Improving game-play around L-canceling

[MagnesD3]

The meter idea is a bit too much, it might as well be a new mechanic all together if meter is involved. Cutting l canceling seems optimal ATM.

There actually are some.

Pika's dair and a few other similar moves had an additional hitbox upon landing if you didn't L cancel. (Axe actually used this with a ledge cancel to get more damage)

That brings me to my other point, you don't always have to l cancel, you could ledge cancel instead

Also you can purposely miss an l cancel to not get punished (happens a lot melee ganon vs sheik, you can't grab sheik if she misses an l cancel on the nair I think) This last reason is trollish but still was the better option accidentally by the player

Btw the auto l cancel due to ff is a horrible idea

Still very specific examples I'd say.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Which moves? If you hit down during the same frame-window you have to l-cancel, it shouldn't make a difference.

Off the top of my head, the following won't come out if fast-fell from a short hop.
Mario's Fair
Wario's Bair
Bowser's Uair
DK's Fair (I think his fast fall cancels the attack more often than not)

It seems like the only thing you're saying here is to replace one "arbitrary press" with another one. What about cases that you don't want to fast fall, should you be punished for that? At least with L-Canceling, you can both fast fall and normal fall and still have the same delay reduction.

 

[Stalled]

you can ff after the aerial comes out, though how that idea is at all different from l canceling in terms of function eludes me.

 

[Stryker]

Seriously this has been beaten to death dozens of times. Why does it have to be a point of contention every time a new player starts frequenting the PM boards? Holy Saint ****, can we just ban talking about this again? PMDT knows enough to make a decision about this on their own (and it's probably going to stay in unaltered). Brand new arguments about the oldest point of contention in PM aren't going to be brought up by scrubs with no or next to no experience and apparently too few hours put into the game practicing even wavedashing. Seriously, back to that other thread, I don't remember which, if you're failing wavedashing multiple times before getting it on the fourth try, you're not in a position to make a sound judgement about its difficulty. But anyway the L-canceling thing got repetitive the 15th and 30th times around, here we are at #45 or som'at, and the same ****ty logic is still used on either side of the argument, with an occasional (ignored) sound reasoning here and there.
Somebody lock please?

Basically this.
Seems like we have this kind of thread pop up every once in a while. It's the same tired arguement. I'm sure if you were to search the boards, you would find this exact same thread not only in the PM forums, but in the melee forums as well from many years ago.
PMDT has stated that while there would be merits to taking out L-Cancelling, it's not something they are doing.
The post above is a bit harsh, but DrinkingFood has been around too see as many of these threads as the rest of us.
This isn't a new discussion. It's the same old discussion being had over and over. Do a forum search, and you'll see.

 

[smashbro29]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jj1_By1c39A&list=TL0pmg2SjaXuA

There's a lot I could say about this, but the most pertinent point is those landing animations are *still* slower than l-canceled landing animations in Smash.

Animation might be slower but it doesn't prevent you from acting out of it at all.

 

[MagnesD3]

Basically this.
Seems like we have this kind of thread pop up every once in a while. It's the same tired arguement. I'm sure if you were to search the boards, you would find this exact same thread not only in the PM forums, but in the melee forums as well from many years ago.
PMDT has stated that while there would be merits to taking out L-Cancelling, it's not something they are doing.
The post above is a bit harsh, but DrinkingFood has been around too see as many of these threads as the rest of us.
This isn't a new discussion. It's the same old discussion being had over and over. Do a forum search, and you'll see.

have they even considered it from a logical game design perspective or is it in "becuz you know"....

 

[Fortress]

Knowing the PMDT, they've probably given it serious thought from time-to-time.

 

[MagnesD3]

Knowing the PMDT, they've probably given it serious thought from time-to-time.

I'd hope so since they seem to have been trying to be more awesome and independent as time goes on.

 

[Paquito]

Off the top of my head, the following won't come out if fast-fell from a short hop.
Mario's Fair
Wario's Bair
Bowser's Uair
DK's Fair (I think his fast fall cancels the attack more often than not)

you can ff after the aerial comes out, though how that idea is at all different from l canceling in terms of function eludes me.

