in general.

i will end talking about the skill-reward mecanic. It is all about logic.
It you agree that the game should have a landing-animation then a lag going with this animation,if this conception make sense for you, we can go on.If not you can stop where.
Now that player are facing lag after an areal because of the landing-animation this means some disadvantages (flaw in the defense or delay if you want to follow up your areal ).
There comes the l-cancel input. an input that will cancel all the lag and make the player avoid its disadvantages. performing will need skill/ability and the performer will be rewarded with no lag. ########
THIS IS HOW THE CONCEPTION OF AN INPUT COULD BE MADE WITHOUT THINKING OF STRATEGY/CHOICE/OPTION
###########that is why i dont even argue with "situation where lcancel is no the best option" "character that can need to not lcancel" because it is all base from a particular way of evaluation that is not the only one!#########

AT THIS POINT, i insist in the fact that everything is logic, the real debate could be the the execution of the input but not its very existence.
now the input itself: pressing a button within a certain windows of frame just before landing, it sounds great to me. I all ready had similars situation in others fighting games (the street fighter3 parry###an input in a windows frame### we are only speaking of skill don't start with "but there are situation where parry is not the best choice" it is not the topic anymore here, and i all ready told you, i **** on choice!)
if you are able to do it you benefits a no laggy-landing , if not you suffer from landing.
No need to think of strategy at this point. and the input is skilled because you can still miss it , it ask ability, reflex.
The only flaw it the fact that there are no loosing frame, if the player smash several times the button within the windows frame he will still succed in performing it. And that is clearly not competitive in my opinion.

THe game is clearly deeper because IN A LOGIC SITUATION WHERE I WILL HAVE TO BE DISADVANTAGED I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY WITH MY SKILL/REFLEX TO AVOID IT!
So having to hit a button anytimes after an aeral to avoid lag is very usefull, it makes sense UNLESS you don't want at all landing animation in the game.

and to proove that lcancel in pointless in the game , the common sense would have asked to remove it from the game and play with landing-lag/animation(the exact game without lcancel) not putting lcancel everywhere! with the auto-option.

 

[Ningildo]

gooooood, now we start talking.

first of all: "more button presses done = the more skill one has" is a conclusion you made , myself, i have and would have never stated it like that.

now i will childishly re-explain myself if you can get why every move/input in a fighting doesn't have only a strategic/option/choice value. take example with many other fignting games could lead to another endless debate far from our topic,so i will stick to smash for the explanation.

You should really understand that everythings comes from landing-animation, smash64 doesn't have landing animation but melee, brawl and pm does. I don't know for SMash4.
2D Fighting games in general does not have landing animation wether you performed and areal or not. Enven if in some rare case they do have some very little frame of lag while landing.
You should understand that setting auto-l-canceling means getting back to smash64 in a certain way, i dont say that it is a good or a bad thing but it is a thing, since auto-l-canceling means no landing animation at all after an areal (the lag comes from the animation).
It is a smash specificity that i do not find wrong, because having landing animation that causing a lag make sense to me, and i think it is very logic in general.

i will end talking about the skill-reward mecanic. It is all about logic.
It you agree that the game should have a landing-animation then a lag going with this animation,if this conception make sense for you, we can go on.If not you can stop where.
Now that player are facing lag after an areal because of the landing-animation this means some disadvantages (flaw in the defense or delay if you want to follow up your areal ).
There comes the l-cancel input. an input that will cancel all the lag and make the player avoid its disadvantages. performing will need skill/ability and the performer will be rewarded with no lag. ########
THIS IS HOW THE CONCEPTION OF AN INPUT COULD BE MADE WITHOUT THINKING OF STRATEGY/CHOICE/OPTION
###########that is why i dont even argue with "situation where lcancel is no the best option" "character that can need to not lcancel" because it is all base from a particular way of evaluation that is not the only one!#########

