King Koopa's New Digs 3.0 Edition

[deadjames]

Any good player of any "video game" is a technical player. They know how the game functions in almost every way. When someone says a game shouldn't be about skill its like saying (sry if i sound like a ****)professional football players should be required to play flag football so even little kids can play. Completely ******** statement right there. Having skill in any technical aspect of any game makes the game fun to watch whether it be a board game, ssb, or a basketball game. Its the fact that the players are able to do something impressive that makes you want to watch or try to accomplish something along those lines. Saying the mentality of having learning curves and barriers is the wrong way of thinking; is just plain ridiculous when it comes to competitive... well anything. And whats the point of playing any game if u cant be competitive and test your skill vs someone else.
I really don't wanna sound like a **** but i mean cmon with some of these posts lol _Odds said everything perfectly i don't even understand how one would disagree with him.

IMO anyone who thinks tech skill and barriers separating pro/casual/noob players are bad hasent ever been on a professional level in anything. It adds an aspect to the game u just can get by playing tic tac toe.

People have opinions, get over yourself, also please try to actually contribute something substantial to the discussion.

 

[MurderClauz]

You've really gotta get past this mentality. Technical difficulty, in any sense, is a bad thing. It should not be. The reason Fox is technically difficult is because you have to put a bunch of inputs into your controller in a short amount of time and slight changes in this input can drastically change the outcome. It isn't because people don't know that they SHOULD nair shine wavedash nair shine wavedash upsmash, it's that their fingers can't do it.

That's a bad aspect of design, a stumbling block. It prevents people from playing Fox that would otherwise want to.

this is absurd my friend.. absolutely absurd... not everyone can do everything.. i dont even know what to say to that. lets just clone michael jordan in his prime and make him play himself all day long.. the fact is EXCITEMENT from video games the hype u feel is when someone does something that not everyone else can do. Hey anderson silva did you know that you shouldnt have gotten punched in the face and knocked out by chris weidman? oh god then why didnt we have someone come into the ring and stop chris??? he knew after all. crazy man. absolutely cray.

 

[\Apples]

Actually there isn't a fail window for L-cancelling as far as I know, the rest of your post is completely irrelevant because teching is another mechanic altogether, furthermore I'd prefer not to continue this argument because as I stated before the whole L-cancelling argument is a dead end, it's a thing and it's not going away, so despite it being a poor design choice imo I've learned to live with it because it's one of very few problems I have with Melee/P:M.

Fair enough. Yeah, I actually think it's a genius mechanic with a fail window implemented, but otherwise then, I agree. Though, not the entire rest of my post is irrelevant. As I said, the trick takes advantages of L-cancel attempts and triggers the tech fail window, making techs attempted during the next 20 frames impossible. I've discussed this many times with both M2K and Vidjo, so unless they're also mistaken, this is definitely a disadvantage to L-canceling, albeit a minor disadvantage.

Yeah you can mash to L-cancel. It's how Kage never misses L-cancels on Brinstar. It's probably not a great idea for most characters though.

Also in melee you can l-cancel with light press so you don't mess up your tech-window (not sure about PM but I assume it's the same).

Well, I'm surprised I never knew that before and this makes me sad. Not much else to say... lol

 

[TTTTTsd]

You know what I kind of don't get? People are saying technical difficulty is bad, and yet the essence of Project M is to add all of Melee's technical difficulty into Brawl. Baffling.

 

[Jacob29]

Clearly you haven't read any of the thread.

 

[Ace55]

stuff

You feel like technical difficulty is something to be cherished no matter what, I get that. I feel technical difficulty is fine as long as it serves a purpose (aka giving extra options). You can disagree with that but it would be nice if you just used arguments instead of calling the other side crazy or 'Brawl players'. Seriously dude, you're just making your side look bad.

 

[deadjames]

You know what I kind of don't get? People are saying technical difficulty is bad, and yet the essence of Project M is to add all of Melee's technical difficulty into Brawl. Baffling.

This is just my opinion, but I feel like buffering in Brawl is harder than any AT in Melee, and I don't know about anyone else, but I never said technical difficulty is bad. Some characters are more difficult than others, which is fine. Bowser is one of the easiest characters to pick up and there was really no reason for him to made less accessible, imo he's one of the best characters to learn the game with and once new players get more used to the mechanics then they can decide whether or not they want to keep playing him or try to challenge themselves to master a more technical character.

