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

[Darth Shard]

There is an enormous middle ground between Melee and Brawl/Smash 4, however. Implementation of ALC is a far cry from ledge trumping or removing chain grabs.

 

[Player -0]

Randomly curious and randomly being bored during boring stuff.

So you never want turnaround lag when running so you crouch then dash other way. Why not make it so there's no turnaround lag?

 

[Bleck]

because then there'd be no movement commitment to dashing, which would make both walking and wavedashing meaningless

 

[Player -0]

But you can already do what I've mentioned with crouching into another dash (then rub)

 

[Bleck]

I didn't even know that oh my goodness

 

[4tlas]

I believe removing that would remove RAR as well.

Otherwise I would have no problem with removing it, yes.

 

[Deleted member]

i suddenly understand why people avoid this subject

 

[Player -0]

I have nothing left to add.

gonna go never touch this topic again

 

[Phaiyte]

"somethingsomething no personal anecdotes allowed even though I just typed a whole soliloquy of nothing but personal anecdotes

alright man

 

[Scribe]

The main thing with removing the dash pivot thing would be that it would remove RAR.

Plus, there actually is some degree of mixup potential with normal dash pivots and cactuar dashing, while only two characters have any real mixup potential with L-Cancels, and even then only in very niche scenarios.

L-cancelling does not take significant skill in the same way that most advanced techs do. L-cancelling results in marginal gains, of which there are already plenty in the game, like spacing more efficiently. And that's when it results in any gains at all, which it often doesn't. L-cancelling does not need to be as precise as those other techniques, like being frame tight. There are plenty of techs in the game to demonstrate tech skill with, like all of the advanced techs. There is no decision-making regarding L-cancelling at all, it is just a tech skill barrier. And most importantly, L-cancelling looks daunting to new players while also being the source of considerable elitism and noob-shaming. This mechanic has a disproportionate amount of negatives associated with it while having nearly insignificant positives. And if you don't care about new players wanting to join or about the treatment they receive, then consider that the scene will die without new players. Would this change be enough to make the difference? Maybe, maybe not.

Pretty much this. And since the whole "no decision making" thing has been brought up before, and we still have people who don't get it, I'll compare L-canceling with two other mechanics involving hitting the shield button right before landing - Wavelanding and teching.

With wavelanding, your first decision is whether to waveland. In some scenarios, it may be beneficial, in others, it might not. Once you've decided to waveland, you then have to decide whether you'll waveland left or right. This all depends on where you're landing on the stage and where you are relative to your opponent, among many other variables. Once you've decided what direction you're going in, you have to decide how far you want to waveland. You can do a short waveland, a long waveland, a medium waveland, or waveland in place, all depending on how you want to position yourself relative to your opponent, the edges of the stage, and any platforms.

Likewise, with Teching, you have to decide whether you'll tech or not. Not teching gives the advantage of being able to use a getup attack and brief immunity to grabs, but also leaves you vulnerable to attack and forces you to wait before you can get up. Teching gives you the ability to immediately respond, at the cost of having fewer getup options - You can only tech in place or tech-roll. Thus, you have the options of tech roll left or right, tech in place, don't tech then getup roll left or right, don't tech then do a normal get up, or don't tech then do a getup attack. Some of these might be favorable in more situations than others - I don't think I've ever seen someone do a normal getup after a missed tech - but they all have enough applications to make them viable options in a competitive setting.

Then you have L-canceling. You have two options, L-cancel and don't L-cancel. With the exception of Kirby and Zelda in very niche scenarios specific to certain matchups that are so statistically unlikely to come up as to be nonexistent in the grand scheme of things, L-canceling is a strictly better option than not l-canceling. There is not a single option that you can do out of a non L-canceled move that cannot also be done out of an L-canceled move, and yet there are many followup options out of L-canceled moves not available out of non L-canceled ones. As such, there is no decision process involved in L-canceling. If you can L-cancel a move, you always want to L-cancel it, no matter what, and is thus not actually an option.

Not only is it daunting to new players and a source of considerable elitism and noob-shaming, a lot of the time that normally gets spent on grinding L-canceling could be spent grinding other tech skill or working on combos and strategy.

 

[Deleted member]

alright man

i didn't... say that? i just said i don't want him attacking my character, which he did. at length. there still has been nothing to address my concern that ALC hurts those that are the most proficient at the game all else equal. The only responses i've gotten so far are "well i don't have to address that" and attacking my ego.

