L-Canceling

[WastingPenguins]

The idea that l-cancelling should only work if you connect with your aerial (basically punishing you for missing) is a bad idea because it implies that it's the player's fault if she missed that aerial. This is not true at all. In fact, a big part of high level smash play is based around reading your opponent, picking up on their habits and guessing what they will do next. That means the best players will guess right more often than other players, and that is what makes them good players. But even the best player in the universe is going to miss some of the time -- not because she did something wrong, but because she is not psychic. Punishing players for trying to read their opponents with less than 100 percent accuracy is just a dumb idea. If it's not your fault that you miss sometimes, why should you be punished for it?

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

so you're telling me most casual players are aware of advanced techniques? and that a casual player will grind for hours being able to tech, lcancel, wavedash on spot, etc?

if your argument is for shorter landing lag, chances are most casuals cant and wont capitalize on a missed l cancel, so it really doesn't matter

when i was a little nub i still preferred melee because it was faster; not even including techniques such as those above melee was inherently faster and smoother.

so stop with your ****ty analogies

tldr my first post, having advanced tech doesnt increase skill floor; it doesnt effect casual play, there's no reason to not have most advanced tech

as far as i know melee outsold brawl when talking percentages by a large margin so yeah​

Well, someone's pissy today. Calm your **** dude, no need to get so worked up over this. Is 'advanced techs' so important to you that you need to start swearing at someone simply for disagreeing?

EDIT: Hm, so it blurred out my word. Odd, that isn't even a swear word, unless you're George Carlin.

 

[LancerStaff]

Yeah, imagine how much of a problem Ike would be for these guys if all his moves were automatically cancelled. He'd be the most hated character ever. L-Cancelling is the better alternative.

Wait, don't most noobs not even know to attack in the air?
'Sides, Kirby's stone is still around. How can you be more OP then becoming completely invincible with no drawbacks?
Really though, it's impossible to balance bottom level play.

 

[[TSON]]

so you're telling me most casual players are aware of advanced techniques? and that a casual player will grind for hours being able to tech, lcancel, wavedash on spot, etc?​

No. But in the ~unbelievably oft chance~ that a "casual-competitive" player (read: a player that plays competitively but has no desire to visit Smashboards/go to tournaments) is up against a "competitive player", I don't think it's right that they should be COMPLETELY SKEWERED with no chance of redemption even if they're smarter than the person they're up against.

if your argument is for shorter landing lag, chances are most casuals cant and wont capitalize on a missed l cancel, so it really doesn't matter

And chances are most high level players won't miss an l-cancel to begin with. Why should it return when it's an artificial skill barrier? A frivolous input that will ALWAYS be wanted in EVERY situation? Let's put our Melee nostalgia aside for a second; is that good game design? Does requiring super saiyan fingers rather than mindgames, superior knowledge of options/your main, and adapting to your opponents playstyle in order to psych them out make a good fighting game? No. It doesn't.

when i was a little nub i still preferred melee because it was faster; not even including techniques such as those above melee was inherently faster and smoother.

so stop with your ****ty analogies

Yes, Brawl was a bad game...but it's not because there's no L-Cancelling. And that doesn't mean we have to make SSB4 have the same downfalls Melee did. Melee was a fantastic game that's fun to watch, but not a perfect one in practice. People are putting it on this high pedestal at all times; let's step back for a second and look at it. Again - fighting games are psychological thrillers. You get your chills and palm-sweats from anticipating what your opponent is gonna do next, not breaking your L button from hitting it literally every time you hit the ground. Imagine how much more interesting high level Melee play would be if we had all of the people that aren't aware of L-Cancelling out there in the tournaments playing competitively? Adding L-Cancelling to SSB4 would serve as nothing more than a wall that you have to burrow under to be a competitive player. Ease of access is the most important thing.

tldr my first post, having advanced tech doesnt increase skill floor; it doesnt effect casual play, there's no reason to not have most advanced tech

as far as i know melee outsold brawl when talking percentages by a large margin so yeah

Melee outsold Brawl because of L-Cancelling? No. Melee outsold Brawl for several reasons:
- Wiis were popular with people who don't normally play video games and just wanted Wii Fit/Wii Sports
- Brawl had a lot of bad press around release with tripping and no hitstun and bad online

I dare say a VAST majority of people who bought Melee/Brawl don't give 2 ****s about L-whatevers and Wave-**** and Spin-****s and Platform mechanics. The game didn't sell because of ATs, lmfao. And Brawl still has a crapton of ATs. Just because our favorite little controversial ******* child L-Cancelling didn't make a return doesn't mean Brawl is inherently null and void of all ATs.