 

[TTTTTsd]

This is just my opinion, but I feel like buffering in Brawl is harder than any AT in Melee, and I don't know about anyone else, but I never said technical difficulty is bad. Some characters are more difficult than others, which is fine. Bowser is one of the easiest characters to pick up and there was really no reason for him to made less accessible, imo he's one of the best characters to learn the game with and once new players get more used to the mechanics then they can decide whether or not they want to keep playing him or try to challenge themselves to master a more technical character.

It wasn't you I was talkin to, man. Don't worry about it. I just can't read "technical difficulty is bad" in a mod that pushes forth the idea that technical difficulty was what made the game they're taking inspiration from. I don't mean to be rude about it, it's just strange to me. Also a lot of the most difficult Brawl ATs are gitches so I don't know if they'd really count.

As for my overall stance on technical difficulty, I feel like a shortage of it within a specific character, in a mod like this, could give the feeling of incompleteness. Too MUCH technical difficulty presents a problem only if the character is not native to it or if the reward is not worth the difficulty(using Fox is hard but he's extremely good in comparison.) This adds a whole new discussion though, since nobody's really "bad" in project M. Usually a character is just "less good."(something I definitely like about it.)

When it comes to something like "risk vs. reward", if it's like most Bowser mains in here are saying, fortress hogging is a great way to take stocks. Lack of any risk at all is also a bad design trait. Ultimately this is difficult to consensually agree on, but I can definitely say the Bair did not need that nerf as it worked really well before.

 

[Anther]

You know what I kind of don't get? People are saying technical difficulty is bad, and yet the essence of Project M is to add all of Melee's technical difficulty into Brawl. Baffling.

The idea was to add Melee's options into brawl. If things are hard for the sake of being hard then the game loses appeal and accessibility. Technical difficulty is a perk of the adding back the interesting movement options and speed that was stripped. Wavedashing is a result of directional air dodges and it's technical because airdodging and making it land somewhere useful is a precise action. The only other thing that's more difficult is the fact that the characters move faster.
+ L cancelling.

I think it's been said multiple times throughout the thread though .

 

[TTTTTsd]

Honestly, my big point is the Risk vs. Reward argument goes two ways, in the long run. Bowser had a guaranteed edgehog before which gave him plenty, now it's a smidge more difficult. I'd wait for this to iron out in meta before calling it a large issue, as of right now I'm pretty neutral on it. I still think more attention should be paid to the Bair nerf.(Also the suggesstion of giving Bowser a better neutral game by a little bit was pretty good too.) This honestly reminds me of, don't laugh, SSF4 AE's transition into USF4(which disables a lot of vortexes with delayed wakeup). Primarily the change to Fei Long's Rekka to make it not as safe, as it really did polarize most high level Fei Long play. Perhaps, to a lesser extent(I'm not completely applying this to Bowser, time will tell if this is a good or bad change) this is a change in that same regard.

This is all just my stance on the matter, though(as someone who's kinda interested in having a Pocket Bowser available in case of emergencies)

 

[666blaziken]

I am with Cmart on this. The fact that the WF edgehogging was too easy made it somewhat broken because there is so much benefit in edgehogging like that. They made it harder to execute because it should require more technical skill to edgehog like that because it is so beneficial to bowser's game. This makes bowser's edgehogging less broken (similer to fox's reflector) because it is harder to execute than before. However, we need to discuss his bair a little more.

 

[Chaos_Blasta]

It doesn't make it less broken because it's harder execute. Why not add silly mechanic inputs like making spacies do a half circle on the stick to jump cancel, or making sheik press B 3 times if she wants to snap to the ledge with her Up B. The possibilities are all the same, you are just making it needlesly harder for no particular reason rather than to spite on the people that have used those techniques for a long time.

 

[Jacob29]

However, we need to discuss his bair a little more.

Oh yeah, now that you have spoken out I guess we should move on. Thanks Blaziken for settling this.

 

[MurderClauz]

It doesn't make it less broken because it's harder execute. Why not add silly mechanic inputs like making spacies do a half circle on the stick to jump cancel, or making sheik press B 3 times if she wants to snap to the ledge with her Up B. The possibilities are all the same, you are just making it needlesly harder for no particular reason rather than to spite on the people that have used those techniques for a long time.

what? sheik's up b requires u to time it.. u cant just press up b at any time and auto grab the ledge..
"spite on the people that have used those techniques for a long time" - melee? been around for a while? you know it right. The coin has twho sides here, People who've mastered the skill were prolly mad they worked for nothing. Also cmart said they've been meaning to fix that. as it wasn't intended to be auto.

ps where the hell is gimpy and kirk?

