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

[JOE!]

What 10 aerials are you talking about?


I guess to better explain myself, at a certain point it becomes a character quirk where like, you will know Kirby can dair to avoid some grabs. That is an outlier in that in every scenario except kirby dair, you will expect an lcancel.

 

[Wise Multishine]

So what if we implement single input wavedashing in tournaments as well?
Example: + left or right on the control stick wavedashes perfectly that direction? Then could be used for just jumping? If you don't agree with this then I don't think you can agree with auto L- cancels in tournaments either. It's the same exact principle. Even something like auto/easy fast falling could be used in this argument. Anything considered "technical skill."

Would you really want to make all of that more simplified or impossible to flub? A high skill ceiling is a huge part of what makes a video game competitively viable. Or even objectively more interesting because there are more things to analyze and understand.

 

[wiztick]

snip

i can agree actually, properly being able to use a wavedash,knowing when to wave dash, and applying wavedashing in between combos is what determines the high skill ceiling that you speak of. being able to wavedash itself doesn't have to much merit but the timing of when to use it makes it the amazing tool that it is.

never really thought the inputs for wavedashing were hard to begin with, especially when good ol muscle memory does its magic.

 

[xquqx]

A high skill ceiling is a huge part of what makes a video game competitively viable. Or even objectively more interesting because there are more things to analyze and understand.

A high skill ceiling is important. L canceling has nothing to do with that ceiling and instead exclusively deals with the skill floor, which does nothing to make the game more competitive.

 

[Bleck]

having a high execution barrier doesn't directly correlate with overall skill requirements - reducing the execution barrier does not inherently devalue the metagame

 

[Wise Multishine]

A high skill ceiling is important. L canceling has nothing to do with that ceiling and instead exclusively deals with the skill floor, which does nothing to make the game more competitive.

I disagree. A skill floor cannot be altered or changed. The skill floor of every single video game is when someone sits down for the first time and plays it without knowing how it plays, no matter how complex it is. I do understand what you mean, though.

-----------

That aside, I believe L-cancelling affects the skill ceiling similarly to every other tech. Being able to L-cancel consistently during high speed, input heavy, and stressful situations along with executing every other small but important part of technical skill is what makes Project M and Melee the pieces of competitive art that they are.

That's why I don't want to see "Auto L-cancelling Tournaments" become a common occurrence. I see no reason to change the way things are. It would also be another situation that splits the community, which is something we definitely don't need. I appreciate auto L-cancelling for what it is. It can be used to ease new players into the competitive community and maybe even in the future, help aging players play the game at the speed they used to.

 

[Vashimus]

having a high execution barrier doesn't directly correlate with overall skill requirements - reducing the execution barrier does not inherently devalue the metagame

It actually can, it just depends on what aspects of the game you're making easier. There's a reason Zangief's Spinning Pile Driver has a 360 motion, for instance. If players could do an instant SPD whenever they wanted, it would have real implications on matches against Gief, even in the highest levels where execution isn't much of a factor. Sometimes it isn’t just about being able to perform your moves, it’s also about knowing what your opponent can perform within a given time frame.

In the case of auto-L-canceling, yes, it's effect is negligible. It's not gonna give the worse player much of a edge over a better player or cheese them out of a match they would've otherwise won.

 

[Bleck]

It actually can, it just depends on what aspects of the game you're making easier. There's a reason Zangief's Spinning Pile Driver has a 360 motion, for instance. If players could do an instant SPD whenever they wanted, it would have real implications on matches against Gief, even in the highest levels where execution isn't much of a factor. Sometimes it isn’t just about being able to perform your moves, it’s also about knowing what your opponent can perform within a given time frame.

you're right - but the whole point of having a seven-frame input attached to a move is so that the player has to react seven frames ahead of executing the move, which is a longer than average amount of time compared to other moves because of how powerful the SPD is

what I'm saying is that if instead of requiring a seven-frame input, you mapped the SPD to a single button and made it have a seven-frame wind-up (that could be further pre-canceled by buffering it during other actions, similar to how it functions now), it would make the game easier without actually devaluing the metagame, because the important part of the metagame (i.e the strategic depth) doesn't actually change

 

[Rawkobo]

well let's see:
A. you're pressing more buttons for better execution of your character; that puts more interaction between your fingers and your character, characters with good tech skill are generally satisfying to play; and as quoted by dr. peepee, "I like falco because I get to press a lot of buttons with him" and it feels satisfying to know that even with characters without any tech like mario or kirby can at least be somewhat technical with L-cancelling.
B. Part of why tr4sh sucks is because there is a lack of tech, and while just putting in L-cancelling wouldn't make the game that much better, it would at least feel rewarding to master that timing.
C. you can capitalize off of someone's missed L-cancelling, which adds a layer of depth to the punish game, and although L cancelling is fake difficulty, it is pretty essential for a game often called Project MELEE!