- It's one less arbitrary button press during SHFF(-L) attacks
- It's intuitive (recovering faster from an aerial is tied to the notion of getting to the ground faster)
- It somewhat retains the chance of making a mistake that your opponent can capitalize on
- We can retain the current animations for un-canceled landings

 

[Kolfax]

I think we need to remember about the intermittent smash players out there. Yes, L-Canceling for new plays seems like a barrier, and yes pros can do it so well that its almost meaningless to be forced to do at all. Lets not forget there are many intermittent plays out there. Where each player knows of/how to L-Cancel and try their best to do so but are not perfect, where a missed LC means punishment, or a successful one gets you that clutch combo/kill. Adding to those exciting "oh sh~" or "got ya!" moments, that keep those plays coming back again and again to improve and polish those techs, for the next time!

So while i feel keeping LC is the right thing to do, it is true that there is no play/counter play to it. LCing is a one sided event, either the attacker does it or not, with the defending player with not enough influence to change the outcome. Perhaps that's where we should look for an answer. Maybe a system where if the defending players tilts his shield up toward the attacker near the time of impact, the attacker's fall is slowed by a meaningful handful of frames; or on the flip side, if the defender tilts his shield down they push the attacker into the ground faster to throw them off; or maybe they don't shield tilt at all. Making a rock/paper/scissors type of scenario.

I think this topic has very fair arguments from both sides, and id like to see where this topic finally ends at.

P.S.
Hello, new to the boards and just jumped onto PM with 3.5. Played lots of Melee back in the day, was no pro, but no push over either. PM at its core is super fun so far, recruiting friends to play again has been a blast and a big thumbs up to PM.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

- It's one less arbitrary button press during SHFF(-L) attacks
- It's intuitive (recovering faster from an aerial is tied to the notion of getting to the ground faster)
- It somewhat retains the chance of making a mistake that your opponent can capitalize on
- We can retain the current animations for un-canceled landings

Going by what you suggest, it only works in SHFF, meaning that if you don't do it, you are stuck with the lag, where with L-Canceling, you would not be.
This replacement essentially forces you to fast fall and gives a massive bonus in comparison to characters that primarily do it vs those who don't always. It sounds to me, like a pretty bad idea that wasn't thought through.

 

[Paquito]

Going by what you suggest, it only works in SHFF, meaning that if you don't do it, you are stuck with the lag, where with L-Canceling, you would not be.
This replacement essentially forces you to fast fall and gives a massive bonus in comparison to characters that primarily do it vs those who don't always. It sounds to me, like a pretty bad idea that wasn't thought through.

I think you're confused by what's meant by "fast fall status". Your character doesn't actually have to "fast fall".

Consider wavedashing. To trigger one, you jump, and then air-dodge towards the ground in the direction you want to wavedash. When properly executed though, your character doesn't leave the ground. There are a few frames where your character has a "jumping" status, while still on the ground, and those are the perfect frames to do an air-dodge to trigger a well executed wavedash.

For l-canceling, you trigger it by hitting Z or R a few frames before hitting the ground during an aerial attack. Now say we want to automatically apply l-canceling when "fast fall is in effect". If you want to do an aerial without fast-falling, you could still do so, but instead of hitting Z or R on those few frames before landing, you hit down on the control stick, which should put the character in "fast fall status" without actually fast-falling.

 

[Leafeon]

I think you're confused by what's meant by "fast fall status". Your character doesn't actually have to "fast fall".

Consider wavedashing. To trigger one, you jump, and then air-dodge towards the ground in the direction you want to wavedash. When properly executed though, your character doesn't leave the ground. There are a few frames where your character has a "jumping" status, while still on the ground, and those are the perfect frames to do an air-dodge to trigger a well executed wavedash.

For l-canceling, you trigger it by hitting Z or R a few frames before hitting the ground during an aerial attack. Now say we want to automatically apply l-canceling when "fast fall is in effect". If you want to do an aerial without fast-falling, you could still do so, but instead of hitting Z or R on those few frames before landing, you hit down on the control stick, which should put the character in "fast fall status" without actually fast-falling.