 

[4tlas]

i didn't... say that? i just said i don't want him attacking my character, which he did. at length. there still has been nothing to address my concern that ALC hurts those that are the most proficient at the game all else equal. The only responses i've gotten so far are "well i don't have to address that" and attacking my ego.

I addressed it and so did other people. We all said "of course it hurts you relative to non-L-cancelling players". You are more skilled at the current set of skills than the new player, including but not nearly limited to L-cancelling. The loss of L-cancelling is marginal, there are still plenty of other skills to set you apart from less/more skilled players, and enlarging the community results in better play from everyone.

And people attacked your ego because you were quite literally using it as an argument.

 

[Deleted member]

disagree with the latter, saying i'm better at the game than most people and why is simply a candid observation with regards to noting a relative advantage between players. my intent was to add practical context to my point of view. we can switch it where i'm the bad player and the opponent is the good player and the point still stands. one player must be better than the other for there to be a discrepancy. thankfully out of two opponents, one player is always decided to be better via the set.

i disagree with the premise that ALC will enlarge the community. with the obvious amount of friction to the idea, you are much more likely to alienate the remaining player base than expand what we already have.

the loss of L canceling as a skill worth testing is indeed marginal, but as already noted the idea of talent at this game is a summary of many skills and one of the main draws to the game. people like being good at smash bros, and taking tools that allow players to differentiate themselves moves to defeat this idea. i know i don't want to lose it.

 

[4tlas]

disagree with the latter, saying i'm better at the game than most people and why is simply a candid observation with regards to noting a relative advantage between players. my intent was to add practical context to my point of view.

I understand. The wording implied that your opinion was more valid because you're a top player regardless of logic to back it up. If you had provided both simultaneously, then it would come off as you intended.

we can switch it where i'm the bad player and the opponent is the good player and the point still stands. one player must be better than the other for there to be a discrepancy. thankfully out of two opponents, one player is always decided to be better via the set.

Yes, it is a skill. Testing more skills offers more opportunities to differentiate between players. I don't think that should affect whether or not we keep this one, though. Why don't we add some, if more skills in the skillset is strictly better? We could always play ironman. That's pretty similar to what we already do.

i disagree with the premise that ALC will enlarge the community. with the obvious amount of friction to the idea, you are much more likely to alienate the remaining player base than expand what we already have.

This is the part that nobody will ever be able to agree on and is entirely conjecture. It does seem as though much of the current player base would be alienated indeed, though I think it is difficult to judge just how effective it would be at expanding the player base. It is totally possible that one will outweigh the other.

the loss of L canceling as a skill worth testing is indeed marginal, but as already noted the idea of talent at this game is a summary of many skills and one of the main draws to the game. people like being good at smash bros, and taking tools that allow players to differentiate themselves moves to defeat this idea. i know i don't want to lose it.

Sure, but again, if more skills tested is strictly better, why not add some? Is L-cancelling so integral to what "playing Smashbros" means to players (all players, not just current competitive pm players) that the loss of it would make the game "not Smashbros"? This is a matter of opinion, but it is an important one. You've made it clear that you think so. I think most current competitive pm players will agree with you, which is a practical concern for ALC. I don't think its at all important. In fact, I have mentioned multiple times in the thread that L-cancelling is the antithesis of the entire game design, aka "not Smashbros".

 

[Bleck]

you are much more likely to alienate the remaining player base than expand what we already have.

"I'm against dividing this community in any way, and that's why I feel we need to support this archaic game mechanic that often convinces people that the game isn't worth playing"

what you're saying here, functionally, is that you believe your time and the time of other l-canceling players is more important, inherently, than the time of people who may yet become a part of this community

the refusal to acknowledge that the community stubbornly acts as it's own biggest obstacle to expansion is what will eventually lead to its demise

 

[Narpas_sword]

Randomly curious and randomly being bored during boring stuff.

So you never want turnaround lag when running so you crouch then dash other way. Why not make it so there's no turnaround lag?

You mean, why not add a shoulder button press to halve it, right?

i didn't... say that? i just said i don't want him attacking my character, which he did. at length. there still has been nothing to address my concern that ALC hurts those that are the most proficient at the game all else equal. The only responses i've gotten so far are "well i don't have to address that" and attacking my ego.

Here's a thought.