A) Subjective. There are more inputs to tech skill than just your shoulder trigger buttons, friend.
B) Subjective. Also, there's an assumption L-cancelling would make the game more satisfying. No, it would still have shoddy movement and terrible ledge mechanics, and getting hits would still feel about just as bad. One button isn't going to change that for me unless that button also nuked their character every time I pressed it.

Y'know, like League of Legends champion ultimates.
C) The first half isn't necessarily false, but the implication made following it is a bit misunderstood. I can punish the whiffed aerial because I have good spacing and awareness, not because of what you're implying is a significant technical flub (the significant part still having yet to be proven).

41 characters * 5 aerials each = 205

10/205 = .049

Roughly 5% of the aerials have this benefit according to your numbers (also 10/500 is 2% which is literally double the 1% you claim it barely reaches). I'd be willing to wager that significantly more than 10 aerials in the game change the shape of your hurtbox as well.

There likely are, but this is the number given to us of aerials that aren't affected by the use of L-cancelling, which was the argument you and several others have been trying to advocate as significant enough to make auto-L-cancelling in tournaments unviable.

...Except my followup question would be about the physical evidence you have that these sorts of intricacies in character design actually decided a set. Like, okay, cool, I'd love to see this tech implemented in a way that leads to your success in high-stakes situations. One rule, though: If it's anecdotal in any way, trying to say it's not an outlier falls through rather hard.

Because I could sit here and say "Hey, yeah, I won a tournament because of Kirby dipping low during his landing lag. It was really significant in every game I played." And you'd have to believe me because of one gfycat you saw. But maybe it was actually because I outplayed everyone at the tournament legitimately.

But you'd never know, and you'd only have to go off what I told you. Do you see how asinine that sounds?

This is entirely subjective and I completely disagree with you. The reward isn't for JUST shielding. It is for shielding and intelligently placing it to screw with your opponent, that is depth by definition and in my opinion that does sound like fun.

Baiting is a mental decision that involves the control of space. Mind you, if you're accounting for your landing lag as a means this, you're doing something needlessly over-complex, but more power to you, I guess?

That aside, I believe L-cancelling affects the skill ceiling similarly to every other tech. Being able to L-cancel consistently during high speed, input heavy, and stressful situations along with executing every other small but important part of technical skill is what makes Project M and Melee the pieces of competitive art that they are.

That's why I don't want to see "Auto L-cancelling Tournaments" become a common occurrence. I see no reason to change the way things are. It would also be another situation that splits the community, which is something we definitely don't need. I appreciate auto L-cancelling for what it is. It can be used to ease new players into the competitive community and maybe even in the future, help aging players play the game at the speed they used to.

It's definitely not the awareness of the players factored into their decision-making at top speed, in addition to high-velocity movement and depth due to the nature of being its own thing: a platform fighter.

No, that'd be silly. It's clearly all L-cancelling. And clearly, L-cancelling represents the same magnitude of competitive quality of these things, if not moreso.

Please.

If the community wants to split over being unwilling to change, they can be my guest. It's not like the Smash community hasn't done the same sort of thing fifty thousand times in the 16 years it's existed as a whole.

 

[Soft Serve]

Oh man, auto l cancel thread AND a post about auto wavedash buttons? My favorite

 

[LightningDragon]

too easy

It is quite easy to feed your pet ego, isn't it?

"objective fact" you said "objective fact", what is objective?

a landing animation for whoever jump is objective
having lag during landing animation is objective
lag making the one who jump defenseless or unable follow up his previous attack is objective
including an input that can cancel all this lag is objective but still debatable according how the input is managed/performed

It's called "knowing how a game is designed". Something you obviously don't understand. I have developed characters for MUGEN, I have gained more experience in game design in several years than you have in your lifetime. I know what I'm talking about.