 

[asd_]

No. But in the ~unbelievably oft chance~ that a "casual-competitive" player (read: a player that plays competitively but has no desire to visit Smashboards/go to tournaments) is up against a "competitive player", I don't think it's right that they should be COMPLETELY SKEWERED with no chance of redemption even if they're smarter than the person they're up against.​

"casual-competitve" players arent going to play people who go to tournaments..
for the record, when i first started, i still was able to beat (far from the best) people who knew ATs just because i can read people well/had very good character knowledge. all it does is increase the skill ceiling, NOT the skill floor.

And chances are most high level players won't miss an l-cancel to begin with. Why should it return when it's an artificial skill barrier?

it's part of what makes them a high level player

Yes, Brawl was a bad game...but it's not because there's no L-Cancelling.

very true friend

Adding L-Cancelling to SSB4 would serve as nothing more than a wall that you have to burrow under to be a competitive player. Ease of access is the most important thing.

it doesn't make it any less accessable... as stated many times, ATs do not increase the skill floor​

Melee outsold Brawl because of L-Cancelling? No.

when did i say this, or even imply this? if anything i implied it sold better because it was faster and smoother overall

I dare say a VAST majority of people who bought Melee/Brawl don't give 2 ****s about L-whatevers and Wave-**** and Spin-****s and Platform mechanics. The game didn't sell because of ATs, lmfao.

yep, and that's exactly why if there are AT's it will sell just as well, so why not include them

 

[[TSON]]

"casual-competitve" players arent going to play people who go to tournaments..​

We now have an online mode that doesn't suck, and we have online rankings. This was true for Brawl, it's likely not to be true anymore.

it's part of what makes them a high level player

it doesn't make it any less accessable...

If we're talking about a Street Fighter title maybe? One of the reasons I play Smash over TvC/the like is because it doesn't require Jet-Li fingers. I can win a match by having superior mindgames and being stronger mentally. This is the same reason I play Dead or Alive. It's not that I CAN'T learn to play these traditional fighting games, but I think it's an inherently flawed system that's left over from the arcade days. As such, frivolous inputs are not the way of the Smash Bros. series. I would argue L-Cancelling falls into this since it doesn't screw up high level play (you'll ALWAYS be doing it) or low level play (you'll NEVER be doing it) and just serves to discourage mixing between the two and/or people who are advancing from low level to high level.

Which is, understandably, dumb.​

 

[asd_]

We now have an online mode that doesn't suck, and we have online rankings. This was true for Brawl, it's likely not to be true anymore.
​

it is highly likely it will be pretty bad, peer to peer when the majority of the people use wifi means delay/possibly packet loss. interpolation just doesn't work with fighting games because of the precision needed, so at BEST it will function similarly to dolphin netplay, i.e wait for server and client to sync (in this case the peers), however if this goes through nintendo (which it probably will) you are adding another node, increasing lag

the fact that sakurai pretty much implied get a ethernet adapter or you're screwed kind of affirms that online play will not be a great improvement from wii

If we're talking about a Street Fighter title maybe? The reason I play Smash is because it doesn't require Jet-Li fingers. I can win a match by having superior mindgames and being stronger mentally. This is the same reason I play Dead or Alive.

ok cool

Frivolous inputs are not the way of the Smash Bros. series.

wat

this isn't chess, this is a fighting game, a relative high degree of apm is going to be required. outmindgaming your opponent often requires you to read them, thus react first, thus (suprise) press buttons fast