 

[deadjames]

ps where the hell is gimpy and kirk?

Why does it matter? Are you unable to think for yourself? Do you need them to tell you how to feel about 3.0 Bowser or something?

 

[Mr.Pickle]

I'm not going to beat a dead horse here, and try to defend bowser's new changes. Because if there is a need to, I think there are people more suited for that than myself. That being said, it didn't seem like anyone noticed this point I made, so I'm quoting it because I think its relevant.

Also food for thought, if bowser is facing the ledge and uses up b toward it, the timing is just as easy as it was in 2.6b.

So if you want the timing you're used to, just face the ledge when you up b to it.

 

[deadjames]

I'm not going to beat a dead horse here, and try to defend bowser's new changes. Because if there is a need to, I think there are people more suited for that than myself. That being said, it didn't seem like anyone noticed this point I made, so I'm quoting it because I think its relevant.



So if you want the timing you're used to, just face the ledge when you up b to it.

Probably because that is false, regardless of whether or not you're facing the ledge you have to slow down and hold towards the ledge, it was never like that in 2.6b, it auto-snapped. It's definitely easier if you're facing the ledge, but it is certainly not the same.

 

[Mr.Pickle]

I forgot just how easy it was in previous versions until I actually popped in on of my older sd cards, my apologies. Even so, I still think its useful to know.

 

[TTTTTsd]

It doesn't make it less broken because it's harder execute. Why not add silly mechanic inputs like making spacies do a half circle on the stick to jump cancel, or making sheik press B 3 times if she wants to snap to the ledge with her Up B. The possibilities are all the same, you are just making it needlesly harder for no particular reason rather than to spite on the people that have used those techniques for a long time.

I'd just like to politely state that you should provide examples that match the magnitude of this change. Those are all much more complicated than having to hold different directions/do something slightly differently. If you want a better example of an unneccessary thing, Smash 64 to Melee with Luigi Tornado recovery where you had to charge it on-stage in Melee was pretty dumb IMO(thank you Project M for fixing this)

 

[deadjames]

I'd just like to politely state that you should provide examples that match the magnitude of this change. Those are all much more complicated than having to hold different directions/do something slightly differently. If you want a better example of an unneccessary thing, Smash 64 to Melee with Luigi Tornado recovery where you had to charge it on-stage in Melee was pretty dumb IMO(thank you Project M for fixing this)

But having to hold shield to store misfires is equally dumb. Especially when you're trying to recover and you get a misfire that you want to store, it feels really awkward and opens up the door for more execution errors in Luigi's already bad recovery.

 

[MurderClauz]

Why does it matter? Are you unable to think for yourself? Do you need them to tell you how to feel about 3.0 Bowser or something?

lol what? im pretty sure ive voiced my opinions pretty well here. I'd like to hear from people that are playing the best players and hear what they think. lol

 

[GeZ]

I've been away from this thread for too long. My baby's all grown up!

lol what? im pretty sure ive voiced my opinions pretty well here. I'd like to hear from people that are playing the best players and hear what they think. lol

That's a bad way to think about it. Posts should be judged by their content, not by the poster. So while Gimpy and Kirk will definitely write from an informed perspective, so has a lot of other players in this thread, and to devalue it because it's not written by your favorite players is dumb.


I'd say that I'm very split on the fortress hog change for three reasons.

On the one hand, Bowser is a veritable salt mine. He can make newer players feel powerless and angry and sad about playing the game. But that shouldn't have ANY effect on the competitive scene. What Overswarm said about technical barriers is correct. I always here people say that Melee and MvC2 persevered for 10-12 years without new games because they were so kick ass. While they're both incredible games, that's not the reason they held the limelight for so long. They were so dominant because they were the most popular games when the Fighting game industry CRASHED AND BURNED. The whole industry was, for the most part, dead, for a long time. And this actually ties back into what I said at the beginning of this, that tech barriers for the sake of tech barriers is bad design. At the time of the crash, Street Figher 3: 3rd Strike, MvC2, SSBM, Guilty Gear, Tekken, and a few other games and series were dominant. But with each new iteration of these games the influx of new players dwindled more so. It didn't take a genius to figure out that it was the insane, often series specific, tech barriers that were being mandatorily spliced into each new release, but unfortunately, PR and marketing at all the companies that owned these series contained no genius's. So the Fighting games got more and more Niche, seeming less and less approachable to new players until the industry, like I mentioned earlier, imploded. The point of the story being, tech barriers for the sake of tech barriers can, and will, crash industries. That's how bad of a design decision it is.