Also, don't take my statement out of context.

the way to do it need skill and the CHOICE to perform a move or not IS NOT THE ONLY interessant value in game and so many fighting game all ready proove it. The lcancel input has a window frame where it should be performed AND THAT IS THE REAL DEBATE

There's no reason to not perform an L-Cancel. Making it have an input frame with no actual fail window doesn't make it take skill. Muscle memory and reflexes are not skills. Quit trying to compare it to something that isn't anything like it.

YOU should check facts and stop following a couple of people who wrongly though they where enough smart to find an absurd , pointless mecanism in such a master-piece as SmashBros... lcancel doesnt exist in most of other 2D-fighting games as landing animation. but other mecanism only base on performing-to-reward system do exist in many other games, mecanism that doesnt have any strategic value, that are only base on the system of reward for everyone who performed it sucessfully, do we starting a list?
YOU should check facts!

Just because the SSB games are masterpieces doesn't mean that they don't have flaws. Masterpiece does not mean perfection. And just because other games have arbitrary inputs that are dumb and pointless does not at all prove that L-Cancelling is a good mechanic. It's just a dumb gimmick, nothing more.

If you're going to try to change definitions of words and take people's statements out of context in an attempt to "prove" your assertions, then why should I and anyone else take you seriously?

 

[4tlas]

So what if we implement single input wavedashing in tournaments as well?
Example: + left or right on the control stick wavedashes perfectly that direction? Then could be used for just jumping? If you don't agree with this then I don't think you can agree with auto L- cancels in tournaments either. It's the same exact principle. Even something like auto/easy fast falling could be used in this argument. Anything considered "technical skill."

Would you really want to make all of that more simplified or impossible to flub? A high skill ceiling is a huge part of what makes a video game competitively viable. Or even objectively more interesting because there are more things to analyze and understand.

This analogy unfortunately doesn't work. There are degrees to wavedashes (when and how), but L-cancelling is binary. You either pressed it or you didn't, and the only reasons to not press it are extraordinarily niche. As wonderful as it is to have very niche depth, I don't think that alone can possibly justify L-cancelling. The mechanic is unnecessary overhead in 99% of cases, and that isn't worth the extremely rare "cool ****" you can pull off with it.

And yes I would love to have a macro for wavedashing. Why not? To take it to the extreme, I would love to remove the controller and just play with brainwaves. If you want physical skill to still be important, then perhaps we should go with virtual reality controls where you have to act out the moves. That sounds like a fun game, but its certainly a different one.

 

[Wise Multishine]

I never meant to imply that L-cancelling is more important than any other tech or anything else that makes a good player. It's small but important; similar to everything else that makes up what the game is.

I don't think you can outright say that it's "bad game design." Granted that melee was obviously a rushed game. It all stems to whether you want more, less, or no landing lag in the game. Or if this should vary greatly depending on the character. And that is probably a very subjective topic.

If you want to develop this debate a tad more, maybe try asking top players and the voices of the community their thoughts.

 

[4tlas]

I never meant to imply that L-cancelling is more important than any other tech or anything else that makes a good player. It's small but important; similar to everything else that makes up what the game is.

I don't think you can outright say that it's "bad game design." Granted that melee was obviously a rushed game. It all stems to whether you want more, less, or no landing lag in the game. Or if this should vary greatly depending on the character. And that is probably a very subjective topic.

If you want to develop this debate a tad more, maybe try asking top players and the voices of the community their thoughts.

Design is an interesting concept. A design is good if it achieves the objective that is was intended to achieve with drawbacks that are worth less than the accomplishment. Assuming the drawbacks do not directly inhibit the accomplishment of the goal, it is hard to decide how to evaluate the worth of all other drawbacks (which get called "side-effects").

In the case of Game Design, the objective is to be fun, and that means something different to everyone. So is the goal to be fun for the most people, or to be the most fun for the people who like it? Only the designer can answer this question.

L-cancelling has 2 parts: the cause and the effect. The effect is the reduced landing lag with a risk of missing it. Almost everyone that likes [the rest of] the game agrees that the landing lag with L-cancelling is appropriate for the game, and many people like the aspect of risk it introduces to performing aerials. The cause is the button press along with the decision to press it, which nearly equates to just the button press. Requiring the performance of physical inputs is a part of game playing that many people enjoy.