Greeeeeaaaatt... solve the "problem" with the "problem." Yep.
Please just leave this as is ==;

 

[Paquito]

Greeeeeaaaatt... solve the "problem" with the "problem." Yep.
Please just leave this as is ==;

The community is divided over whether or not l-canceling should be kept in, for a whole bunch of different reasons, and this solution would be a good compromise that takes into account everyone's concerns.

If you're going to make a follow up argument that claims this is no different than the way l-canceling is now, stop, take a lap, and then re-read the last few posts of mine in this thread.

*EDIT*

It's worth noting that the current l-canceling behavior can be retained even if it were automatically applied on characters that have fast-fall status. So if you're worried about having to update your muscle memory, that's not an issue either.

 

[BananaBolts]

The community is divided over whether or not l-canceling should be kept in, for a whole bunch of different reasons, and this solution would be a good compromise that takes into account everyone's concerns.

If you're going to make a follow up argument that claims this is no different than the way l-canceling is now, stop, take a lap, and then re-read the last few posts of mine in this thread.

*EDIT*

It's worth noting that the current l-canceling behavior can be retained even if it were automatically applied on characters that have fast-fall status. So if you're worried about having to update your muscle memory, that's not an issue either.

To be fair, your previous comment doesn't offer a very good compromise

For l-canceling, you trigger it by hitting Z or R a few frames before hitting the ground during an aerial attack. Now say we want to automatically apply l-canceling when "fast fall is in effect". If you want to do an aerial without fast-falling, you could still do so, but instead of hitting Z or R on those few frames before landing, you hit down on the control stick, which should put the character in "fast fall status" without actually fast-falling.

This doesn't really sound like a good idea. I'm not trying to discourage you by any means. Keep looking for a good "solution". Just keep in mind that people don't accept change very well nor is it easy to adjust a habit that people have had for several years.

Edit: I just saw your edit lol

 

[Stalled]

The community is divided over whether or not l-canceling should be kept in, for a whole bunch of different reasons, and this solution would be a good compromise that takes into account everyone's concerns.

If you're going to make a follow up argument that claims this is no different than the way l-canceling is now, stop, take a lap, and then re-read the last few posts of mine in this thread.

*EDIT*

It's worth noting that the current l-canceling behavior can be retained even if it were automatically applied on characters that have fast-fall status. So if you're worried about having to update your muscle memory, that's not an issue either.

Again how is this any different than l canceling? All this does is remove an input and makes it impossible to l cancel in certain situations.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

I think you're confused by what's meant by "fast fall status". Your character doesn't actually have to "fast fall".
For l-canceling, you trigger it by hitting Z or R a few frames before hitting the ground during an aerial attack. Now say we want to automatically apply l-canceling when "fast fall is in effect". If you want to do an aerial without fast-falling, you could still do so, but instead of hitting Z or R on those few frames before landing, you hit down on the control stick, which should put the character in "fast fall status" without actually fast-falling.

You're not very good at explaining what you intend. Fast fall status? How is that any different at all from fast falling and how is that any different from being forced to hit a button/direction on the stick at an arbitrary time in the same manner that we currently have to? It might not be the same exact time that we have to L-Cancel, but you're essentially recommending replacing one action with another that would do the same thing in any case where you aren't naturally fast falling.

So good going. You simplify SHFFL by essentially making it automatic, but you basically leave everything else requiring an L-Cancel like action, only with your thumb instead of your index finger.

 

[Paquito]

Again how is this any different than l canceling?

- It's one less arbitrary button press during SHFF(-L) attacks
- It's intuitive (recovering faster from an aerial is tied to the notion of getting to the ground faster)

[it's] impossible to l cancel in certain situations.

Which situations?

You simplify SHFFL by essentially making it automatic, but you basically leave everything else requiring an L-Cancel like action, only with your thumb instead of your index finger.

Mmhmm. That's a net gain in less arbitrary buttons that have to be pushed, without having to sacrifice anything.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Mmhmm. That's a net gain in less arbitrary buttons that have to be pushed, without having to sacrifice anything.