I would argue L-Cancelling falls into this since it doesn't screw up high level play (you'll ALWAYS be doing it) or low level play (you'll NEVER be doing it) and just serves to discourage mixing between the two and/or people who are advancing from low level to high level.

i dont think you realize that if someone can't l cancel chances are if the player who could decided not to he would get equally destroyed, it isn't difficult to do​

 

[PCHU]

Most casuals I've played with thought it was a pretty cool mechanic because it's just one button press.
I've also met quite a few casuals that prefer perfecting their ground game than working with aerials, and they still don't get outright stomped by people who do l-cancel.
I guess I'm just not seeing the issue with its inclusion besides the people who want autocancels, which would be okay because it'd make everything...well, not that much easier (Melee Fox shield pressure would be more braindead), but I feel it'd screw with the visual fluidity (not that everything looks outright amazing, but still).
At least with l-canceling you're manually altering the animation speed.

I'm for it because I like techniques and stuff in general (QAC, Item-dashing, DACUS, whatever looks cool) and don't really mind that I have to press another button.
If they cut down on landing lag in general, awesome, but if Brawl's system is back, I guess I'm sticking with Snake, Kirby, and MK again since they don't have much need to cancel.

If anything, I'd be complaining that crouch-canceling from a dash was taken away; the momentum shift was enough, but that made approaches even more awkward.
I miss being able to dash -> cc -> dsmash.

 

[sunshinesan]

No. But in the ~unbelievably oft chance~ that a "casual-competitive" player (read: a player that plays competitively but has no desire to visit Smashboards/go to tournaments) is up against a "competitive player", I don't think it's right that they should be COMPLETELY SKEWERED with no chance of redemption even if they're smarter than the person they're up against.

You don't think it's right? If someone is completely skewered, than he or she was severely outplayed. If it was a 1 stock or 2 stock, than the the casual-competitive knew some of his stuff. What you said has no meaning. There is no right or wrong in how someone losing in a game that requires skill and has no random elements (Competitive ruleset - no items, yadayada)... unless you are advocating random elements, than I agree, there is right and wrong how a match would play out - the match where the guy who had less skill that had a star spawn on him would be considered "not right".

Interestingly, Smash is probably the only fighting game that a lesser player has a chance for redemption, thanks to Smash's brilliant core mechanics in punishing hubris players with SD's or rewarding smart but maybe less experienced players with the ability to bait and gimp opponents. Combos are balanced and less frustrating in Smash as well, as infinites are less likely to happen due to the fact that knockback increases as a side-effect to the game-mechanics, as well as DI as a system for getting out of combo locks. I tried to play Blazblue with a friend once, and it was basically me watching the game as she combo'ed without any hope of doing anything (I tried DI'ing, but yeah.). Other games have clunky systems for prevent infinites or effectively infinite combos/0-death strings with bursts in traditional fighters, or AP bursts in Playstation Allstars. Honestly, they just feel like cop-out, shoddy patch work to try and fix inherent problems in they're game mechanics. Smash is the only game where it's inherent mechanics goes hand and hand with giving advantages to the underdog.

 

[Praxis]

No. But in the ~unbelievably oft chance~ that a "casual-competitive" player (read: a player that plays competitively but has no desire to visit Smashboards/go to tournaments) is up against a "competitive player", I don't think it's right that they should be COMPLETELY SKEWERED with no chance of redemption even if they're smarter than the person they're up against.​

​

This doesn't make any sense. Good competitive game design should be built to ensure that the better player wins consistently. The weaker player having a chance to win is for casual games like Mario Party or dice based board games or even Mario Kart.

What do you mean by "even if they're smarter"? The player that understands the game better is smarter. You defined a casual competitive as someone who does no research about the game. He can only play so smart if he doesn't know the mechanics. Part of being smart is knowing your options in a giving circumstance and how to react out of them.

 

[LancerStaff]

​

This doesn't make any sense. Good competitive game design should be built to ensure that the better player wins consistently. The weaker player having a chance to win is for casual games like Mario Party or dice based board games or even Mario Kart.