So manual L-cancelling accomplishes 2 things: it tests the ability to perform the physical input and creates a risk that one might miss that input, changing decision-making. Now it comes down to deciding how valuable these things are in terms of fun, so we can decide whether this is good design. And here is where we always get into arguments.



In favor of L-cancelling: Requiring the button input gives a sense of accomplishment for those who succeed at it. Having a risk of failure provides another chance for players to fall below the skill ceiling.

In opposition to L-cancelling: The button input is antithesis to the rest of Smash's design (its the simplistic fighter as designed by Sakurai). Requiring the button input scares away potential players who would enjoy the rest of the game. The risk of failure is so small it might as well not exist. The risk of failure is just one small thing among 1000 of reasons why you would lose, and thus again inconsequential.

Please let me know if I have missed anything.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

No cuz melee



p.s.: this game is dead

 

[qwertz143]

No cuz melee



p.s.: this game is dead

Actually this game got even more hyped up all over the world after news of it being dead so no.

 

[Ningildo]

I never meant to imply that L-cancelling is more important than any other tech or anything else that makes a good player. It's small but important; similar to everything else that makes up what the game is.

I don't think you can outright say that it's "bad game design." Granted that melee was obviously a rushed game. It all stems to whether you want more, less, or no landing lag in the game. Or if this should vary greatly depending on the character. And that is probably a very subjective topic.

If you want to develop this debate a tad more, maybe try asking top players and the voices of the community their thoughts.

But it's effect on gameplay is rather insignificant, to the point of where missed l-cancels are not ever considered at top level play. People in favor of l-cancelling always claim that it involves shield angling and whatnot to provide "interaction", yet haven't shown any footage of this happening at top level play. Even with shield angling, l-cancelling remains consistent among top players.

Then people point to...using missed l-cancels as a mix up for...something like kirby's dair I think? There's no reason giving your opponent frame advantage would benefit you (as they now have more time to punish, reset to neutral or whatever works best in that given situation) and the only legitimate concerns involve incredibly niche situations of avoiding attacks with the landing animation (although the added landing lag would leave you at a disadvantage regardless).

One might wonder at this point; why? If it's so easy to do, why make such a huge fuss? It's here that some assume the other side can't l-cancel to save their life and promptly tells them to get good (doesn't really help discussion at all, it seems, making rash assumptions). The reason is simple (for me at least); it doesn't serve a purpose. As mentioned, the supposed interaction between players trying to angle their shield to mess up l-cancel timings of their opponents doesn't happen at top level play, nor does giving your opponent frame advantage ever truly help as a mix up. Certain tech could be argued to be not difficult (see wavedashing, dash dancing and so on), but these techs are incredibly versatile tools, which require knowledge of both the game's intricacies and the moment at hand to fully utilize. They have purpose, hence why no one argues for their simplification or removal (well, some do, but that's for another discussion). L-cancelling, on the other, is easy as well, but serves no purpose other then to avoid giving frame advantage to your opponent, which can be easily accomplished by halving landing lag for aerials universally without removing any significant interactions from the game.

 

[Angell]

I would just like to say that I have totally flipped on auto L-canceling after playing with newer players. It's a pointless barrier that only serves to make the game arbitrarily harder. I would support auto canceling at every single tournament because it's a stupid, unnecessary mechanic.

 

[Guel]

Someone states that if there was proof of a point in not L canceling theyd agree to not have auto L canceling. Then proof is provided and everyone says "Oh but thatll barely ever happen" . Lol great defense there. Youre pretty much arguing that someone with 200% should just suicide because the chance of them making a comeback is slim. No matter how slim the chances if i have the opportunity to change the tide of battle im going for it.

Suprisingly this "No L cancel" actually happend today to me vsing a kirby which brought me back to this thread. Out of about 10 games it happend at least twice. This is about an hour worth of game time. Now lets imagine PM lives for another 10 years. I could only wonder how many times this chance would occur considering 2 happend within the hour I played a kirby. If my character had something exclusive such as this Id want it to remain regardless of how situational it is. This "rare chance" couldlve been the deciding factor in some past matches and for future matches to come. That small chance is like a butterfly effect that causes the match to play out differently.

As for me I personally prefer L cancel to remain being done manually because we are all human. People do miss L cancels which is game changing. Once theyve missed I either survived a combo that wouldve otherwise killed me or I punish them for it. At high lvl play this is crucial and happens much more than you think. You can argue "oh but high lvl play wouldnt have missed L cancels". Having at least 5 100% back to back L cancel accuracy matches consistently I highly doubt anyone has. Which in some cases regarding some characters is intentional.