AT THIS POINT, i insist in the fact that everything is logic, the real debate could be the the execution of the input but not its very existence.
now the input itself: pressing a button within a certain windows of frame just before landing, it sounds great to me. I all ready had similars situation in others fighting games (the street fighter3 parry###an input in a windows frame### we are only speaking of skill don't start with "but there are situation where parry is not the best choice" it is not the topic anymore here, and i all ready told you, i **** on choice!)
if you are able to do it you benefits a no laggy-landing , if not you suffer from landing.
No need to think of strategy at this point. and the input is skilled because you can still miss it , it ask ability, reflex.
The only flaw it the fact that there are no loosing frame, if the player smash several times the button within the windows frame he will still succed in performing it. And that is clearly not competitive in my opinion.

THe game is clearly deeper because IN A LOGIC SITUATION WHERE I WILL HAVE TO BE DISADVANTAGED I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY WITH MY SKILL/REFLEX TO AVOID IT!
So having to hit a button anytimes after an aeral to avoid lag is very usefull, it makes sense UNLESS you don't want at all landing animation in the game.

and to proove that lcancel in pointless in the game , the common sense would have asked to remove it from the game and play with landing-lag/animation(the exact game without lcancel) not putting lcancel everywhere! with the auto-option.

So we should keep it in because animations are important or something? Despite avoiding those laggy animations is in your best interest? We've already established that l-cancelling is easy, but now it needs to be harder so you can use your SKILL/REFLEX to avoid it? For what purpose should we, in theory, make it harder? This makes the game deeper because avoiding a situation that you can easily avoid with a button press is skillful? You are justifying l-cancelling's existence...because it has an input and doing the input requires "skill".

You can't be seriously claiming that because you have to input it, it's existence is justified. Every tech needs to be inputted, but have other reasons for being there. Auto wavedashing wouldn't work because of all the angles needed and interfering with other inputs. Auto dashdancing...well. Auto shieldropping would be debatable, but would probably interfere with spot dodges on platforms. Not to mention all the other stuff they offer (interactions, teaching certain key aspects of the game when trying to master them and so on). That's why no one really lobbies for those things to become auto. Note that in justifying their existence, not once did I mention that because they had an input, they should stay.

You still haven't answered the other part of Narpas's question (Shouldn't we add l-cancelling to (aerial) specials?) and explained why (not).

This is not meant as an insult, by the by, but maybe, possibly improve your English? Or at least stop with obnoxious use of hashtags and CAPS, it makes it harder to read than it already is.

 

[masterpad]

This is not meant as an insult, by the by, but maybe, possibly improve your English? Or at least stop with obnoxious use of hashtags and CAPS, it makes it harder to read than it already is.

i sincerely apologize and thank you for your efforts and for this kind dicussion. I will try to make simple and short sentences while answering directly to what you wrote.

So we should keep it in because animations are important or something? Despite avoiding those laggy animations is in your best interest?

No, as soon as we admit that it is normal to have landing animation and the lag that goes with it, we should admit that it is an interesting to have something to avoid the disadvantages that goes with this lag

We've already established that l-cancelling is easy,

False! if lcancel was so easy to performed beginners would have never complain about it, and actually even pros still miss to lcancel sometimes. BUt it is not that difficult if the player smash the button several times during the windows frame.

but now it needs to be harder so you can use your SKILL/REFLEX to avoid it? For what purpose should we, in theory, make it harder?

yes because, competitively speaking things are about the ability/reflex/skill needed to perform a move, the reward of those movement and the choice to do it or or not. since the reward of lcancel is obvious it all ready have its place in the game.Now we can discuss if the way of performing it has to be refine or not but not performing at all just go in the opposite direction of the game.

This makes the game deeper because avoiding a situation that you can easily avoid with a button press is skillful? You are justifying l-cancelling's existence...because it has an input and doing the input requires "skill".

No the game is deeper because we have a way to avoid a bad situation on a certain condition, the condition to successfully perform lcanceling. it is a certain amount of depth. a narrow window frame for an input that is a common mechanism of adding skill in a game.