It's still an arbitrary direction you have to press in order to gain the benefit in times you wouldn't want to fast fall. I don't understand how you can't see that it's exactly the same thing in certain ways.

 

[Narpas_sword]

There are 2 options:

1: Keep it as it is
2: Remove the need to L cancel. (then adjust timings on a per move basis to balance)

There is no compromise.
Anything that is a 'compromise' has the same problem as L canceling.

Unless its an option in the menu, i guess, in which case, 'both' is a third option.

 

[Bleck]

l-canceling is stupid

but replacing it with another stupid thing is also stupid

 

[Fortress]

There are 2 options:

1: Keep it as it is
2: Remove the need to L cancel. (then adjust timings on a per move basis to balance)

There is no compromise.
Anything that is a 'compromise' has the same problem as L canceling.

Unless its an option in the menu, i guess, in which case, 'both' is a third option.

l-canceling is stupid

but replacing it with another stupid thing is also stupid

Exactly correct. There is no replacement or improvement for a fundamentally flawed mechanic. No matter how much spit and polish you apply to L-Cancelling, it is still L-Cancelling, and still an arbitrary input that would see no negative effects (outside of niche, super-specific combinations) if removed and all aerials land at L-Cancelled rates anyway.

/thread

 

[Paquito]

It's still an arbitrary direction you have to press in order to gain the benefit in times you wouldn't want to fast fall. I don't understand how you can't see that it's exactly the same thing in certain ways.

Um... I do see that. Do you understand the what's meant by the term "net gain"?

[It's] an arbitrary input that would see no negative effects (outside of niche, super-specific combinations) if removed

So, judging on the posting behavior I've observed, I'm pretty sure your brain is somehow unable to process any information that doesn't comport with your current opinions. Like, there's a significant impact to competitive play by removing l-canceling, one that's been brought up many times in this thread, that I honestly don't think you could name right now.

 

[Bleck]

So, judging on the posting behavior I've observed, I'm pretty sure your brain is somehow unable to process any information that doesn't comport with your current opinions. Like, there's a significant impact to competitive play by removing l-canceling, one that's been brought up many times in this thread, that I honestly don't think you could name right now.

hey he did go on to say literally immediately after where you cut off his post that there would be no real effect if you removed l-canceling and made landing lag the l-canceled rates

like don't get all pissy just 'cause you didn't read the whole post

 

[Paquito]

hey he did go on to say literally immediately after where you cut off his post that there would be no real effect if you removed l-canceling and made landing lag the l-canceled rates

He's arguing that there would be no real effect if every landing automatically happened at l-canceled rates. The way I quoted him doesn't imply otherwise. He's made this point several times in this thread, several posters have brought up the counter example, but he's still unaware of it.

 

[Bleck]

should I assume the counter example is "but then the skill ceiling is lowered" and that you're pretending like that matters at all

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Um... I do see that. Do you understand the what's meant by the term "net gain"

If you see that it's essentially the same exact thing with a different flavor, and are completely against that arbitrary press, how can you be in favor of the arbitrary press that you came up with? You don't replace something obnoxious with something equally obnoxious and call it an improvement.

There are really only three choices here that make sense to me.
1) Leave it alone.
2) Give everyone automatic L-canceling rates on their aerials.
3) Take away L-Canceling completely and replace it with nothing.

You don't want number one because L-Canceling is just needless button presses that you will always do.
Taking number two is the same thing as number one without the obnoxiousness of needing to press L/R/Z or the ridiculous down of your example.
Using example three makes it that the game massively punishes characters with laggy aerials and would require a complete re-working of their post-attack lag in order to make them close to equal with the characters with less lag on their attacks.

Two seems to be the best choice, but as Hylian has said, there are times you won't want to L cancel as is. So it's really up in the air which is better in the long run.

 

[Bleck]

looked up what Hylian said and I mean not to put words in his mouth but I don't think "it helps players buffer Ice Climbers tech" is really a good enough reason for l-canceling

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

looked up what Hylian said and I mean not to put words in his mouth but I don't think "it helps players buffer Ice Climbers tech" is really a good enough reason for l-canceling

Agreed, but it's useful to take as many perspectives as possible into account when deciding what the best course of action is.