What do you mean by "even if they're smarter"? The player that understands the game better is smarter. You defined a casual competitive as someone who does no research about the game. He can only play so smart if he doesn't know the mechanics. Part of being smart is knowing your options in a giving circumstance and how to react out of them.

He's saying both players should be able to win based solely off of what the game teaches them, not because one looked up more 'techniques' then the other. Let's say the casual competitive is smarter, but doesn't know how to L-cancel. The other guy who looked up L-canceling will win, dispite being the worse player overall.

 

[asd_]

He's saying both players should be able to win based solely off of what the game teaches them, not because one looked up more 'techniques' then the other. Let's say the casual competitive is smarter, but doesn't know how to L-cancel. The other guy who looked up L-canceling will win, dispite being the worse player overall.

that is TOTALLY NOT TRUE

to know how to punish failed l cancels consistently would require you to be smarter

if we're at the level of where player a is worse but can l cancel and only l cancel and player b is better but can't l cancel, player b will win

where l canceling is important is high level play, where if you don't l cancel you get consistently punished for it

it is negligible in low level play

you may say the same about wavedashing or double shining or w.e but that requires you to have the smarts to know how and when to incorporate them, thus having a more deep understanding of the game, thus being smarter

sometimes i wonder if people on these boards actually play a game called super smash bros

 

[Praxis]

He's saying both players should be able to win based solely off of what the game teaches them, not because one looked up more 'techniques' then the other. Let's say the casual competitive is smarter, but doesn't know how to L-cancel. The other guy who looked up L-canceling will win, dispite being the worse player overall.

Then this is the perspective of someone with little experience in fighting games. Fighting games are so deep that you really can't learn everything in depth without relying on the research of others. Casual players like to imagine someone discovering everything on their own, but there's just too much.

If this logic was followed for game design, not just L cancelling but all depth would have to be removed so that people wouldn't have to look it up. Glide tosses, wavedashes, B-reversals, autocancels, edgecancels, etc.

 

[Thirdkoopa]

Melee outsold Brawl? On a ratio, maybe, but that's it. Even then, technically most Wii games sold worse on a ratio to people who bought the console.

What the hell fact checking am I reading.

sometimes i wonder if people on these boards actually play a game called super smash bros

Welcome to SmashBoards!

 

[RODO]

I don't care for L-cancelling one way or another but some of these arguments I just don't understand. "There is no instance where you WOULDN'T want to L-cancel." ....ok?? Why WOULDN'T I want to attack? I couldn't win otherwise. How about just the act of moving? I could choose to stand still the whole match but I would get pummeled probably. Why WOULDN'T I want to recover when off of the ledge? There are always going to be situations that you are better off for doing something than not doing it.

Anyway if you want to get better you'll just have to suck it up and do it (not that you have to or want to). You can play a guitar without knowing scales or notes but if you do learn those things then you are much better off for it, even though it's a boring process compared to just learning to play songs that you like.

 

[Ulevo]

He's saying both players should be able to win based solely off of what the game teaches them, not because one looked up more 'techniques' then the other. Let's say the casual competitive is smarter, but doesn't know how to L-cancel. The other guy who looked up L-canceling will win, dispite being the worse player overall.

This is why casual players shouldn't be posting on these boards about competitive topics.

The fact that the 'other guy' knows about L-Cancelling and can implement it properly, within this example, makes him the better player.

Seriously, guys. If you don't like competitive play, the answer isn't for you to invade a competitive forum and decide it is within your right to change how the world of competitive Smash should work. The answer is to go to a casual board for Smash.

And on a non-smash related topic, this is a very terrible outlook in general. If you think an individual who puts time and effort in to something as an investment to better themselves, whether if it be studying for university courses, practicing that figure skating move you've almost nailed, perfecting your artistic skills, or something as simple as looking up tips and tricks for a video game, deserves to lose to someone else who didn't put an equivalent amount of effort in at some point, you're going to have a rough time with life without being extremely privileged. 99.99% of you are not.

 

[mimgrim]

If anything, I'd be complaining that crouch-canceling from a dash was taken away; the momentum shift was enough, but that made approaches even more awkward.
I miss being able to dash -> cc -> dsmash.