All other things equal. and now the guy who l cancelled 40% vs the guy who l cancelled 90% are on even footing.
Here's your new scenario:

You're now training / fighting against people who are equal to you, instead of you being marginally better by the utmost tiny fraction.
You now have to focus on other matters of your game to improve on in order to beat the opponent who is considered equal.

Your game will improve as you work on making better decisions, punishing where you should instead of hoping they miss a cancel, and in general being more careful.


Just a hypothetical scenario of course. but then again, in what world is there someone exactly equal with another but has half their l cancelling rate and both play at a high level otherwise.
And lets be honest, if all things were equal other than that l cancel %, the split in wins would already be pretty close to even. maybe 49.5 : 50.5.

 

[Scribe]

the loss of L canceling as a skill worth testing is indeed marginal, but as already noted the idea of talent at this game is a summary of many skills and one of the main draws to the game. people like being good at smash bros, and taking tools that allow players to differentiate themselves moves to defeat this idea. i know i don't want to lose it.

But here's the thing, consistent L-canceling isn't something that makes you good at Smash Bros. It's something that puts you at the very baseline of being able to compete. It's not something that you need to know in order to win, it's something that you need to know in order to play, and having something with such a tight frame window that's also incredibly braindead in its usage as a basic requirement is a terrible way to provide a barrier of entry for your game. The skill involved in L-canceling - careful, frame-perfect timing of button presses - is also completely irrelevant to the skill set involved in competitive Smash Bros - strategizing, adapting, thinking on the fly, spacing, footsies, and maintaining stage control - and does nothing to contribute to that skillset nor teach any of those skills. The sort of skill that L-canceling involves is more in line with the sort of skills required for QTEs or rhythm games.

And the idea is that we've gotten as far as we can with our current approach of focusing on bringing in Melee players, and continuing to focus primarily on Melee players as our main audience is unsustainable. We've already won over as much of that crowd as we're ever gonna get, so it's time we expand our horizons.

 

[Player -0]

The point was arbitrary inputs that don't add value but I can tell we're not going to get anywhere so I'm going to actually leave this time

 

[Deleted member]

But here's the thing, consistent L-canceling isn't something that makes you good at Smash Bros. It's something that puts you at the very baseline of being able to compete. It's not something that you need to know in order to win, it's something that you need to know in order to play, and having something with such a tight frame window that's also incredibly braindead in its usage as a basic requirement is a terrible way to provide a barrier of entry for your game. The skill involved in L-canceling - careful, frame-perfect timing of button presses - is also completely irrelevant to the skill set involved in competitive Smash Bros - strategizing, adapting, thinking on the fly, spacing, footsies, and maintaining stage control - and does nothing to contribute to that skillset nor teach any of those skills. The sort of skill that L-canceling involves is more in line with the sort of skills required for QTEs or rhythm games.

And the idea is that we've gotten as far as we can with our current approach of focusing on bringing in Melee players, and continuing to focus primarily on Melee players as our main audience is unsustainable. We've already won over as much of that crowd as we're ever gonna get, so it's time we expand our horizons.

I disagree with much of this - I agree that it's an unnecessary barrier to entry, but I'll stop there. Consistent L cancel is something that makes you good at smash bros since goodness is relative as is your advantage is being able to do it better. L canceling is not the baseline for play, it's the ideal, and even the best players in the world miss occasionally. I would consider it rather obvious that you need to know L canceling to win more than you need it to play, since not using it will certainly cause you to lose more often.

Unsurprisingly, I highly support the practices of noob shaming and elitism.

 

[Scribe]

Consistent L cancel is something that makes you good at smash bros since goodness is relative as is your advantage is being able to do it better.

I'm sorry, what? Not only is that a completely circular argument, it makes no grammatical sense.

Unsurprisingly, I highly support the practices of noob shaming and elitism.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but if you aren't, then, like I said before, if we want to grow the community, we need to get past that attitude of treating new players like ****. If you think that having an unwelcome environment for new players this is good for the community, then we'll do just fine without you. Don't let the door hit you on the way out

 

[Deleted member]

no

being good is everything in this community

 

[Scribe]

You know what, no. If you're going to pull that card, I'm gonna have to shut you down right there, because that in no way justifies either of your arguments - that manual L-canceling is a necessary part of the game and that making it automatic would be detrimental, or that it is somehow beneficial for us as a community to treat new players like ****, and act like more experienced players are somehow more "deserving" of being part of the community than them. Besides, the only place where being good is everything is in the specific circumstance of the tournament. Everywhere else? **** that noise.