 

[Alfonzo Bagpipez]

This may be a dumb idea (and it may have been brought up before, but I'm too lazy to check), but what if L-Cancelling affected the amount of knockback you would take?

During L-Cancelled landing lag, you would take slightly more Knockback, but during non-L-Cancelled landing lag, you would take less knockback.

(marginally less than what DI would do)

That way, at low%, not L-cancelling could be punished harder, but at high%, you could deliberately miss the L-cancel and potentially survive a kill move that you read.

Whiffing an L-Cancelled aerial could also lead to dying at earlier %.


It's probably not feasible, but I'm just brainstorming.

Feel free to call me an idiot.

 

[Leafeon]

This may be a dumb idea (and it may have been brought up before, but I'm too lazy to check), but what if L-Cancelling affected the amount of knockback you would take?

During L-Cancelled landing lag, you would take slightly more Knockback, but during non-L-Cancelled landing lag, you would take less knockback.

(marginally less than what DI would do)

That way, at low%, not L-cancelling could be punished harder, but at high%, you could deliberately miss the L-cancel and potentially survive a kill move that you read.

Whiffing an L-Cancelled aerial could also lead to dying at earlier %.


It's probably not feasible, but I'm just brainstorming.

Feel free to call me an idiot.

The reason why that shouldn't be they way it's done is because you're being rewarded for being punished on a failed tech. Wat.

I'm so done with this thread right now lol unwatch

 

[Bleck]

Between shielding, spot-dodging, rolling, crouch-canceling and repositioning with wavedashing, people don't really need any more defensive options.

 

[Alfonzo Bagpipez]

The reason why that shouldn't be they way it's done is because you're being rewarded for being punished on a failed tech. Wat.

I'm so done with this thread right now lol unwatch

It wouldn't be a reward at low%, because you could potentially get combo'd harder than before.

And it's not exactly failure if you don't attempt the tech at all.

Like I said, tho, it's probably not feasible.

Between shielding, spot-dodging, rolling, crouch-canceling and repositioning with wavedashing, people don't really need any more defensive options.

I wouldn't really call it an "option". If you miss an L-Cancel, you're in an unfavorable position no matter what happens. And then if you do survive a kill move due to the lowered knock back, then you're either off the stage, ready to be edge guarded, or in the air, ready to be juggled. It's more of a "last resort" kinda thing.

 

[Fortress]

I just want it to be clear that I've only ever said from the start of this garbage-tier thread that L-cancelling is a mechanic that everybody performs 100% of the time, and outside of one specific combination is the correct choice to do after every aerial, so why not make the experience tighter and more consistent by making landing lag standardized at the L-cancelled rates?

>because you take away the experience of being able to punish a player for - -

Cutting that response off right there. Nobody (outside of one (one, count them, one) specific combination with one character) is going to choose to not L-cancel. Say these words aloud again, and read back to me whether-or-not it makes sense: "I am going to choose to make my move more punishable and my combos shorter/less airtight by extension as a mixup." There are far more reasons and ways to punish a player in this game. You lose nothing in the experience from this, even below the highest levels of play, save for one very specific combination.

Tell me if and why you would ever choose to be more punishable. Tell me why you would choose not to L-cancel outside of the one, very, very, very specific combination that @Hylian mentioned. Tell me why anybody would argue that being more punishable and not being able to follow through with your combinations to their fullest potential and giving your opponent a gap to respond with is a good idea. Tell me when you'd choose that.

Tell me why you'd choose to be more punishable in any situation, @ Paquito , because you cannot honestly have a good reason. I have not seen you give any good reason yet. You have not once answered that question. Tell me why you would choose to be more punishable in a situation, and I mean actively choose to be more punishable?

Pro Tip: you can't.

 

[BananaBolts]

Tell me if and why you would ever choose to be more punishable. Tell me why you would choose not to L-cancel outside of the one, very, very, very specific combination that @Hylian mentioned. Tell me why anybody would argue that being more punishable and not being able to follow through with your combinations to their fullest potential and giving your opponent a gap to respond with is a good idea. Tell me when you'd choose that.