This so much. Dash Cancel should really some back. It was really helpful to do any grounded attack out of a dash.

Seriously, guys. If you don't like competitive play, the answer isn't for you to invade a competitive forum and decide it is within your right to change how the world of competitive Smash should work. The answer is to go to a casual board for Smash.

How many people get the reference I wonder.

 

[Chimera]

The elitism in this thread is gross.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I don't care for L-cancelling one way or another but some of these arguments I just don't understand. "There is no instance where you WOULDN'T want to L-cancel." ....ok?? Why WOULDN'T I want to attack? I couldn't win otherwise. How about just the act of moving? I could choose to stand still the whole match but I would get pummeled probably. Why WOULDN'T I want to recover when off of the ledge? There are always going to be situations that you are better off for doing something than not doing it.

Anyway if you want to get better you'll just have to suck it up and do it (not that you have to or want to). You can play a guitar without knowing scales or notes but if you do learn those things then you are much better off for it, even though it's a boring process compared to just learning to play songs that you like.

****ing thank you. That argument is ridiculous.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

L canceling seems to be useless. why not just make land lag faster. it only serves to make things harder.
why not after every individual hit press L so you can connect ur next hit faster a well.
it just dose not make sense.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

L canceling seems to be useless. why not just make land lag faster. it only serves to make things harder.
why not after every individual hit press L so you can connect ur next hit faster a well.
it just dose not make sense.

No. What you are saying doesn't make sense. You are speeding up the attack itself, just the landing lag. It's inversely related because aerials connecting to the ground don't string into anything. A series of jabs was designed to connect, so it isn't the same thing.

We need a poll for people who are pro and against L-Canceling. I guarantee you at least 90% of those who are against can't do it or have not even tried to learn it.

 

[LancerStaff]

Then this is the perspective of someone with little experience in fighting games. Fighting games are so deep that you really can't learn everything in depth without relying on the research of others. Casual players like to imagine someone discovering everything on their own, but there's just too much.

If this logic was followed for game design, not just L cancelling but all depth would have to be removed so that people wouldn't have to look it up. Glide tosses, wavedashes, B-reversals, autocancels, edgecancels, etc.

Depth =/= has to be looked up. And SSB =/= fighting game. You don't need to look up a thing to fuse good weapons in KIU. You just look for specific results and make it. Yes, looking up X + Y = Z let's you plan ahead, but most of us made things just fine before the major fusion discoveries. Tell me this: Why must you look up things to get good at the game? You don't for KIU, SMB, Megaman, and the list goes on. Letting glitches slip by or leaving important moves unexplained is horrible game design.

I don't care for L-cancelling one way or another but some of these arguments I just don't understand. "There is no instance where you WOULDN'T want to L-cancel." ....ok?? Why WOULDN'T I want to attack? I couldn't win otherwise. How about just the act of moving? I could choose to stand still the whole match but I would get pummeled probably. Why WOULDN'T I want to recover when off of the ledge? There are always going to be situations that you are better off for doing something than not doing it.

Anyway if you want to get better you'll just have to suck it up and do it (not that you have to or want to). You can play a guitar without knowing scales or notes but if you do learn those things then you are much better off for it, even though it's a boring process compared to just learning to play songs that you like.

No, you don't always want to attack or move, and there's more than one way to attack or move. You have exactly two options when in position to L-cancel, and there's almost never a reason not to.

 

[Ravio_Yo]

The elitism in this thread is gross.

I know, right? Didn't even think casual elitism existed until I met the Smash Community.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

No. What you are saying doesn't make sense. You are speeding up the attack itself, just the landing lag. It's inversely related because aerials connecting to the ground don't string into anything. A series of jabs was designed to connect, so it isn't the same thing.

We need a poll for people who are pro and against L-Canceling. I guarantee you at least 90% of those who are against can't do it or have not even tried to learn it.

Hmm thats a good assumption. But L canceling is not to hard its just annoying land lag should just be sped up instead.

