Is Brawl more balanced than melee? **Take 2**

[Yuna]

No.

We're not comparing 3S with Gill unbanned to Melee. That would mean it's not being played in its competitive form today, which was what the criteria was in my first post.

I'm not asking us to actually do it. I'm invalidating the argument "3S has a character banned!" as a valid argument.

 

[pure_awesome]

Yuna, did you just teach someone something? You old softy, you.

It is besides the point whether or not 3S is more balanced than Melee, that argument (repeated several times in this thread) is invalid.

Wait. I thought we were arguing which one was more balanced?

...that's what I was arguing, anyway. If that is what we were arguing...

Melee obviously has no banned characters, but modern competitive play does have a ban on items.

I think you'll find that, upon closer examination, having items turned on balances the game even further.

Random items spawns and effects push every match-up ratio closer to 50/50. Thus, balance. Totally anti-competitive, but balanced.

 

[Yuna]

Wait. I thought we were arguing which one was more balanced?

You are arguing that. I have said several times now that I'm not arguing it at all since I do not possess the necessary insight into Competitive 3S to argue it. I'm merely counter-arguing your flawed arguments, telling you get better ones.

 

[pure_awesome]

Alright then.

Then I'll agree that, under the hypothetical that there were a game with a single overpowered character where the rest of the cast was perfectly balanced, the game itself, while not being balanced from a practical standpoint, would be balanced from a theoretical and literal standpoint.

 

[RDK]

I think you'll find that, upon closer examination, having items turned on balances the game even further.

Random items spawns and effects push every match-up ratio closer to 50/50. Thus, balance. Totally anti-competitive, but balanced.

Yeah, I'm not even going to take this post seriously.

Better hope Yuna's patience is better than mine.

 

[Radical Dreamer]

I'm telling you to not stare yourself blind at the red dot but look at the big picture. Also, read my posts better.

I'm not arguing whether or not 3S is more or less balanced than NTSC or PAL Melee. I've told you this at least twice now.

And I'm telling you that you're quite simply not the debating powerhouse you make yourself out to be. Please, you've been misreading my posts all day, and even admitting to not reading parts of them at all. You're in no position to tell anyone how to read. Just because you put no stock into years of empirical evidence for some strange reason, doesn't mean other people don't. Open a book on sociological methods some day. Real world data is illustrative of general trends even if you can't control all variables.

I'm not talking about SSF2T or 3S with banned characters vs. Melee. I'm saying that just saying "They banned a character" does not mean the game is automatically more imbalanced than all fighting games without any banned characters.

Then it's a pretty good thing this isn't my argument to begin with, huh? It's that they have that severe balance issue to begin with, one that is completely unheard of in a game like Melee and even in Brawl. And then even once that particular severe balance issue has been externally eliminated, they still only come out to be about as balanced as Melee.

See, it's hypocritical of you to tell me to look at the big picture since it's not what you do yourself. I post tournament results to show the presence of top tiers and non top tiers in the top 8, and you won't shut up about Jigglypuff taking first. I talk about characters other than Akuma and Gill, and you still insist on saying it's all about Akuma and Gill.

Sometimes I can't help but wonder if you're just doing all this for your own amusement.

 

[pure_awesome]

Yeah, I'm not even going to take this post seriously.

Better hope Yuna's patience is better than mine.

Actually, since this makes logical sense, I'm fairly sure that Yuna would agree with me.(Why you think Yuna will feel the need to join in this conversation is odd.) A completely 100% random game, while being hilariously anti-competitive, would be perfectly balanced, since every character would have an equal chance of winning against every other character.

Think about it. You and your friend go to the Brawl menu. You pick Ganondorf. He picks Falco. Then, you flip a coin to decide who wins. Bam, instant 50-50 matchup ratio. No legit competitive scene could develop from such a game, but that doesn't change the fact that it would be balanced.

 

[Yuna]

And I'm telling you that you're quite simply not the debating powerhouse you make yourself out to be. Please, you've been misreading my posts all day, and even admitting to not reading parts of them at all.

I haven't been misreading you at all. You're just bad at articulating your points. That or you're just plain wrong. At least I admit to TL:DR:ing you for the sheer irritation your posts cause me. You quote parts of my posts without having actually read through them.