You can't be seriously claiming that because you have to input it, it's existence is justified. Every tech needs to be inputted, but have other reasons for being there.... Note that in justifying their existence, not once did I mention that because they had an input, they should stay.

No, i didn't say that at all. There is all ready a situation where having something the player can make to avoid lag-landing could be a good idea, that, justify the existence of lcancel unless you want to remove landing-animation form the game. Now the choice to make this "something" an input in a window frame, is choice that i find great and that was all ready made in other games.

You still haven't answered the other part of Narpas's question (Shouldn't we add l-cancelling to (aerial) specials?) and explained why (not).

aerial-special usually don't causes landing animation, they used to have defenseless falling or the possiblily to do a simple arial after....

and one more time:
To prove that lcancel is useless in the game, the common sense would have asked to remove it from the game and play with landing-lag/animation(the exact game without lcancel) instead of putting lcancel everywhere, by using with the auto-option.

 

[Ningildo]

No, as soon as we admit that it is normal to have landing animation and the lag that goes with it, we should admit that it is an interesting to have something to avoid the disadvantages that goes with this lag

Why?

False! if lcancel was so easy to performed beginners would have never complain about it, and actually even pros still miss to lcancel sometimes. BUt it is not that difficult if the player smash the button several times during the windows frame.

Actually, you'll have to provide examples of beginners having issues with it, and examples of top players missing these consistently. Note that if you only name one, it could easily be taken as an exception to the rule, so I'll have to ask for multiple examples.

yes because, competitively speaking things are about the ability/reflex/skill needed to perform a move, the reward of those movement and the choice to do it or or not. since the reward of lcancel is obvious it all ready have it place in the game, now we can discuss if the way of performing it has to be refine or not.

So tech in competitive games should require tech skill to be performed, have a reward for doing so and be optional (as there are times were the tech might not be the best move). Except l-cancelling isn't hard, even in Melee and isn't optional. There's only a reward, but it's fine regardless? What was the point of this paragraph, then?

Also, we could just have landing lag frames cut in half for all aerials and remove l-cancelling as it would have the exact same effect as auto l-cancelling. And nothing would be lost in terms of interactions.

No the game is deeper because we have a way to avoid a bad situation on a certain condition, the condition to successfully perform lcanceling. it is a certain amount of depth. a narrow window frame for an input that is a common mechanism of adding skill in a game.

This implies, however, that we'd choose not to at times, which is never the case. And secondly, until proven otherwise, l-cancels aren't missed much at all and the very few that do occur get punished or wouldn't open up a chance for a punish for other reasons (see my analysis of the EVO GF set).

No, i didn't say that at all. There is all ready have situation where having something the player can make to avoid lag-landing could be a good idea, THAT justify the existence of lcancel unless you want to remove landing-animation form the game. Now the choice to make this "something" an input in a window frame, is choice that i find great and that was all ready made in other games.

Yes, except parrying is a choice. FADC is a choice. L-cancelling isn't. You see it as an option to remove animation landing lag, correct? Good. Except there is no reason not to l-cancel, so it isn't an option. If you don't want to give free frame advantage, you will do it. If it is a choice (which you are saying) then prove that there are situations where not l-cancelling is the better option.

I think it's also important to note that most, if not all aerials do not lose their landing animations when l-cancelled, characters are merely stuck in the animation for less time. I don't understand why landing animations lasting longer should be of concern when discussing game mechanics in any case.

 

[Lamesama]

Can't delete, removing all my posts for privacy.

 

[masterpad]

Why?

"as soon as we admit that it is normal to have landing animation and the lag that goes with it, we should admit that it is an interesting thing to have something to avoid on a certain condition, the disadvantages that goes with this lag "
if you don't get this i really think you don't get what could make a fighting game great or deep.

Actually, you'll have to provide examples of beginners having issues with it, and examples of top players missing these consistently. Note that if you only name one, it could easily be taken as an exception to the rule, so I'll have to ask for multiple examples.