As people have mentioned, there are so many other skills involved in Smash that don't get involved in competitive play. Playing with items on, dealing with stage hazards, knowing how to play every character, playing 3 or 4 player FFAs, 2v1 matches, 3v1 matches, 2v1v1 matches, playing blindfolded, playing one-handed, playing with your feet, playing with one foot, playing with your face, playing Smash while playing DDR, 1p2c matches. Winning in formats that use any of these could be considered "being good," but we don't test for any of these in competitive play, because it's borderline impossible to be good at all of these. Hell, many of these are completely irrelevant to the game itself. Not testing for a variable isn't saying that somehow being good doesn't matter. It's deciding what factors are proper indicators of player skill. It's deciding what it means to be good, and here, we're saying that, no, having to do a timed input every time you land isn't a proper indicator of skill, because that's not what Smash is about. If you want a game where the sole indicator of skill is frame-perfect timing, then Stepmania might be more your style.

Besides, you can't sustain a community if you constantly treat new players like **** for not "being good." Nobody just starts off already being good. It's something that takes time and dedication, and if we just constantly tell people off just for trying, then guess what? Significantly fewer people will ever get good. A ton of people will give up before they get good if you give them **** for not already knowing everything instead of giving them a chance to learn and improve.

So, again, if you seriously think that this is desirable, that we should be discouraging new players from trying to improve and just telling them to **** off if they're not magically an expert the instant they pick up a controller, then you have no business in the Smash community. You were once one of them, as was everyone else here, so you're a hypocrite if you want to keep new players out. And if you want to say otherwise, then you're lying to us and to yourself.

 

[Deleted member]

this has nothing to do with L canceling really, but sure i'll take the tangent. elitistism and noob shaming makes new players hungry to beat your ass. having "the boys club" doesnt mean you treat people outside of it poorly- far from it, since those people fill your wallet. on the contrary, it gives people something to aspire to. i started at the bottom like everyone else man. but it gets tiring to help randoms every day, so i wrote a guide and refer people to that. if i give prodigous advice and help to someone and they quit after six months it was basically a waste of my time, people that actually want to stick with it will generally find my work on their own. no johns is a beautiful philosophy but it usually takes someone several years to really "get it".

 

[DMG]

I'd be more likely to support auto L-cancel if there weren't nuances attached. I think you could successfully argue that manual L-cancel is meaningful because of variations from other influences. Ex: whether you incur hitstun/hitlag for touching an opponent or his shield, whether your attack landed a tipper/sweetspot/sourspot that offers different hitlag from other parts of the move, how early or late you perform the aerial, etc


Auto L-cancel would make more sense if these factors were simplified or didn't exist. Like if hitlag was 0: your SH aerial will not lag for hitting an opponent or his shield. Means no matter what the other factors are, you press L-cancel on frame 31 and achieve it. There is no 3-8 frames of possible hitlag to throw this off etc. Stuff like that would make Auto L-cancel appealing because there's no real nuance or variance on when you would need to press.


There are enough meaningful variables to the equation for Manual L-cancel to not require or be improved with an Automatic change. If that were to be the case, I'd prefer a couple things be streamlined to automatic: Automatic Shield Grab (hold A while shielding, buffers grab or some similar idea) along with Auto L-cancel might be interesting.

 

[Bleck]

as has been noted before in this argument, probably by me, adjusting when you l-cancel on reaction to various factors that change the timing by a couple of frames is literally physically impossible

anybody with reaction times that fast probably plays fox and doesn't even use aerials - they probably just wait for you to try to attack and then immediately 0-to-death waveshine you in the opening frames of your attack

 

[DMG]

Well it's possible to spam the L-cancel since there's no failure penalty (like premature teching penalty). You could hit 100% of L-cancels with that method, even for fairly average tech ability players. Spamming it probably does have downsides though: accidentally shielding after the L-cancel will happen way more if you don't know what you are doing, or possibly getting hit out of aerial and having early L-cancel "spam" give you a tech fail window, etc

In any case, making it Auto would seem to make more sense in an environment where the other factors were normalized or not so variable. Same thing if Auto SHFF were implemented: hitting people creates different timings for manual inputs and better players can distinguish themselves from worse players by being more proficient at the manual version (manual of both L-cancel and FF). Same with OOS options that can't totally be buffered that easily