But, I do think that the tech was very powerful. I've been teaching a couple friends of mine to play Project M, and while none of them have caught up to me yet, they've started to become actual competition. But through all of that, Fortress Hogging has been dominant. It's a great edgeguarding tool, but really very omniapplicable. I'm fine with a nerf, but I think it should actually be a nerf. Like I stated above, execution barriers do not a healthy game make. I think powering up some of Bowser's other options for edgeguarding, to compensate for an actual nerf would be a good idea. Unfortunately, we got the opposite, and the tool is less accessible, while his other moves that would help, namely Bair, are also nerfed. So instead of a subtle nerf to Bowsers Edgeguarding game, 3.0 Bowser has eater a ton of concrete and suffers in his offstage game for it, as most non avian, non concrete'avores would.

Overall though, I don't think Bowser needed nerfs. I think he needed to be tuned up, and I agree with the decision to do so, but you guys didn't do that. You nerfed some things, "changed" some things, and stated your reasoning for doing so made more sense from a design standpoint. I love this project, because of the interactivity between the fans and the team, and I think that's what makes this project different than the vanilla smash games. It's by fans, for fans. What I really hope I don't see is the effective walling off of certain issues from the community. I'm not saying you should take to heart everything everyone says, because the community is full of a lot of dingbats (I'm desperately trying not to post names, send help), but the interactivity and ability to learn from the community is what makes this project really jive. I want that to continue, because I feel it's emblematic of your guys love for this series, and ability to take criticism and work with it. You guys, especially Strong Bad and cmart, are great at this, and that's why I'm really confident in the project's longevity. It's being managed well. But I don't like seeing you guys clam up in these threads. You're experiencing what a lot of developers avoid completely, and that is full fan interactivity. It's a tough gig, and you guys do get a lot of heat for your comments and changes often, but being able to combine your ideas with ours and have us ALL work through the issue is a fantastic show of being a humble designer, which is what designers really need to be.

Much love guys. You all rock and have created (as freeware no less) one of my favorite gaming experiences. I just urge you to consider what I've said not necessarily about the changes, but about the interactivity of design.

 

[TTTTTsd]

But having to hold shield to store misfires is equally dumb. Especially when you're trying to recover and you get a misfire that you want to store, it feels really awkward and opens up the door for more execution errors in Luigi's already bad recovery.

But having a misfire come out during a weak missile was also pretty..well...stupid. Especially if you were trying to legitimately recover since the missile can sweetspot ledges. It's the epitome of a double edged sword in terms of how to alter it. This change is difficult to debate and honestly, I don't know if it should be here. Definitely go make a thread in the Luigi section though, it should spice it up and maybe unearth discussion in there, since Luigi forums are sadly silent.

In relation to Bowser changes and higher tech windows, I think it's important to analyze just how much harder it is as an entire relative. Most comparisons being drawn are silly ideas like "Imagine if Falco had to do like twenty inputs to pillar once" and that kind of stuff is pretty unreasonable. For a change like this to create a significantly higher window, IMO, it has to be much much harder to do. It's hard to say it overcomplicates the tech or makes it too hard when the ease of use is still applicable to a fairly good degree. IDK though, this is just from my own personal experimentation and trials.

In regards to tech barriers crashing industries, I can agree to an extent, but SF3 was extremely popular, especially Third Strike(the EVO highlight, Daigo). I think what crashed the industry more was lack of a direction to move forward + lack of interest in arcades in general with consoles on the rise. Just my two cents though.

 

[GeZ]

But having a misfire come out during a weak missile was also pretty..well...stupid. Especially if you were trying to legitimately recover since the missile can sweetspot ledges. It's the epitome of a double edged sword in terms of how to alter it. This change is difficult to debate and honestly, I don't know if it should be here. Definitely go make a thread in the Luigi section though, it should spice it up and maybe unearth discussion in there, since Luigi forums are sadly silent.

In relation to Bowser changes and higher tech windows, I think it's important to analyze just how much harder it is as an entire relative. Most comparisons being drawn are silly ideas like "Imagine if Falco had to do like twenty inputs to pillar once" and that kind of stuff is pretty unreasonable. For a change like this to create a significantly higher window, IMO, it has to be much much harder to do. It's hard to say it overcomplicates the tech or makes it too hard when the ease of use is still applicable to a fairly good degree. IDK though, this is just from my own personal experimentation and trials.