I will seriously stop arguing on something that is not absolute, there are poeple missing their lcanceling even pros often miss it as their miss their wavedash. So, lcancel is enough difficult to enter the skill-for-reward box since the reward given goes well with the difficulty of the input IMO.

So tech in competitive games should require tech skill to be performed, have a reward for doing so and be optional (as there are times were the tech might not be the best move). Except l-cancelling isn't hard, even in Melee and isn't optional. There's only a reward, but it's fine regardless? What was the point of this paragraph, then?

I wasn't exactly describing what tech should be in competitive game but rather some ways that are used to make the tech valuable in a game in other to make the game deep -some ways- i don't know all the ways so i don't say because a tech do not have a value in the way i see things this tech is useless. Wich leads to the point of this paragraph, the reasons that could make a tech feeling important to a player in a game. There are so many , you should definitly stop acting like the strategy/choice/option-value is the only relevant reason. lcancel ask reflex for a reward and is enough to make it a good thing.

Also, we could just have landing lag frames cut in half for all aerials and remove l-cancelling as it would have the exact same effect as auto l-cancelling. And nothing would be lost in terms of interactions.

the game will be less deep because we are simply removing the possibility for the player to perform a particular input for usefull reward. You should just remove all the landing-lag/animation because if you keep half of the lag-frames having a way to cancel it on a certain condition will always be a good idea...

Yes, except parrying is a choice. FADC is a choice. L-cancelling isn't. You see it as an option to remove animation landing lag, correct? Good. Except there is no reason not to l-cancel, so it isn't an option. If you don't want to give free frame advantage, you will do it. If it is a choice (which you are saying) then prove that there are situations where not l-cancelling is the better option.

I told you to not jump on "parrying" to bring me back the choice argument, i talk of parrying just to explain how lcancel's implementation (an input to perform in a window frame) is a common way to make a skilled input that ask for reflex. yes, you have to do it everytime afetr an arial but you do not have to do an arial nor to jump neither to land everytime.you can air dodge after you arial according various situations.

I think it's also important to note that most, if not all aerials do not lose their landing animations when l-cancelled, characters are merely stuck in the animation for less time. I don't understand why landing animations lasting longer should be of concern when discussing game mechanics in any case.

if it please you, i will only talk about landing-lag and not mention landing-animation anymore. landing-animation is cute, it shows us how the engine works, it is a part of the game experience.

 

[Ningildo]

"as soon as we admit that it is normal to have landing animation and the lag that goes with it, we should admit that it is an interesting thing to have something to avoid on a certain condition, the disadvantages that goes with this lag "
if you don't get this i really think you don't get what could make a fighting game great or deep.

Why? As in, why should we admit l-cancelling is interesting in that it is something you can use in a certain situation to avoid lag based on admitting that having landing animations having landing lag is normal? You can't just make a statement that only you can agree with and draw conclusions based off of it.

I will seriously stop arguing on something that is not absolute, there are poeple missing their lcanceling even pros often miss it as their miss their wavedash. So, lcancel is enough difficult to enter the skill-for-reward box since the reward given goes well with the difficulty of the input IMO.

Well, if it's not absolute, then your word is as good as mine, isn't it? Hence why I asked for examples.

I wasn't exactly describing what tech should be in competitive game but rather some ways that are used to make the tech valuable in a game in other to make the game deep -some ways- i don't know all the ways so i don't say because a tech do not have a value in the way i see things this tech is useless. Wich leads to the point of this paragraph, the reasons that could make a tech feeling important to a player in a game. There are so many , you should definitly stop acting like the strategy/choice/option-value is the only relevant reason. lcancel ask reflex for a reward and is enough to make it a good thing.

We're back to square one here as your point of l-cancelling having some sort of difficulty has yet to be proven. See above as to how to prove it.

the game will be less deep because we are simply removing the possibility for the player to perform a particular input for usefull reward. You should just remove all the landing-lag/animation because if you keep half of the lag-frames having a way to cancel it on a certain condition will always be a good idea...