And it's quite clear most of the time that you actually read them, you just skipped vital parts of them for whatever reason.

ust because you put no stock into years of empirical evidence for some strange reason, doesn't mean other people don't. Open a book on sociological methods some day. Real world data is illustrative of general trends even if you can't control all variables.

I'm telling you get iron-proof evidence instead of flawed ones. Your "evidence" does not conclusively proof anything.

Give me something more tangible, like match-up statistics and ratios. The only way for you to "lose" then would be if I could prove those ratios and statistics were wrong.

Then it's a pretty good thing this isn't my argument to begin with, huh? It's that they have that severe balance issue to begin with, one that is completely unheard of in a game like Melee and even in Brawl.

Yet you counter-argued me when I counter-argued pure awesomeness on it!

And then even once that particular severe balance issue has been externally eliminated, they still only come out to be about as balanced as Melee.

You're still not getting this. I'm trying to prove that the point "They had to ban a character!" does not prove that the game in question must be be less balanced than another game just because that game didn't ban any characters. or not the game is actually balanced is irrelevant.

And I just said that in the post you just quoted.

See, it's hypocritical of you to tell me to look at the big picture since it's not what you do yourself. I post tournament results to show the presence of top tiers and non top tiers in the top 8, and you won't shut up about Jigglypuff taking first.

You only have 3 different Jigglypuffs and then Azen and Chu Dat. That's it. It's not lower tiers, it's Azen and Chu Dat.

I'm looking at the big picture plenty. I am not here to prove that 3S is more balanced. I don't know that. I'm merely pointing out the blatant flaws in your arguments. Most of them merely strongly suggest that your point is right, they do not conclusively prove you are right since they can easily be explained away with rhetoric alone.

I talk about characters other than Akuma and Gill, and you still insist on saying it's all about Akuma and Gill.

No I don't. When did I ever do that?

Sometimes I can't help but wonder if you're just doing all this for your own amusement.

I'm trying to teach you get better arguments. It also happens to amuse me somewhat.

Alright then.

Then I'll agree that, under the hypothetical that there were a game with a single overpowered character where the rest of the cast was perfectly balanced, the game itself, while not being balanced from a practical standpoint, would be balanced from a theoretical and literal standpoint.

Wouldn't it just be easier to admit that you were wrong and that "They banned a character! Brawl and Melee did not!" isn't a valid argument?

Think about it. You and your friend go to the Brawl menu. You pick Ganondorf. He picks Falco. Then, you flip a coin to decide who wins. Bam, instant 50-50 matchup ratio. No legit competitive scene could develop from such a game, but that doesn't change the fact that it would be balanced.

If the coin is made in such a way that the statistical probability for both outcomes is the same, then, yes, it'd be 100% balanced. Only, what happens if it ends up standing up on its side?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I'm sorry, are you strawmanning yourself?

You: Didn't you (me, since you were quoting me) use this claim to say is Brawl banned MK that would prove how much more imbalanced it was compared to Melee? I don't remember it was in the Ban MK thread or something.
Me: No.
You: I could have sword someone spouted someone said at one point about how...

So are you saying you could've sworn I said it or are you saying you could've sworn someone said it and just assumed that I had said it for absolutely no reason at all?

I missed a part in that post I meant to add. My mistake.

I meant to say someone said stupidly, "Brawl will be insanely more balanced than Melee if MK was banned" comment.

After that I thought you said, "no it would prove the opposite" or something of the sort.

 

[NES n00b]

stuff

How about this? At evo world 2008 6 out of the top 8 people played Chun Li at the third strike tourney. The other two people played yun and someother character I don't remember. Keep in mind that Yun is the second best character in the game.

I am pretty sure Melee has similar or better results. I believe the latter.

Also, the year before that Evo World results (again third strike) were 6 out of the top 8 players played Yun (he was considered the best character at that time) with one being chun li (Justin Wong) and some other character I don't know (probably another chun >_>).

 

[Yuna]

How about this? At evo world 2008. 6 out of the top 8 people played Chun Li. The other two people played yun and someother character I don't remember. Keep in mind that Yun is the second best character in the game.

I am pretty sure Melee has similar or better results. I believe the latter.

Also, the year before that Evo World results were 6 out of the top 8 players played Yun (he was considered the best character at that time) with one being chun li (Justin Wong) and some other character I don't know (probably another chun >_>).

Yes, what does this prove, really? That 3S players tierwhore more.