In regards to tech barriers crashing industries, I can agree to an extent, but SF3 was extremely popular, especially Third Strike(the EVO highlight, Daigo). I think what crashed the industry more was lack of a direction to move forward + lack of interest in arcades in general with consoles on the rise. Just my two cents though.

I'm not debating 3rd Strikes popularity, heck I play the game, I'm saying it had popularity within the market that was already naturally inclined to play it. The arcades never died and direction never faltered. I've actually put a buttload of study into the fighting game dead period and I'm almost positive it was the rise of tech barriers, as that was the only constant through the whole ordeal.

 

[TTTTTsd]

But now we have games like Guilty Gear and Blazblue which are reinstating technical barriers(at least I can confirm this with Guilty Gear as it's either really technical or just a really really strange game.) It might not be the death of arcades, but it could've been the whole console port thing since most ports beyond Dreamcast ports had a lot of issues, and the Dreamcast sold...negligibly. I think the lulling period was also a result of having no way to either further or simplify the technical barriers presented in said games, resulting in a drought to prevent disappointment. There's so much factors.

 

[GeZ]

But Guilty Gear and Blazblue suffer from poorer sales than the big hyper popular fighting games because of those awkward barriers. The console ports didn't matter since the game was either played casually with whatever controller or competitively with a fightstick. The failing consoles at the time aren't an explanation as that would have lead to the failure of the whole market rather than one specific part of it. The tech barriers would be hard to axe but they could have been changed up. The games just got to a point where they were very very difficult. That's why when Sf4 revived fighting games, it did it with buffers on most of the game and ease of access inputs. But we should stay on topic for the sake of the Bowser threads.

 

[deadjames]

But having a misfire come out during a weak missile was also pretty..well...stupid. Especially if you were trying to legitimately recover since the missile can sweetspot ledges. It's the epitome of a double edged sword in terms of how to alter it. This change is difficult to debate and honestly, I don't know if it should be here. Definitely go make a thread in the Luigi section though, it should spice it up and maybe unearth discussion in there, since Luigi forums are sadly silent.

Perhaps I will make a thread about it at some point, I will say I'm much happier with Luigi in 3.0 than Bowser, the Melee shield push back makes it so much easier to land up-b OoS, before it was damn near impossible without power-shielding, and unlike the new fortress hog mechanics, Luigi's new misfire mechanics actually create options rather than limiting them, which is what a tech barrier should do imo.

 

[Comeback Kid]

Guys, this is literally apples and oranges when you bring the hard execution requirements of any other fighter into the discussion.

Like even David "hard execution barriers are bad" Sirlin would probably laugh and shake his head at the primitive things the Smash community considers unacceptable technical barriers. Like really basic stuff being brought up here.

How can anyone speak of the FGC in general in this discussion when Smash doesn't even meet many of the community's criterea of a acceptable basic technical execution barrier of entry for a fighting game.

Sure everyone can have their own opinion (before the usual suspect tries to shut down mine). But really It's silly to try and bolster one's opinion with irrelevant examples, that don't help your point whatsoever.

 

[GeZ]

Guys, this is literally apples and oranges when you bring the hard execution requirements of any other fighter into the discussion.

Like even David "hard execution barriers are bad" Sirlin would probably laugh and shake his head at the primitive things the Smash community considers unacceptable technical barriers. Like really basic stuff being brought up here.

How can anyone speak of the FGC in general in this discussion when Smash doesn't even meet many of the community's criterea of a acceptable basic technical execution barrier of entry for a fighting game.

Sure everyone can have their own opinion (before the usual suspect tries to shut down mine). But really It's silly to try and bolster one's opinion with irrelevant examples, that don't help your point whatsoever.

God this is bad. It's different execution barriers, not easier. I played Street Fighter 4, 3rd Strike, P4:A And MvC3 before coming to P:M and it's still comparable. But even besides that, the point hasn't been the difficulty for 4 pages. I know reading is hard but take out some time and try it. Your posts relevance will thank thee.

 

[Comeback Kid]

My mistake, I thought you had an actual mechanical problem and this wasn't an argument based entirely on the principle of the thing.

It makes you point even less relevant actually in terms of game balance, which is the only reason this would even be changed.