But as stated above, this reward is ridiculously easy to get, to the point of never being failed (and even if they did fail it, anything that "changes" would've happened due other factors). Again, we're at a standstill until you prove that l-cancels being missed is common.

I told you to not jump on "parrying" to bring me back the choice argument, i talk of parrying just to explain how lcancel's implementation (an input to perform in a window frame) is a common way to make a skilled input that ask for reflex. yes, you have to do it everytime afetr an arial but you do not have to do an arial nor to jump neither to land everytime.you can air dodge after you arial according various situations.

Except the two aren't comparable in the slightest. How can you tell? Just imagine how much 3s would change if parrying was auto. It'd be "whoever attacks first loses" the game. In contrast to what would happen with auto l-cancelling, which is to say, we lose a button press and people who have bad neutral, punishes and everything else bar tech would whine that their shortcomings are harder to hide. No, I meant that we'd lose an option to land with that is mandatory. Yes, you can airdodge after an aerial. But for most characters, going high enough so that your aerial's animation will end before you hit the ground for said airdodge will usually result in you being above your opponent, which is generally bad and in quite a few MUs, fatal. Trying to do that will lose you games, so this is generally not an option unless your name is Ganon due his godlike aerials (but the aerials where you'd be able to airdodge autocancel anyway).

The better question, though, is if l-cancelling is such a deep and meaningful mechanic as you claim it is, why is it only in the earlier Smash games and nowhere else, not even in other fighting games, in a similar function? If you're going to say "well, the devs for those games don't know REAL deep and meaningful mechanics", I'm going to remind you that that is both a logical fallacy and an inability to recognize that when nearly everyone else doesn't see something the way you do, you might be wrong on at least a few points. That is, of course, if you're going to say that in response. But I'm sure that if your view on the mechanic is right, you'd be able to show me why it wouldn't be able to work in other games with sound reasoning.

 

[Lamesama]

Can't delete, removing all my posts for privacy.

 

[xquqx]

masterpad you realize that auto l canceling doesn't just remove all the landing lag of a move, right? From all your posts, it seems like you might be confused about that. Also, there is landing lag in smash 64, but that game's version of l canceling gets rid of it entirely. Since you didn't seem to know that, it appears to me that you've just been watching pro matches instead of playing the game, and thought l canceling was the default in that game and didn't realize it was an apparently "skillful input that even the pros sometimes miss." Interesting how you couldn't tell the difference between it being automatic and it being manual in high level game play, almost as if it doesn't create meaningful interactions or something.

 

[4tlas]

I disagree with masterpad significantly, but I also disagree with the way ningildo is attempting to refute his claims. I can't be bothered to read every response to those prompts that I disagree with, so I'll just start with the first claim.

1) L-cancelling is a skill. This is undeniably true, though one could argue how MUCH of a skill it is. There is no decision, so it only measures tech skill (which is a fine thing to measure). It is very easy though. It is also very prevalent. It is essentially a base mechanic. But the whole design of Smash is to make the basic mechanics only the simplest possible inputs for the maximum amount of decision making. L-cancelling is exactly the opposite of this, and is akin to some of the ridiculous button sequences required in other fighters for no apparent reason other than to test that tech skill. Since those fighters are full of those sequences, that would indicate that a core gameplay element of those games is to test tech skill. This is not the case in Smash. The design is an attempt to remove as much tech skill as possible for the base game mechanics.

2) Players should be rewarded for skill. Yes, this is true as well, but it is not enough alone to justify its existence. Playing with one hand is a skill, playing blindfolded is a skill, having to input L+R+B to do specials would be a skill.