You just said so yourself. Why did so many people play Yun in 2007? Because they thought he was better. The top players just tierwhored the hell out of the game. It doesn't necessarily mean the game is less balanced than X game, which enjoys more varied results.

It could very well just be that the players tierwhore more.

I am not saying this is the case. I am saying that you do not hold conclusive proof. Tournament results are strong indicators, not conclusive proof. For that, we also need theory fighter and deep analysis of the metagame.

 

[Grunt]

If Daigo was playing in either of those events, then it was Ken, lol.

 

[pure_awesome]

Wouldn't it just be easier to admit that you were wrong and that "They banned a character! Brawl and Melee did not!" isn't a valid argument?

So while you're right that "3S has a character banned" isn't a valid standalone argument, it does work within context.

If the coin is made in such a way that the statistical probability for both outcomes is the same, then, yes, it'd be 100% balanced. Only, what happens if it ends up standing up on its side?

If we're trying to keep it random, re-flip. If we really want to be random, use a Random Number Generator.

Though since nobody would care about this game anyway, the first person to just grab the coin and run is the real winner, since they would gain twenty-five cents (or whatever the coin was worth).

How about this? At evo world 2008 6 out of the top 8 people played Chun Li at the third strike tourney.

Uh... are you sure about that? I'm fairly sure Yun was more popular in the top 7.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Smash is one of the lesser tierwhored out games. It still happens but with our top players that can varry.

Azen doesn't really tierwhore, yet M2K tierwhores a lot more.

 

[NES n00b]

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/206/20051226123941589560sg.jpg

forum here. http://forums.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=112266

@pureawesome

I was keeping up with evo world and everyone made a big deal that 6 out of 8 top players were chun. But I guess I can check again.

Daigo was in none of these events.

 

[RDK]

If Daigo was playing in either of those events, then it was Ken, lol.

It wasn't. Daigo disappeared a long time ago.

And again, tournament results aren't objective evidence of anything in particular. It certainly doesn't have the final say on game balance, because as Yuna so eloquently put it, they could just be ridiculously whorish when it comes to character picking.

 

[pure_awesome]

@pureawesome

I was keeping up with evo world and everyone made a big deal that 6 out of 8 top players were chun. But I guess I can check again.

Never mind, you were right. I was just mixing up events.

 

[NES n00b]

It wasn't. Daigo disappeared a long time ago.

And again, tournament results aren't objective evidence of anything in particular. It certainly doesn't have the final say on game balance, because as Yuna so eloquently put it, they could just be ridiculously whorish when it comes to character picking.

Maybe not the end all evidence, but a very good indicator. Plus, this reasoning in itself is sorta a cop out. Cause the same could be said for Melee or conversly, you can say people don't tier ***** in Super Turbo and therefore have more varied results (with John Choi being able to beat the best players with Ryu who isn't even top tier but is in admittedly high tier).

The matchup chart for the game shows a pretty big imbalance (already posted) and has a similar tier divisions. Three characters that beat everyone with a couple other characters being decent.

 

[Radical Dreamer]

I haven't been misreading you at all. You're just bad at articulating your points. That or you're just plain wrong. At least I admit to TL:DR:ing you for the sheer irritation your posts cause me. You quote parts of my posts without having actually read through them.

I found your posts irritating, hur hur. I quote the parts of your post that I believe merit a response. I resist the temptation to quote useless filler just so I can make fun of it. Maybe I also miss things since 10 new posts seem to spawn in the time I make one. As it is I feel I've quoted unnecessary parts of this post. You have been misreading me plenty.

I'm telling you get iron-proof evidence instead of flawed ones. Your "evidence" does not conclusively proof anything.

Give me something more tangible, like match-up statistics and ratios. The only way for you to "lose" then would be if I could prove those ratios and statistics were wrong.

Matchup statistics and ratios are neither iron-proof nor evidence. Those are theory and they are also flawed. It's not one or the other. Both are ultimately flawed, and neither of them are conclusive proof of anything, at least not alone. The two of them complement each other and even together they aren't entirely conclusive, only strong indicators, because iron-proof evidence can only be obtained in a experimental setting. Ironically, theory is always the less "tangible" of the two, so your post is silly. So unless you want to give me a sound experimental design, stop using your own flawed arguments just for the sake of being irritating. If you think theory alone is conclusive proof, you've got a lot to learn, and you don't have the background to authoritatively say what constitutes conclusive proof. But just for the fun of it, here you go:

http://www.shoryuken.com/wiki/index.php/Image:ThridStrikeDiagramCropped.jpg

Yet you counter-argued me when I counter-argued pure awesomeness on it!