Tell me why you'd choose to be more punishable in any situation, @ Paquito , because you cannot honestly have a good reason. I have not seen you give any good reason yet. You have not once answered that question. Tell me why you would choose to be more punishable in a situation, and I mean actively choose to be more punishable?

Pro Tip: you can't.

It may not be worthy of keeping l-cancelling around but I've heard a few peach mains say that they would intentionally miss an l-cancel to bait their opponent into punishing. The missed l-cancel, however, would be spaced well enough to not be punished which would allow for a counter punishment. (I heard this from a Melee Peach)

It's a gimmick at best. *shrugs*

 

[Lil Puddin]

L-canceling is something you should always do, but it was a glitch or unintended quirk originally. So to pull it off, you obviously had to play it the way the game "wants" you to. Or, shield exactly when you hit the ground in this case.

Since Project M is able to change the environment and mechanics... L-canceling suddenly becomes very redundant. L-canceling is ALWAYS the right choice and ALWAYS happens the same way if you time it right. Keeping it this way actually raises the skill ceiling and creates more room for error.

From a competitive standpoint: that's one way to make a heated match even hotter. The more techs you know, the better you are. It also means that's one screw up an opponent can make that you can take advantage of.

From a casual standpoint: it's just random button pushing to get an advantage and ain't nobody got time for that brb too busy having simple fun. It's annoying to constantly do or even bother doing.

From a logical standpoint: it is always the superior option when landing and it happens the same exact way every time, considering you do it right. So it makes 0 sense as to why it's just not something that happens automatically without button pushing. Or remove it entirely. Leveling the playing field (the basic mechanics) makes more sense. Fighters are unique; general game play remains uniform without ever being over-complicated.

From a gaming standpoint: it lets the users decide how fast paced they want the battle to be. L-canceling will make things hectic no matter what, because you will always be doing something as soon as possible. For a less hectic match, the delay caused by landing helps slow down the pace.


IMO I liked L-canceling because I was competitive. But... Now I'm not. The idea of creating an unnecessary skill gap is actually quite infuriating. Gaps separate players and that's to be expected. Wavedashing is a good example, since it is a very valuable tech and the result is not always the same since you can change how you slide and where you slide. It becomes dumb (and therefore infuriating to see) when it's due to a tech that technically doesn't even require button pushing to make sense.

 

[Bleck]

L-canceling is something you should always do, but it was a glitch or unintended quirk originally.

just want to point out that this isn't true

not disagreeing with the rest of what you said, but l-canceling was intentional

 

[Paquito]

should I assume the counter example is "but then the skill ceiling is lowered" and that you're pretending like that matters at all

Looks like Fortress partially got the counter example

>because you take away the experience of being able to punish a player for - -.

I rejoiced for all of 2 seconds before:

Cutting that response off right there. Nobody (outside of one (one, count them, one) specific combination with one character) is going to choose to not L-cancel.

*face-palm*

Ignoring the niche cases, ya, I'm not arguing that people *choose* to not L-cancel. @ Fortress , here are the things you didn't seem to be able to absorb from this discussion:

Playing at a competitive level demands not only technical expertise, but consistency in your performance. Under the stress of an important match, if you miss an lcancel, that leaves you vulnerable and makes it harder for you to follow up on your last attack. Capitalizing on mistakes like that are what makes for exciting moments in tournament play.

Removing lcanceling takes away from that element of the game

L-cancelling still presents the mental challenge to players of being able to keep their cool under stressful situations that will separate moderately good players from top professionals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk01Y9ODqOs

Notice how Sethlon early into the game has claimed a strong early lead and dominance over his opponent, not just through gameplay strategy but also in causing mental stress to his opponent. It's even readily apparent from the calm expression on Sethlon's face vs the expressions on his opponents face that show he's already lost the battle, not only from the gameplay perspective, but also from the mental perspective.

For the most part, this is because of better gameplay decisions from Sethlon, and it is true L-cancelling is done somewhat consistently, however even at this level of tournament play, there are already instances which support what I had claimed earlier.