You really should be happy Auto L canceled was even added. You get a gift and now wanna change things.
Dont bite the hand that feeds you.

 

[Vigilante]

I would not attend. I have invested time and effort to learn this technique. Keep in mind that I use my pinkie fingers to L-cancel. It would be to my advantage if it went away. However, I also do not make excuses.

Plus, by making tournaments that turn auto-cancels off, you would divide this community.

 

[Rawkobo]

Someone states that if there was proof of a point in not L canceling theyd agree to not have auto L canceling. Then proof is provided and everyone says "Oh but thatll barely ever happen" . Lol great defense there. Youre pretty much arguing that someone with 200% should just suicide because the chance of them making a comeback is slim. No matter how slim the chances if i have the opportunity to change the tide of battle im going for it.

Suprisingly this "No L cancel" actually happend today to me vsing a kirby which brought me back to this thread. Out of about 10 games it happend at least twice. This is about an hour worth of game time. Now lets imagine PM lives for another 10 years. I could only wonder how many times this chance would occur considering 2 happend within the hour I played a kirby. If my character had something exclusive such as this Id want it to remain regardless of how situational it is. This "rare chance" couldlve been the deciding factor in some past matches and for future matches to come. That small chance is like a butterfly effect that causes the match to play out differently.

As for me I personally prefer L cancel to remain being done manually because we are all human. People do miss L cancels which is game changing. Once theyve missed I either survived a combo that wouldve otherwise killed me or I punish them for it. At high lvl play this is crucial and happens much more than you think. You can argue "oh but high lvl play wouldnt have missed L cancels". Having at least 5 100% back to back L cancel accuracy matches consistently I highly doubt anyone has. Which in some cases regarding some characters is intentional.

You really should be happy Auto L canceled was even added. You get a gift and now wanna change things.
Dont bite the hand that feeds you.

That was me, and the point failed to have substantial evidence because of the criteria of what valid, meaningful experience is. Anecdotal evidence is never this way and objectively proves zilch, because it cannot be broken down, observed, or replicated to the same extent except by word of mouth. Memory itself is spotty as is.

On top of that, implying that something at a lower level that works and occurs frequently, because optimization of punishment is drastically non-existent for most players at that level, is ludicrous. It's trying to suggest that it's meaningful in a completely inefficient (and thus illogical) framework.

The point is we were given a gift and the gift has a use we'd like to try implementing to bring people into the scene. The change is associated with the gift and has only shown good intention. Is it really that wrong to at least try implementation and get feedback in the first place?

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

So while you don't care about low level players and their tactics (which YOU believe that not l-canceling to dodge is only at low level play), you want to get rid of l-canceling....to help low level players. Hmmm nice and hypocritical.

You are a great example of the one thing I don't like about some of the pm/smash4 community. The community is filled with spoiled brats who want their way because they have/had devs to make changes to "balance" the game, or to "make it better" (sorry to bring up a touchy subject....ha not you're game is dead lawl).

Melee is successful and will stay successful because it is a legit game that doesn't whine to dev teams asking for changes. While Smash4 will die instantly once a new smash game comes out (and will slowly die while balances aren't made), melee will live on independent of any outside forces.

 

[Rawkobo]

So while you don't care about low level players and their tactics (which YOU believe that not l-canceling to dodge is only at low level play), you want to get rid of l-canceling....to help low level players. Hmmm nice and hypocritical.

You are a great example of the one thing I don't like about some of the pm/smash4 community. The community is filled with spoiled brats who want their way because they have/had devs to make changes to "balance" the game, or to "make it better" (sorry to bring up a touchy subject....ha not you're game is dead lawl).

Melee is successful and will stay successful because it is a legit game that doesn't whine to dev teams asking for changes. While Smash4 will die instantly once a new smash game comes out (and will slowly die while balances aren't made), melee will live on independent of any outside forces.

No, I believe that every example implying that L-cancelling is a necessary skill barrier and also has variability to the level of wavedashing is a ridiculous notion without substantial evidence beyond situational frame data, and that the implication that low-level players should put technical development first is equally so.

The rest of this argument is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, so I'll let the mods do their thing.