I quoted the part where you quoted me.

You're still not getting this. I'm trying to prove that the point "They had to ban a character!" does not prove that the game in question must be be less balanced than another game just because that game didn't ban any characters. or not the game is actually balanced is irrelevant.

And I don't care since that's not my argument.

You only have 3 different Jigglypuffs and then Azen and Chu Dat. That's it. It's not lower tiers, it's Azen and Chu Dat.

I also only had three different Sheiks, and two of them only used her as a counterpick in a few matches. I also only had like three Akumas and one Urien in my 3S results. That's it.

I'm looking at the big picture plenty. I am not here to prove that 3S is more balanced. I don't know that. I'm merely pointing out the blatant flaws in your arguments. Most of them merely strongly suggest that your point is right, they do not conclusively prove you are right since they can easily be explained away with rhetoric alone

You don't look at the big picture. The entire basis of your current interaction with me in this thread is ignoring the big picture and picking nits.

No I don't. When did I ever do that?

#591

I'm trying to teach you get better arguments. It also happens to amuse me somewhat.

You're not in the position. You don't have the understanding or the knowledge of argumentation or methodological proof, only a pigheaded sense of always being right.

God, that's enough for one day. I'm considering withdrawing purely because of endurance.

 

[Yuna]

Random BS.

You seem to not understand the mistake you made. This debate began when pure awesome (you said you never made this argument, I'm too lazy to check up on you so I'll just take your word for it) made the argument that "3S and SSF2T banned characters!" as if that automatically made them less balanced than Melee.

I contested this. Somewhere along the line, you stepped in and randomly started counter-arguing me. What am I supposed to do, assume you didn't read the entire conversation and just jumped in to counter-argue a few minor points?

No, I just assumed you knew what it was all about and was arguing the same thing. This was your fault.

The only thing I was trying to do was disqualify "They had to ban characters!" as a valid argument because that does not automatically make a game less balanced than another. I didn't make the entire balance argument revolve around Gill and Akuma.

I made up a rhetorical example where there existed a 3S game where Gill was much better than everyone else, but not by much (but still bannable because ->) while everyone else is 50/50 against each other, completely neutral. This is 18 characters who all 50/50 each other vs. 1 who 80/20s them or something.

The logical result of this would be that Gill would be banned. But wait, does that mean 3S is automatically less balanced than Brawl? No, it doesn't.

You don't look at the big picture. The entire basis of your current interaction with me in this thread is ignoring the big picture and picking nits.

Because you're using inherently flawed arguments. Even put together into a bigger picture, it's just a bunch of flawed arguments strung together.

If this were a court room, you'd merely be an attorney standing there waving around a lot of circumstancial evidence, none of it entirely solid.

You're not in the position. You don't have the understanding or the knowledge of argumentation or methodological proof, only a pigheaded sense of always being right.

But you see, a 60/40 match-up does not always end in victory for the one holding the advantage. The best character in the game doesn't always win. Just because everyone thinks a character is the best one, it doesn't mean they really are. Also, the American 3S community is a bunch of tierwhores.

These are all variables you do not take into consideration, staring yourself blind at your "methodological proof". Your proof isn't iron-clad.

Tell me, why don't you just pull up match-up data like I asked you?

 

[Titanium Dragon]

If there were advanced techniques worth learning people might use them but they don't exist. Its not a matter of we haven't looked hard enough since we've looked harder in 6months of Brawl than at least 2 years of Melee.

Define "advanced techniques".

Dragon punching isn't an advanced technique. Its technically difficult, but it isn't an "advanced technique". Same goes for wavedashing.

Difficult technical moves are not necessary for "advanced techniques".

If you think that all characters in Brawl are played exactly the same way now as they were nine months ago, you're simply wrong.

MK's dominance vs. Fox, Marth, Shiek? MK has been dominant since maybe 1 month into the game. We explored over 2 Melee years equivalent and nothings changed that. No one calls either one of those characters broken since they're all very beatable. MK is less beatable, no johns.