 

[4tlas]

You can spam light press to get the L-cancel then full press to get the tech. ****s broke yo

 

[Scribe]

this has nothing to do with L canceling really, but sure i'll take the tangent. elitistism and noob shaming makes new players hungry to beat your ***. having "the boys club" doesnt mean you treat people outside of it poorly- far from it, since those people fill your wallet. on the contrary, it gives people something to aspire to. i started at the bottom like everyone else man. but it gets tiring to help randoms every day, so i wrote a guide and refer people to that. if i give prodigous advice and help to someone and they quit after six months it was basically a waste of my time, people that actually want to stick with it will generally find my work on their own. no johns is a beautiful philosophy but it usually takes someone several years to really "get it".

I'm sorry, but no. That's not how it works. Sure, people tend to react that way to losing in general, but if it's a total blowout, and people are constantly treating you like **** just for being there, then you're not gonna think "man, I gotta get better," you're just gonna say "**** this, I'm out," and you can't sustain a community on that mentality. And if you don't want to help people anymore, fine. Tell them to read your guide or refer them to someone else, but you don't just treat them like **** just for needing help. This is **** that would get you kicked out of tournaments for any other fighting game. It's the same attitude that the Soul Calibur community was built on, and look at it now. It's down to about 30 people, they're all total assholes, and the rest of the FGC hates them.

The PM community is already on its last legs. You may be willing to strangle the community's lifeline to stroke your ego, but the rest of us aren't. Your attitude does more harm than good for the community, and it's one that the rest of us are trying to move past. If you're not willing to do the same, then we'll be perfectly glad to leave you behind.

 

[Scribe]

Oh, and as an addendum to my last post, @Umbreon, you're also missing the point of No Johns. It's not "If you lose, it's because you suck, and until you git gud, you're just here to give the big boys free wins," it's "Don't use blatantly false excuses, and don't blame outside factors when you lose." In other words, you don't even get the point behind the "beautiful philosophy" that it takes someone several years to "really get."

But this is has gone way off topic, so I'll end our little tangent with this: The point of using ALC is to get new people who were turned off by L-canceling to start playing, and, if not save the community from dying, at least keep things trucking along until Wavedash Games releases whatever they're working on. If we have people treating any new players that ALC brings in like **** just by virtue of them being new, then we'll just be killing the community faster. Like I said before, aside from the Soul Calibur community (who, like I said before, are a couple dozen ****ters who everyone hates), most of the FGC looks down upon treating fellow competitors like **** and trying to make them feel unwelcome in the community, especially if they're new. That's the kind of **** that gets you DQ'd, banned from tournaments, and shunned by the rest of the community. If we truly want to put our best foot forward and, if not grow our community, at least keep things going until we have a good alternative to move on to, we should follow suit and start getting rid of some of the bad eggs in our community.

Now, back on topic, since 4tlas mentioned that his local scene has been opposed to the idea of switching over to ALC, are there any other TOs or would-be TOs who have considered running ALC events? Because I'm honestly contemplating talking over the idea of hosting an ALC event with some local TOs, which might go over a bit better, since my area doesn't really have that active of a PM scene to begin with.

 

[4tlas]

I'm surprised to hear that the Soul Calibur scene is full of jerks. Last I remember, Soul Calibur was regarded as the series non-FGC people liked because weapons were interesting and the control scheme was simple and intuitive. Then again I know another fighting game with simple and intuitive controls...

 

[Scribe]

Yeah. What's left of the competitive Soul Calibur community is full of jerks. And the tournament scene is basically dead at this point. It all comes from Soul Calibur 3, and the whole mentality of information hoarding that continued into later games. The history of the Soul Calibur community is basically a cautionary tale about why you don't treat new players like crap and don't just tell them to **** off when they ask for help.

Basically, someone discovered a Lizardman glitch that let him cancel his grapple and leave him free to act while the opponent was stuck in the grapple animation. He could then push the opponent to the edge of the stage and force a ring out.