3) Competitive gaming should be about testing skill. So far so good, everyone agrees. But remember that a certain amount of practicality should be included in our rulesets. We use 4 stocks and 8 minutes so that tournaments run on time but still have enough chances for each player to show their skill. We ban stages with stage hazards because they are weird, not because there is something inherently wrong with a game with hazards. We could enable Auto L-cancelling because it would bring more people to the tournament and allow them to participate.

4) An exception (L-cancel) to a rule (normal landing lag) provides interesting interactions in gameplay. Well, sometimes. If you have too many exceptions, then each one loses value. Furthermore, not all exceptions are good ones, and not all exceptions occur with equal frequency.

So here is a big problem with L-cancelling. The exception is actually missing an L-cancel because its just so EASY to L-cancel! But it LOOKS daunting to new players, and the attitudes around it (not L-cancelling = noob) also scare away players. Even if those things individually don't do it, they give the (correct) impression that a significant amount of tech required for good play AND that the community is elitist, still scaring them away.

 

[masterpad]

Except the two aren't comparable in the slightest. How can you tell? Just imagine how much 3s would change if parrying was auto. It'd be "whoever attacks first loses" the game.

Once again : my only point in mentioning "parry" was the way this tech has to be performed, an input within a widow of frame.

The better question, though, is if l-cancelling is such a deep and meaningful mechanic as you claim it is, why is it only in the earlier Smash games and nowhere else, not even in other fighting games, in a similar function?.

To have my answer about this , you should first answer :
To prove that lcancel is useless in the game, the common sense wouldn't have been to remove it from the game and play with landing-lag/animation(the exact game without lcancel) instead of putting lcancel everywhere, by using with the auto-option?

masterpad you realize that auto l canceling doesn't just remove all the landing lag of a move, right? From all your posts, it seems like you might be confused about that. Also, there is landing lag in smash 64, but that game's version of l canceling gets rid of it entirely. Since you didn't seem to know that, it appears to me that you've just been watching pro matches instead of playing the game

I heard of it a long time ago but i have never really felt any amount of lag after performing a lcancel. Sometimes i do, when i try to down-tilt with marth quickly after spacing with back-shortHop+Fair. And please, let it go about how much i really play i won't even reply to you about that. The topic is the relevance of lcancel or precisly auto-lcancel in competition.

1) L-cancelling is a skill. This is undeniably true, though one could argue how MUCH of a skill it is...

Ok , i see your position and i really understand why you say lcancel is going against the game philosophy since it is a way to ask for skill that is not common to the others mechanism of the game.
But it doesn't have to happen all the time since you don't jump or do an arial or even land all the time! people see lcancel everywhere because they think the same way , a snake main for example, doesn't have to care about that much. And you should understand that there are people that found it very very fun!

2) Players should be rewarded for skill. Yes, this is true as well, but it is not enough alone to justify its existence. Playing with one hand is a skill, playing blindfolded is a skill, having to input L+R+B to do specials would be a skill.

Now you are trying to caricaturate, Lcancel is a SINGLE button input to press in a window of frame, a very very common procedure in fighting games there is nothing exaggerated.

We could enable Auto L-cancelling because it would bring more people to the tournament and allow them to participate.

This is a complete made up story! so melee and pm are lacking of new players because of lcancel?! yes , i know tournament's organizers have feedback on how lcancel is a problem for beginners. But as a beginner somebody should not face obstacles when learning advanced techniques of a game? waveDash, ledge hog are also very difficult when you start! I think the common idea that a consistent amount of beginners are leaving because of lcancel is exaggerated. There will always be people letting down a game for one reason or another. Many beginners just want to move theirselves in smash like in the others fighgting game they have experienced and perform great things without any skill. OK, it won't be a skill after the apparent difficulty as you say but that's veteran part off the topic, beginner experienced just what beginner have to experienced.

So here is a big problem with L-cancelling. The exception is actually missing an L-cancel because its just so EASY to L-cancel! But it LOOKS daunting to new players, and the attitudes around it (not L-cancelling = noob) also scare away players. Even if those things individually don't do it, they give the (correct) impression that a significant amount of tech required for good play AND that the community is elitist, still scaring them away.