Shiek was dominant since maybe 1 month into Melee, and did not cease to be the #1 character for YEARS. Brawl hasn't been out for one (1!) year.

So again, this argument is "I don't know what I"m talking about so I'll spew stuff out of my mouth".

Really, this is all your entire argument was.

Seriously, go away. You don't know what you're talking about and you don't know how to debate.

Brawl is not balanced at all. People have considered banning a character. He has no bad matchups at all.

Are scrubs really people, though? Or at least, useful ones? I don't think so.

We played it, we examined it, we laughed at it. And we never made the switch. Not because of the backlash in America but because we were smart enough to realize what a ****ty game it is .

More commonly known as "I'm good at Melee and I have to start over with the new game, so the new game obviously sucks because I'm not as good at it".

 

[hichez50]

All of you guys are analysing a game play that came out by many years of melee pro-play, in the beggining of melee peach was unbeatable (for some reasons I won't but here because of laziness), then suddenly fox, falco, sheik and marth abruptly gone up on tiers lists. We can't compare the gameplay of a newer game, in case Brawl, with and old-pro-played game as Melee, tactics were much more improved there and the tactics that seemed pro on its beggining are now seen as weak tactics. The same can happen in melee.

Well said. The problem with brawl is that too may people depend on the melee masters. They still have a melee mindset. I remember when brawl came out everyone quickly thought that pit and Ike were going to be top tier. I think pit still had the potential but no one followed him.

I think that brawl has more balanced characters but Its not a balanced game.

 

[1048576]

The difference is in the beginning of Melee's lifespan nobody was looking to break the game, so stuff was ddiscovered way slower. We're about a year into brawl and already we've had three "best character" changes and the discovery of AT's is slowing drastically. I think it's safe to say Brawl isn't going to experience any more major shifts, given that the gameplay has been the same for six months.

 

[pure_awesome]

I think it's safe to say Brawl isn't going to experience any more major shifts, given that the gameplay has been the same for six months.

...
maybe your gameplay...

 

[CRASHiC]

I think that brawl has more balanced characters but Its not a balanced game.

Yeah. Your right. The items TOTALLY throw it off. We should consider banning those guys. Then brawl will be balanced because then the game will only rely on how balanced the characters are.

 

[RDK]

I think that brawl has more balanced characters but Its not a balanced game.

This post literally couldn't be any more wrong, unless I added something else in just to be a ****.

How is the game not a balanced game but yet it has a balanced character roster? Maybe if you jam a pencil into your brain enough times it makes sense, but for some reason the logic just isn't connecting for me.

 

[Fletch]

I remember when brawl came out everyone quickly thought that pit and Ike were going to be top tier.

Who actually thought this?

 

[Yuna]

I remember when brawl came out everyone quickly thought that pit and Ike were going to be top tier.

No. No one credible ever thought Ike was going to be Top Tier. Pit's strength was over-estimated by many. Incidentally, I over-estimated neither, immediately calling Ike a future low tier.

Guess what, the most insightful and intelligent players did not come to the conclusions you claim "everybody" did. By "everyone", you mean the unenlightened masses with very little insight into Competitive gaming and Competitive Smash (and Brawl in general).

I think that brawl has more balanced characters but Its not a balanced game.

And the question would be: Why?

...
maybe your gameplay...

How did the metagame change dramatically in the past 6 months? How?!

Who actually thought this?

Random no-name idiots. Other less intelligent people assume that just because 100 no-named people they've never heard of say something, it means everyone agrees, even those who aren't nameless schmucks who disagree.

I don't remember a single credible player making this claim.

 

[1048576]

Awww... Yuna stuck up for me. I must be special

Now don't ruin this tender moment by saying your argument was more focused on wrecking him than helping me.

 

[Fletch]

Random no-name idiots. Other less intelligent people assume that just because 100 no-named people they've never heard of say something, it means everyone agrees, even those who aren't nameless schmucks who disagree.

I don't remember a single credible player making this claim.

The sad thing is I don't even remember those people saying that. I remember hearing that about Pit, but I really don't remember or even fathom how anyone could think Ike was going to be awesome. Maybe because Azen was so good with him? But he's always the exception, Azen could probably 4-stock me with Sandbag.