Rather than using it for easy wins in locals and regionals or teaching it to other players, he just kept it to himself and saved it for nationals, where he'd take people by surprise with it. Him pulling out such a blatantly broken tactic out of nowhere and keeping it to himself basically lead to an arms race of people discovering new tech and keeping it to themselves, which further exacerbated the SC community's mentality of refusing to help new players with tech and just telling them to figure everything out on their own. Thus, new players left for other games, TOs stopped running SC, thus meaning fewer people started playing to begin with, and the existing players started to leave for other games due to a lack of tournaments, until all that was left was the information-hoarding jackasses.

Oh, and the guy ended up losing anyways.

 

[Comprehend13]

this has nothing to do with L canceling really, but sure i'll take the tangent. elitistism and noob shaming makes new players hungry to beat your ***. having "the boys club" doesnt mean you treat people outside of it poorly- far from it, since those people fill your wallet. on the contrary, it gives people something to aspire to. i started at the bottom like everyone else man. but it gets tiring to help randoms every day, so i wrote a guide and refer people to that. if i give prodigous advice and help to someone and they quit after six months it was basically a waste of my time, people that actually want to stick with it will generally find my work on their own. no johns is a beautiful philosophy but it usually takes someone several years to really "get it".

There is really no need to attack your character when you degrade it by sharing ideas like this.

 

[GP&B]

"No Johns" was a long-running joke meant to poke at inane and arbitrary reasons someone comes up with to deny acceptance of a loss. It's comparable to scrub mentality. Also, trying to provoke passion through harassment as a means of causing improvement is not a good thing when it comes to the long-term. It's completely inconsiderate and is focused of producing instant results and turnarounds for the sake of rivalry bull**** and short-term "success". I understand that there's a risk involved with investing in someone who may possibly just drop out of the scene (for me, as soon as my studies and prospective job opportunities became imminent, Smash dropped off in importance substantially), but shortcuts are sloppy and are far more likely to produce long-term resentment and terrible mindsets for future goals. It's easy not to care about that when you're not involved in their life beyond this, but there's great responsibility to be had when teaching someone. There's more to life than winning in Smash, believe it or not. Pursuing passions is great but generating passion out of animosity is hardly admirable.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Unsurprisingly, I highly support the practices of noob shaming and elitism.

This is why Leffen got banned from his scene for a while.

Just a reminder that this is not a good mentally.

 

[Scribe]

This is why Leffen got banned from his scene for a while.

Just a reminder that this is not a good mentally.

He didn't just get banned from his local scene, he got banned from tournaments in much of Northern Europe, and he's still banned from commentating at most European tournaments for a separate incident.

But yeah. I think that we can all agree that we as a community need to be more serious about banning, or at least disqualifying, players who harass new players to try to get quick turnarounds and rivalries.

 

[BlueX]

I saw this happening and i wanted to say something about this.

The idea of being hostile to new players is wrong. They are the ones who are still learning the game and still need help on improving and learn to not do mistakes so they will be most likely to play with better players and receive advice but however if you just going to be hostile to them however then they will likely to stop playing and not come to any tournaments anymore. I am in full support of disqualifying players who are hostile to new players for no reason, It is completely unnecessary and there is no reason to be hostile.

 

[Stryker]

This game wasn't released to be played with auto L cancel on. if anyone wants to do the whole want to do that whole "honor the PMDT" You should probably play like that. Otherwise, why not just throw in the new characters as well? Following this logic, there's no good reason for the mostly completed ones not to be in there.

Honestly, if you'd likely to rebalance the entire game around having basically no landing lag, be my guest, but PM is already struggling to keep a consistent version played among all members, and this would probably just split the community even further.

tl:dr if you want to split an already endangered community, then be my guest, but this isn't a good idea for the survival and growth of the game. You may argue that it would help bring in new players, but the number of players you would alienate and lose would far surpass anything you gain.

 

[Bleck]

This game wasn't released to be played with auto L cancel on. if anyone wants to do the whole want to do that whole "honor the PMDT" You should probably play like that. Otherwise, why not just throw in the new characters as well? Following this logic, there's no good reason for the mostly completed ones not to be in there.

what the hell are you talking about

 

[xquqx]

Honestly, if you'd likely to rebalance the entire game around having basically no landing lag, be my guest, but PM is already struggling to keep a consistent version played among all members, and this would probably just split the community even further.

The game is already balanced around the "basically no landing lag" that auto L cancel would have, since it's balanced around people L canceling and the two are the same.

 

[JOE!]

Also unlike Knux/Lynn, Auto l cancel has been in PM since like...3.02?