Notice at 1:39 into the video, Sethlon's opponent connects with a dair, but fails to L-cancel properly. Sethlon is then able to utilize his opponent's landing lag and knock his opponent off-stage, which is not the ideal place to be as his opponent's options are reduced drastically. At this point, the mental dominance Sethlon has placed onto his opponent grows more and more, and they begin to make more input errors as they lose their cool.

This happens again at 2:37 where Evan misses the L-cancel, and Sethlon is able to capitalize on his landing lag and hit him. Granted, the punish was a dash attack, which was probably not the best choice of punish, but what if it had been a wavedash or crouch-cancel to f-smash or down-smash? It would surely have been a kill at that percentage, showing that even at tournament level play, failure to keep control of anxiety can cause input-errors such as failed L-cancels, which top professionals can capitalize on, separating the good players from the greats.

********************

If you see that it's essentially the same exact thing with a different flavor, and are completely against that arbitrary press, how can you be in favor of the arbitrary press that you came up with?

Just to be clear, I'm agreeing that the act of hitting down on the control stick is essentially the same thing. That doesn't mean that automatically applying l-canceling to fast falls isn't significant. You should try to answer my question: What do you think I mean when I say that this change would be a net-gain?

 

[Foo]

Omfg paquito, you are REALLY NOT ONE TO TALK when it comes to ignoring other people's points. You do it literally every single post.

Would changing it to fast fall only be a net-gain? Sort of, but as has been said a million times, WHO CARES. It's still the same thing! Why change something ****ty to something slightly less ****ty. This isn't a compromise, it's something nobody but you agrees with. Neither people for and against L-cancel will want that.

Also, he keeps saying no one will CHOOSE not to L-cancel because that's the only way it's relevant. If you had to input the konami code in order to wavedash, people would **** it up and then you'd be able to punish it. Does this give depth? no.

Any arbitrary button press is going to lead to people messing it up and getting punished for it.

Also, I'm SUPER suspicious of whomever said pros miss 10% of L-cancels. I've been watching my L-cancels, and I hit around 90% too. I'm nowhere near pro level, and I feel like I miss a lot more than I should.

 

[Paquito]

Omfg paquito, you are REALLY NOT ONE TO TALK when it comes to ignoring other people's points. You do it literally every single post.

Your confusing me not writing up a reply to everything people post to me with @ Fortress outright ignoring arguments against his position. Just because I don't respond to something doesn't mean I don't take it into account when I make my later arguments.

Would changing it to fast fall only be a net-gain? Sort of, but as has been said a million times, WHO CARES. It's still the same thing! Why change something ****ty to something slightly less ****ty. This isn't a compromise, it's something nobody but you agrees with. Neither people for and against L-cancel will want that.

You're painting both sides of the debate as spoiled brats that refuse to accept anything less than everything they're asking for. I don't know how accurately that describes the two sides of this debate, but it's this ridiculous attitude that makes the Project M devs feel handcuffed to Melee mechanics that they may want to move away from.

That said, what really blows my mind here is that most of the crazy-pants outrage I'm seeing here isn't even from the "keep l-canceling camp". It's from the group that wants to get rid of it all together. Here you have the possibility of significantly reducing the amount of l-canceling required, without even forcing people to relearn mechanics (because we can keep the hold behavior in place for people that still want to use it). At the worst, I would have figured this group would just respond with "meh, this doesn't go far enough", but instead you guys are choking on your own rage.

Also, he keeps saying no one will CHOOSE not to L-cancel because that's the only way it's relevant. If you had to input the konami code in order to wavedash, people would **** it up and then you'd be able to punish it. Does this give depth? no.

Any arbitrary button press is going to lead to people messing it up and getting punished for it.

The camp that wants to keep it is wary of removing something that players can be punished for. Plus, there are ramifications to flat out removing it, forcing the devs to either slow down the game, or sacrifice the nice landing animations that makes this game enjoyable for casual play.

The guy upthread that was arguing that it's possible to make nice, fast, landing animations isn't taking into account just how fast some of these l-canceled recoveries are, nor does he really get what's meant when I say an animation conveys a "nice sense of weight" to the character.