 

[Yuna]

The sad thing is I don't even remember those people saying that. I remember hearing that about Pit, but I really don't remember or even fathom how anyone could think Ike was going to be awesome. Maybe because Azen was so good with him? But he's always the exception, Azen could probably 4-stock me with Sandbag.

There were people, who shall remain nameless, who in recent SWF history have claimed that MK vs. CF and DK vs. D3 aren't unwinnable match-ups at all and that the logic we used to ban Smash Balls dictates that we must ban D3's infinite as well, despite him having never been to a single tournament in his entire life and not reading up on why Smash Balls were banned in the first place.

People say all kinds of things on SWF. There were several people who were, like, "Ike is good, you can mindgame people into Fsmash and they could trip into it!".

 

[Tamoo]

Man, i always have arguements with my friends about which game is more balanced.
I seem to be the only one in my group of friends who think brawl is more balanced.
They just seem to come at me with the argument that if u put falcon and mk in a match, mk will always win.
Its kinda annoying that theyre basing their judgement based on one of a few really bad matchups.
I genuinely think brawl is more balanced, not because of what i have analysed of the gameplay, but because of tournaments.
I go to monthly brawl and melee tournaments and melee is constantly dominated by the top tier. In fact, having looked at my area's ranking board, melee's top 10 has 8 top tier mains and 2 high tier mains. In Brawl however, there are 4 top tier mains, 4 high tier, and 2 mid tier, showing that, im my area at least, and im assuming in general, that lower tiers can also compete at a high level in brawl, whereas in melee, you would struggle to find high ranking low or mid tier mains.

 

[Natch]

IIT: Lightsabers

10lightsabers

 

[furyberserk]

No. I think it may be worse than melee. You have to train with melee and no matter who you choose great skill will have to be used. In brawl choose Metaknight or Falco and spam some attacks with(possibly new tactics) and you MAY win.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

There were people, who shall remain nameless, who in recent SWF history have claimed that MK vs. CF and DK vs. D3 aren't unwinnable match-ups at all and that the logic we used to ban Smash Balls dictates that we must ban D3's infinite as well, despite him having never been to a single tournament in his entire life and not reading up on why Smash Balls were banned in the first place.

People say all kinds of things on SWF. There were several people who were, like, "Ike is good, you can mindgame people into Fsmash and they could trip into it!".

Then the match-up should be 100-0 it is unwinnable, there is a chance of Captain Falcon and Donkey Kong winning, the chance is just slim.

Unwinnable implies unplugging your controller is the same as playing.

 

[RDK]

Then the match-up should be 100-0 it is unwinnable, there is a chance of Captain Falcon and Donkey Kong winning, the chance is just slim.

Unwinnable implies unplugging your controller is the same as playing.

No, unplugging your controller isn't even 100% unwinnable. We've been over this.

In reality? In high-level tournament play? Yes, it's unwinnable. But we're talking physically, virtually unwinnable. There is no such matchup.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

No, unplugging your controller isn't even 100% unwinnable. We've been over this.

In reality? In high-level tournament play? Yes, it's unwinnable. But we're talking physically, virtually unwinnable. There is no such matchup.

Match-ups reflect how the characters would fair at the highest level of play. If it was unwinnable it should be 100-0 since unwinnable means there is no chance to win at all.

They have a chance, it's just really unlikely to happen.

 

[Dragoomba]

Then the match-up should be 100-0 it is unwinnable, there is a chance of Captain Falcon and Donkey Kong winning, the chance is just slim.

Unwinnable implies unplugging your controller is the same as playing.

There's already a thread discussing this.

 

[YUNq PHR3$H]

well you cant compare the 2 wen it comes to balance gameplay. Melee has somehwat easier tatics and cheap tactics. For instance, Marth's spike is wayy easier in melee than brawl. Wavedashing , pillar , etc. But brawl has stuff that melee doesn't have. Running while doing a upsmash [ srry dont know the specific name for it ] better chaingrabs, spikes, what B0mbe1c said : more nfered char such as mk && snake. But if i had to choose between the 2, i would pick the melee because it is funny and entertaining. Its something you can juss chill and play && even watch on the tube. Brawl is all about the fact of cheapy moves. They made brawl 2 ''realistic'' if you ask me.

 

[Mocha19]

But brawl has stuff that melee doesn't have. Running while doing a upsmash

Melee has dash to jump-cancel upsmash. It's nearly the same thing.