Ok , is this all about helping beginners? i dont like the attitudes around either but it is not only in smash community. A beginner can feel that way almost in every deep game he starts. Videos always looks so intimidating. Enven i, a 32 years old player of fighting games since i was 13, MarvelvsCapcom3 videos/x-factor tech/assist-gameplay intimidate me so much in the beginning when it is a so simple game!
Are smash games on the verge of extinction that theirs core has to be thrown apart to make them survive? Beginners should get over it and elders should not pamper them with a futur without lcancel. Auto-lcancel is avalaible for training and helps to get use to it.
it is a pain in the as , like many other one in many other games

 

[Green_Bluebird]

I just wanna jump in here and say this thread is why Smashboards is awesome. Sure there are a few idiotic and childish posts, because this is still the internet, but for the most part it's been a bunch of good, knowledgeable players giving their arguments in a civilized manner, and that's really refreshing to see on an internet forum.

*End pointless appreciative comment*

EDIT: My actual opinion on the topic: Is there any situation where you would intentionally NOT L-cancel? If not, I don't see how it adds anything to the game. People have this elitist attitude a lot in Melee, where if something takes away from the techskill aspect, it's ruining the whole game. But L-cancelling is hardly even a techskill, it's just something every half-decent player does. Multishining is a techskill, perfect wavedashes are techskill, Haxdashing, Scarjumping, these are techskills. There's hardly any skill to L-cancelling, it's just something you do. So I see nothing wrong with taking an arbitrary button press out of the game.

 

[masterpad]

EDIT: My actual opinion on the topic: Is there any situation where you would intentionally NOT L-cancel? If not, I don't see how it adds anything to the game.

Yes, i can choose to not lcancel and wave land instead. And lcancel is not everywhere in the game, i can choose to not jump or not do an arial.
And your little bird is very beautiful.

 

[Green_Bluebird]

Yes, i can choose to not lcancel and wave land instead. And lcancel is not everywhere in the game, i can choose to not jump or not do an arial.
And your little bird is very beautiful.

I'm.. gonna try to spell this out a little better for you. If I'm using an aerial, and I'm gonna hit the ground while it's active, is there any reason not to L-cancel it?

 

[Lamesama]

Can't delete, removing all my posts for privacy.

 

[JOE!]

Yes, i can choose to not lcancel and wave land instead. And lcancel is not everywhere in the game, i can choose to not jump or not do an arial.
And your little bird is very beautiful.

If you (choose to) Waveland, you would not have been able to Lcancel at all in the first place. Lcancel only happens if you land mid-attack, if you are able to air-dodge you are no longer attacking meaning you could not have had the choice to lcancel the attack.

 

[Ningildo]

To have my answer about this , you should first answer :
To prove that lcancel is useless in the game, the common sense wouldn't have been to remove it from the game and play with landing-lag/animation(the exact game without lcancel) instead of putting lcancel everywhere, by using with the auto-option?

I think no one would mind lag animations being adjusted to have the same amount of lag as l-cancelled and removing l-cancelling entirely, as it's effect on gameplay would be the exact same as auto l-cancelling at the top level, which is to say none.

Also, I hope I'm reading this wrong, but you seem to think auto l-cancel puts l-cancelling...on every move? It just makes l-cancels happen automatically, that's it.

Now answer my question.

Yes, i can choose to not lcancel and wave land instead. And lcancel is not everywhere in the game, i can choose to not jump or not do an arial.
And your little bird is very beautiful.

No, you can't choose to l-cancel in a situation where you'd be able to waveland or vice versa. In order to waveland, you'd have to be in IASA frames of the aerial or the aerial would have to be finished, in which case, you can't l-cancel it. If you can l-cancel it, you have to be doing an aerial while landing, which means you're stuck in the aerial until it ends or you land and can't input anything else (well, besides l-cancelling, I guess). So there's no choice involved. Ninja'd by JOE.