 

[Ningildo]

Someone states that if there was proof of a point in not L canceling theyd agree to not have auto L canceling. Then proof is provided and everyone says "Oh but thatll barely ever happen" . Lol great defense there. Youre pretty much arguing that someone with 200% should just suicide because the chance of them making a comeback is slim. No matter how slim the chances if i have the opportunity to change the tide of battle im going for it.

Suprisingly this "No L cancel" actually happend today to me vsing a kirby which brought me back to this thread. Out of about 10 games it happend at least twice. This is about an hour worth of game time. Now lets imagine PM lives for another 10 years. I could only wonder how many times this chance would occur considering 2 happend within the hour I played a kirby. If my character had something exclusive such as this Id want it to remain regardless of how situational it is. This "rare chance" couldlve been the deciding factor in some past matches and for future matches to come. That small chance is like a butterfly effect that causes the match to play out differently.

As for me I personally prefer L cancel to remain being done manually because we are all human. People do miss L cancels which is game changing. Once theyve missed I either survived a combo that wouldve otherwise killed me or I punish them for it. At high lvl play this is crucial and happens much more than you think. You can argue "oh but high lvl play wouldnt have missed L cancels". Having at least 5 100% back to back L cancel accuracy matches consistently I highly doubt anyone has. Which in some cases regarding some characters is intentional.

You really should be happy Auto L canceled was even added. You get a gift and now wanna change things.
Dont bite the hand that feeds you.

Not only does it barely happen, the additional lag from not l-cancelling makes so you're at disadvantage to whatever your opponent does in response.

First off, we're going off high level play. Not random smashfests, not locals in random regions, high level play. Secondly, this supposed butterfly effect has yet to be shown happening. Provide video proof that this happened at a tournament with high level play. You can talk all about theoretical scenarios that could possibly be true (that supposed missed l-cancel that decided it all), but you've yet to show any proof of this. Anyone ever who has talked about this happening all time never shows video footage of it happening at tournaments.

Following paragraph is more or less the same. Show that this changes games before saying it does.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

Ok, and i believe that every example implying that auto-l-cancelling is necessary are only subjective arguments from spoiled brats who want their way.


So, what do we have in the end? A split community to a dead game with a dev team that was almost sued. Nice


"First off, we're going off high level play."


Which none of us have played in situations like this. So what gives you the right to divide the community about this subject?

Also, the topic of auto-l-cancelling isn't a high level discussion because it is geared towards lower levels of play to begin with. The whole goal is to "lower the skill floor." What does high level play have to do with this? If low level players benefit from not using it, then they don't have to use it, and should end the discussion right there.

 

[Rawkobo]

Ok, and i believe that every example implying that auto-l-cancelling is necessary are only subjective arguments from spoiled brats who want their way.


So, what do we have in the end? A split community to a dead game with a dev team that was almost sued. Nice

Which is an irrelevant argument because it substantiates belief without factual evidence beyond faceless accusations, followed by a statement that's deliberately trolling the thread.

Just stop. We're actually trying to get something done here.

EDIT: In response to what you posted afterward, that's based on the assumption it lowers the skill floor, which implies L-cancelling is significant enough that extracting it would do so.

It isn't. Substantial evidence has not been provided to indicate that it does.

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

Which is an irrelevant argument because it substantiates belief without factual evidence beyond faceless accusations, followed by a statement that's deliberately trolling the thread.

Just stop. We're actually trying to get something done here.

EDIT: In response to what you posted afterward, that's based on the assumption it lowers the skill floor, which implies L-cancelling is significant enough that extracting it would do so.

It isn't. Substantial evidence has not been provided to indicate that it does.

Wait....uh what? So you are telling me that the main argument that seems to be driving most people to have this implemented isn't accurate (as of yet) in your eyes (the other being that its "pointless" which has been disproved slightly)?

uh what?


"We're actually trying to get something done here."

Yea, you are trying to get something done with a very minor group of the community that posts on these types of forums. Many people that i have talked about this laugh and say that they wouldn't, but they aren't posting here, so i don't understand how you can get something done when most of the community isn't here to have their say. All i see getting done here is splitting a community at probably the worst time possible.

 

[Rawkobo]

Wait....uh what? So you are telling me that the main argument that seems to be driving most people to have this implemented isn't accurate (as of yet) in your eyes (the other being that its "pointless" which has been disproved slightly)?