 

[Praxis]

Depth =/= has to be looked up. And SSB =/= fighting game. You don't need to look up a thing to fuse good weapons in KIU. You just look for specific results and make it. Yes, looking up X + Y = Z let's you plan ahead, but most of us made things just fine before the major fusion discoveries. Tell me this: Why must you look up things to get good at the game? You don't for KIU, SMB, Megaman, and the list goes on. Letting glitches slip by or leaving important moves unexplained is horrible game design.



No, you don't always want to attack or move, and there's more than one way to attack or move. You have exactly two options when in position to L-cancel, and there's almost never a reason not to.

You just listed a bunch of single player games. (I'm not sure what KIU is.)

Why must you look up things? Because the things used to gain an edge on your opponent start out broad- like in Mario Bros- but end up getting deeper and deeper and subtler and subtler and using subtler and subtler mechanics.

Heck, even in Mario 64, it's impossible to do a speedrun without knowing the exploits speedrunners use. Yeah, maybe you could figure some of them out, but you'll never be as good as your friend who has access to the community's compendium of knowledge.

Let's use some other examples, shall we? Street Fighter. Marvel vs Capcom. There aren't "hidden" mechanics that you have to look up to know about. But the tricks and exploits you can create using these mechanics are so complicated and subtle that you would never find them on your own. And you use these to create options in fringe situations which is where your intelligence comes in to play.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

No, you don't always want to attack or move, and there's more than one way to attack or move. You have exactly two options when in position to L-cancel, and there's almost never a reason not to.

This makes no sense either. You can win a match without L-Canceling. You can't win a match without attacking or moving.

 

[RODO]

No, you don't always want to attack or move, and there's more than one way to attack or move. You have exactly two options when in position to L-cancel, and there's almost never a reason not to.

I understand but there are things in other games and in real life that are only beneficial to your needs and there is no reason not to do them. All this is asking us to do is press a shoulder button so I don't see how it's a big deal. I play Brawl and PM and I don't mind it either way. It's not harming the game imo so if it's in then oh well. The people who want to do it will do it and the people who don't probably aren't competitive players anyway.

 

[Praxis]

This makes no sense either. You can win a match without L-Canceling. You can't win a match without attacking or moving.

Technically, you can win a match without moving.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I also want to address one more thing for the "casual players", since it seems like they may have input on the matter.

If you are on an Internet forum discussing smash bros and the intricacies of said game, you are not casual, rather you are far from it. A person who casually plays a video game will probably never dedicate his or her time into speculating the game.

You "casual" players label yourself as such so that you may make ignorant statements towards things you don't understand. You labeling yourself that is by no means a defense mechanism that allows you to make intolerable statements.

So from here on out, if I see someone say "I'm a casual player" I'll see "I suck". You suck, and everyone at some point has, so quit lying to yourself, accept it and move on. You'll improve from that point forward if you are willing to learn.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Technically, you can win a match without moving.

True, but what of the opponent? What if he doesn't want to move? I guess sudden death will settle it.

 

[Starcutter]

I can L-cancel fine in Melee, but I would rather the landing lag or whatever is sped up to the point it's almost like you L-canceled the move.


If people really miss it, they could just hit L and pretend they were doing it.

 

[Praxis]

True, but what of the opponent? What if he doesn't want to move? I guess sudden death will settle it.

Well, then it depends who has a projectile.

Ness is OP in this scenario, though Fox's reflector would be pretty powerful.

 

[Second Power]

Just make L-Cancelling vs. General Reduction an option linked to names. Any issues?

 

[LancerStaff]

This is why casual players shouldn't be posting on these boards about competitive topics.

The fact that the 'other guy' knows about L-Cancelling and can implement it properly, within this example, makes him the better player.

Seriously, guys. If you don't like competitive play, the answer isn't for you to invade a competitive forum and decide it is within your right to change how the world of competitive Smash should work. The answer is to go to a casual board for Smash.

And on a non-smash related topic, this is a very terrible outlook in general. If you think an individual who puts time and effort in to something as an investment to better themselves, whether if it be studying for university courses, practicing that figure skating move you've almost nailed, perfecting your artistic skills, or something as simple as looking up tips and tricks for a video game, deserves to lose to someone else who didn't put an equivalent amount of effort in at some point, you're going to have a rough time with life without being extremely privileged. 99.99% of you are not.