 

[GeZ]

My mistake, I thought you had an actual mechanical problem and this wasn't an argument based entirely on the principle of the thing.

It makes you point even less relevant actually in terms of game balance, which is the only reason this would even be changed.

Because metagame isn't relevant to balance. Man you're good at this.

 

[Comeback Kid]

Every version changes the metagame dramaticly, that's not why things get changed. You know that.

Man you're good at this.

Man, you're smarmy.

 

[GeZ]

Every version changes the metagame dramaticly, that's not why things get changed. You know that.




Man, you're smarmy.

The tiers and how good characters are are part of the meta. How a characters tools help them interact with other characters is a part of the meta. I'm not sure how you can say the meta has no involvement in changes. That doesn't actually make any sense.

 

[Comeback Kid]

Every argument about some janky move or tactic boils down to one side arguing "metagame!" while the other arguing "design!" and design seems to win most of the time.

Maybe the fix wasn't implemented correctly, who knows? Prove it sucks, the effect will be lessened. Or it's fine.

The metagame matters sure, but the balance is what creates a healthy metagame right? Intead of letting jank **** stay in or else risk pissing people off because they don't like these experiments in character design playing out naturally.

 

[MurderClauz]

That's a bad way to think about it. Posts should be judged by their content, not by the poster. So while Gimpy and Kirk will definitely write from an informed perspective, so has a lot of other players in this thread, and to devalue it because it's not written by your favorite players is dumb.

The only peoples whose posts i have devalued are ones that don't think tech skill is a + for video games. Id say the same thing to kirk or gimpy if they disagreed. Neither of which are my favorite players.. however i will listen to what they have to say considering they are at the forefront of Bowser play in PM.

To me they are masters of the character, a professional player if you will. I would take the advice of a professor(professional) in any class of study over a student who just knows the material. I would think its just common sense to head the advice or critiques of a person that has a proven wealth of knowledge on the subject, over one who is merely speculating.

 

[GeZ]

The only peoples whose posts i have devalued are ones that don't think tech skill is a + for video games. Id say the same thing to kirk or gimpy if they disagreed. Neither of which are my favorite players.. however i will listen to what they have to say considering they are at the forefront of Bowser play in PM.

To me they are masters of the character, a professional player if you will. I would take the advice of a professor(professional) in any class of study over a student who just knows the material. I would think its just common sense to head the advice or critiques of a person that has a proven wealth of knowledge on the subject, over one who is merely speculating.

But the pro's don't always have the best information or most valid opinions just by virtue of being a pro. (see m2k on sheik)
Also I don't agree with your comments on tech skill based on necessity being a good thing. All fighting games are cerebral, so from that perspective, the tech skill is all that keeps the best minds from being the best, as it should be. Mango, the almighty lord of Melee, was as he was because of his ability to see and use moves and tools in unorthodox ways. Or, to rephrase that, he was good at rethinking things that were considered rote, and he excelled for that. That's what the smash series, and fighting games in general, are about.

 

[standardtoaster]

you realize in 2.6 you could jump out of bair like halfway through the animation while his back was still out there right. 3.0 restored its melee gimping while also making its iasa be where it was originally meant to be

 

[deadjames]

The only peoples whose posts i have devalued are ones that don't think tech skill is a + for video games. Id say the same thing to kirk or gimpy if they disagreed. Neither of which are my favorite players.. however i will listen to what they have to say considering they are at the forefront of Bowser play in PM.

To me they are masters of the character, a professional player if you will. I would take the advice of a professor(professional) in any class of study over a student who just knows the material. I would think its just common sense to head the advice or critiques of a person that has a proven wealth of knowledge on the subject, over one who is merely speculating.

Making your posts slightly more grammatically correct doesn't change the fact that you've yet to actually contribute to this discussion. Also what is cmart? Chopped liver? I'm pretty sure he's the one who designed Bowser, so he probably knows the most about the character and he's already shared his thoughts. Plus Overswarm is another high level Bowser player, but you seem to have overlooked that fact because *gasp* his opinion is different from yours.

 

[Frost | Odds]

To me they are masters of the character.

Gimpy was in Melee, but his PM play looks pretty sloppy from what I've seen. Those were old videos, though, so I'm sure he's back up to form.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

you realize in 2.6 you could jump out of bair like halfway through the animation while his back was still out there right. 3.0 restored its melee gimping while also making its iasa be where it was originally meant to be

Could you really jump out of it halfway through? Damn. I never got to go up against that, but it sounds pretty ridiculous.