That would require substantial evidence beyond the frame data involving implementation at a more significant level of play, which tends to be, y'know, "what wins tournaments."

 

[Bleck]

I have invested time and effort to learn this technique.

your time is not inherently more valuable than other people's

 

[Guel]

Not only does it barely happen, the additional lag from not l-cancelling makes so you're at disadvantage to whatever your opponent does in response.

First off, we're going off high level play. Not random smashfests, not locals in random regions, high level play. Secondly, this supposed butterfly effect has yet to be shown happening. Provide video proof that this happened at a tournament with high level play. You can talk all about theoretical scenarios that could possibly be true (that supposed missed l-cancel that decided it all), but you've yet to show any proof of this. Anyone ever who has talked about this happening all time never shows video footage of it happening at tournaments.

Following paragraph is more or less the same. Show that this changes games before saying it does.

Depending on the situation there are times you can punish even after the additional landing lag. However for this next example im going to go off what you said.
"the additional lag from not l-cancelling makes so you're at disadvantage to whatever your opponent does in response."



(Each example is based off the kirby missile situation.) - Im going to call this K.M.S.

Scenario one: Auto L cancel on

Kirby is to the left of Samus. KMS happens. Auto L cancel causes kirby to get hit tossing Kirby back to the left side of the screen.

Based off this example we had 1 possible outcome.



Scenario two: Auto L cancel off

Kirby is to the left of samus. KMS happens. The Kirby player misses his L cancel be it intentional or not. Kirby is now in front of Samus. The Samus player is now forced to react to Kirby being in front.

The Samus player has multiple choices here but lets just use Grab, Fsmash and Dsmash for this example.

The Samus player grabs. Now has the option of tossing kirby in 4 directions.

The Samus player decides to Fsmash knocking Kirby back to the left side of the screen at a different % and angle a missile would have.

The Samus player decides to Dsmash. Dsmash sends kirby backwards now placing Kirby to the right of Samus.

Based off this example we had 3 possible outcomes.


This is a butterfly effect. You can argue "Its not video proof" but the sheer amount of offline matches to streamed matches is too great to have video proof. Someone couldve been knocked out tourney because of this but we wouldnt know as it happend off vid. Just because something is not recorded doesnt mean it didnt happen. I only listed a few but imagine if I did list all the options Jabs Tilts Specials DI etc. Every instance that happens after either of those outcomes will cause the rest of the match to play out differently. Regardless of wether the same person wins or not these events matter. The set could change drastically causing a stock to be taken sooner than later and vice versa. This isnt only limited to KMS either. Matches go by players reacting to what other players do. A missed L cancel regardless of where its at will cause different gameplay everytime unless the opponent is extremely far and you are shffling for no reason.

 

[Vigilante]

your time is not inherently more valuable than other people's

And neither is yours. Look, I'm against dividing this community in any way. As a grassroots game, we need to huddle together and work together. That's the reality of it.

 

[trash?]

I mean, it's a correct statement to say that auto-l-cancel will not reasonably happen because enough people will actively refuse to let it, but when trying to discuss how ALC would work as a whole, to stick solely to that is to simply build the same brick wall, over and over again

I also still think that pigeonholing a non-l-cancel's few niche uses as not being worthy of discussion because you don't personally use it is sorta missing the point that its mere existence at all should change the way this is being discussed, but ehhh this is all really messy and I don't feel as if it's ever gonna lead anywhere

 

[Ningildo]

Depending on the situation there are times you can punish even after the additional landing lag. However for this next example im going to go off what you said.
"the additional lag from not l-cancelling makes so you're at disadvantage to whatever your opponent does in response."



(Each example is based off the kirby missile situation.) - Im going to call this K.M.S.

Scenario one: Auto L cancel on

Kirby is to the left of Samus. KMS happens. Auto L cancel causes kirby to get hit tossing Kirby back to the left side of the screen.

Based off this example we had 1 possible outcome.



Scenario two: Auto L cancel off

Kirby is to the left of samus. KMS happens. The Kirby player misses his L cancel be it intentional or not. Kirby is now in front of Samus. The Samus player is now forced to react to Kirby being in front.

The Samus player has multiple choices here but lets just use Missile, Fsmash and Dsmash for this example.

The Samus player makes an attempt for another missile. Kirby then punishes the point blank missile.

The Samus player decides to Fsmash knocking Kirby back to the left side of the screen at a different % and angle a missile would have.