Casual? Oh ho ho. Yeah, no. Been truly studying SSB for the past two years and I can play Melee and Brawl proficiently. Why are you trying to label me as a casual just because I hate one minor aspect of competitive Melee?

Think of it like this: P1 plays SSB for 1000 hours. P2 plays 100. P1 naturally wins by a landslide. But then somebody whispers in P2's ear about L-canceling, and the very next match P1 loses because he doesn't know how to L-cancel. Is P2 really the better player? Or let's say they're playing Goldeneye64. P1 is above and beyond the better player, but P2 found the cheat code for invinciblity and used it. Is P2 the better player because he found one obscure thing P1 didn't?

You just listed a bunch of single player games. (I'm not sure what KIU is.)

Why must you look up things? Because the things used to gain an edge on your opponent start out broad- like in Mario Bros- but end up getting deeper and deeper and subtler and subtler and using subtler and subtler mechanics.

Heck, even in Mario 64, it's impossible to do a speedrun without knowing the exploits speedrunners use. Yeah, maybe you could figure some of them out, but you'll never be as good as your friend who has access to the community's compendium of knowledge.

Let's use some other examples, shall we? Street Fighter. Marvel vs Capcom. There aren't "hidden" mechanics that you have to look up to know about. But the tricks and exploits you can create using these mechanics are so complicated and subtle that you would never find them on your own. And you use these to create options in fringe situations which is where your intelligence comes in to play.

Kid Icarus Uprising. And yes, SM64 and MvC are also flawed because it has those glitches and doesn't explain them.

I understand but there are things in other games and in real life that are only beneficial to your needs and there is no reason not to do them. All this is asking us to do is press a shoulder button so I don't see how it's a big deal. I play Brawl and PM and I don't mind it either way. It's not harming the game imo so if it's in then oh well. The people who want to do it will do it and the people who don't probably aren't competitive players anyway.

Isn't real life, isn't other games. All I'm asking is that Sakurai make it automatic so I don't see how it's a big deal. And I've seen plenty of competitive players that don't want L-canceling, so quit lumping us with casuals, because we're not.

Just make L-Cancelling vs. General Reduction an option linked to names. Any issues?

As long as general reduction isn't worse, I'd be happy. But now we'll have people complaining because L-canceling is useless with the other option around...

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Just make L-Cancelling vs. General Reduction an option linked to names. Any issues?

Absolutely none. Let's both players have what they want without "hurting" the other.

 

[Cap'nChreest]

Think of it like this: P1 plays SSB for 1000 hours. P2 plays 100. P1 naturally wins by a landslide. But then somebody whispers in P2's ear about L-canceling, and the very next match P1 loses because he doesn't know how to L-cancel. Is P2 really the better player? Or let's say they're playing Goldeneye64. P1 is above and beyond the better player, but P2 found the cheat code for invinciblity and used it. Is P2 the better player because he found one obscure thing P1 didn't?

No. Player 2 learned an advanced technique. I wouldn't call l-canceling a cheat code. I can see where you're coming from though. It can give another player an unfair advantage. But so do all advanced techniques. I played Brawl for the longest time. Then I went to the arena and got blasted because I didn't know how to play it correctly. Then I learned how I should play it. Then I started winning. I don't think that argument holds really.

 

[mimgrim]

You just listed a bunch of single player games. (I'm not sure what KIU is.)

Kid Icarus Uprising, which is a mutiplayer game. And a pretty good one. Though I wouldn't call it the best comparison to Smash but it does help his point somewhat, though I never really looked into the competitive side of the game and for all I know there are ATs in the game that aren't explained.

Absolutely none. Let's both players have what they want without "hurting" the other.

My question for that is; how would the competitive community treat it? Would they allow players to chose, in which case why turn on L-cancel when the potential to mess up, even if unlikely, is there, basically why handicap yourself, or would they force L-cancel on for everyone? If it's the former why ever bother having the option? It would be better to just have it or not have it.