The Samus player decides to Dsmash. Dsmash sends kirby backwards now placing Kirby to the right of Samus.

Based off this example we had 3 possible outcomes.


This is a butterfly effect. You can argue "Its not video proof" but the sheer amount of offline matches to streamed matches is too great to have video proof. Someone couldve been knocked out tourney because of this but we wouldnt know as it happend off vid. Just because something is not recorded doesnt mean it didnt happen. I only listed a few but imagine if I did list all the options. Every instance that happens after either of those outcomes will cause the rest of the match to play out differently. Regardless of wether the same person wins or not these events matter. The set could change drastically causing a stock to be taken sooner than later and vice versa. This isnt only limited to KMS either. Matches go by players reacting to what other players do. A missed L cancel regardless of where its at will cause different gameplay everytime unless the opponent is extremely far and you are shffling for no reason.

Note I said high level play. If people can't last long enough to make top whatever to get on stream, they probably aren't note worthy to begin with.

You also seem to be forgetting how much needs to happen for this occur. Kirby needs to be in the air already when Samus fires the missile (because jumping in response to a missile tends to be bad), Dair preemptively at mid to close range (not that Samus will ever fire a missile at close range) or Dair in response to a missile at long range (instead of closing the gap or crouching, if you REALLY want to dodge the missile), be at FH height when starting the Dair and fastfall it (as doing it at SH height gets you hit) with good timing to avoid the missile. All this to have a mediocre way of dodging missiles that probably still leaves you in a bad spot.

What I'm trying to say is that you need a lot of setup for something that could done way better for way less commitment. Yes, you CAN do this with intentionally missing the l-cancel, but there's never a reason to when better alternatives exist (crouching, multiple uses of jumps to maneuver around missiles, perfect shielding, probably more), making this a moot reason for keeping l-cancelling in.

 

[Rawkobo]

And neither is yours. Look, I'm against dividing this community in any way. As a grassroots game, we need to huddle together and work together. That's the reality of it.

But as a grassroots game, the only people we can lose would be ourselves. And it would be in our interest to have research on various means of running tournaments to come to a consenus of how to approach the game as a whole community, would it not?

That's why for the initial question of the thread I would be in favor of it. There's no harm in trying it and having results and information to examine from it, considering most of the tournaments we acquire our data for in the first place are locals. Having information we can act on, for or against, shouldn't divide a community.

If it does, we were never much of a community to begin with.

 

[trash?]

But as a grassroots game, the only people we can lose would be ourselves. And it would be in our interest to have research on various means of running tournaments to come to a consenus of how to approach the game as a whole community, would it not?

That's why for the initial question of the thread I would be in favor of it. There's no harm in trying it and having results and information to examine from it, considering most of the tournaments we acquire our data for in the first place are locals. Having information we can act on, for or against, shouldn't divide a community.

If it does, we were never much of a community to begin with.

you could say the same for quite literally any other change to PM, including the very version changes we've been pretty keen on vehemently denying for the past 18-ish days, trying to insult a community already trying to recover because of ppl realizing what would actually happen isn't doing you many favors

 

[Rawkobo]

you could say the same for quite literally any other change to PM, including the very version changes we've been pretty keen on vehemently denying for the past 18-ish days, trying to insult a community already trying to recover because of ppl realizing what would actually happen isn't doing you many favors

And we could also have said the same of any Smash game prior to our "involvement" in the esports scene.

Don't take this the wrong way, but if that's the case, then what's the problem?

 

[MEnKIRBZ]

And we could also have said the same of any Smash game prior to our "involvement" in the esports scene.

Don't take this the wrong way, but if that's the case, then what's the problem?

you are

 

[LightningDragon]

you are

Playing the blame game accomplishes nothing. At least try to put up an intelligent argument.

 

[TeddyBearYoshi]

And neither is yours. Look, I'm against dividing this community in any way. As a grassroots game, we need to huddle together and work together. That's the reality of it.

Why does this come up every time somebody disagrees with how things work? Saying we all have to agree on something that we may or may not even agree with because we have to (when we are given the option of not doing so) doesn't really help anybody. Wanting to play a bit differently doesn't divide the community, being stingy does.

 

[Bleck]

And neither is yours. Look, I'm against dividing this community in any way. As a grassroots game, we need to huddle together and work together. That's the reality of it.

"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