Anyway. As someone who has played Gears of War, albeit not competitively (though I really really really want to) due to lack of reliable WiFi. But it does have a mechanic that is comparable to L-cancel. It's called Active Reloading. When you reload your weapon in that game a little bar will appear on the screen with a somewhat medium sized grey section and a small section with the rest being a black section. If you hit the reload button again while the cursor is in the black part of the reload you jam your reload and it takes even longer. If you hit the grey part it speeds up your reload. And if you hit the white part you damage out put increased along with the speed increase. Now this mechanic might be more accepted because it has a risk factor to it, but technically speaking I believe L-cancel does have a risk (albeit much minor) risk to it in that you can't Tech if you get hit during the L-cancel (I know this is the case for PM and I think it is also the case for Melee but I don't remember), but the same principal is still there. There is no reason to not hit the white section and you will always want to and eventually it will become so ingrained into your muscle memory that you can hit the white section without looking at it, though I haven't reached that point yet though. So it would be pretty hypocritical of me to be ok with this mechanic but not with L-cancel, even though I wouldn't care a great deal if it doesn't come back anyway. So really if the GoW mechanic, that I explained, sounds ok to you then I don't see how you could have a problem with L-cancel.

 

[Ravio_Yo]

Think of it like this: P1 plays SSB for 1000 hours. P2 plays 100. P1 naturally wins by a landslide. But then somebody whispers in P2's ear about L-canceling, and the very next match P1 loses because he doesn't know how to L-cancel. Is P2 really the better player?

Could say the same thing about DACUS, short hopping, catching thrown items, and even rolling or air dodging to an extent.

Also, I hardly believe that P1 would go from landslide victory to defeat because of L-Canceling.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

My question for that is; how would the competitive community treat it? Would they allow players to chose, in which case why turn on L-cancel when the potential to mess up, even if unlikely, is there, basically why handicap yourself, or would they force L-cancel on for everyone? If it's the former why ever bother having the option? It would be better to just have it or not have it

Because some of us like to do it manually and some don't.

Offering the option is way better than the crap that pisses some people off. It's the same thing with items or random tripping. Some mind, some don't. Albeit, this is closer to Items. You can choose to have whichever ones you want on during a tourney(if any). And that's fine. But this is a more personal option. By making it by name, only those who want it get it. Everybody else gets auto-cancel. And why not challenge yourself? I prefer that since it gives me full controllable options. It's the same reason I absolutely hate Brawl's Dancing Blade. No effort is needed to actually use it like in Melee. The auto-combos are super lame and boring for me to use. Related, I'd love the option to select stuff like that too, mapping it to a Name.

I dislike the auto-cancel and find it completely useless compared to regular l-canceling. It fails to fix the lag for every character, and giving potential for a player's character to be punished only adds to the game and balances it out. It basically means being good matters in every area. It's not a bad thing to be able to screw up and require training to handle other situations. Also, as pointed out, you don't always l-cancel. Just sometimes when necessary. I don't even do it all the time, depending the move I make. By not l-cancelling, you can even lure your opponent into a false sense of security, and then hit them when they least expect it. It only adds to the experience and gives you more to work with. Auto-cancel doesn't do anything useful in the end to actually add to the game. Might as well not have it at all then.

And people are definitely overstating how much of an impact l-canceling has on a match. It's very little. It can maybe decide a super close match by a tiny degree, but not usually does it matter.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

I don't think that L- Canceling is any different than the instant rev up mechanic in Devil May Cry 4 with Nero.

It gives you a full attack boost if you press L and time the attack right. You can make the same arguments about " never wanting to not doing it" or "adds nothing to the game", but the reality is that it works fine: gives you extended combo attacks, extra power, and allows you to do things a player couldn't normally do without it. Of course you can function without it too.

The difference between this and an L-Cancel is virtually nil. The difference lies in the community response. The adept gamer sees this as a way to improve combat and take the game to the next level. Our community on the other hand will complain about it to death and argue how arbitrary an application is instead of just accepting it for what it is. SF4 community didn't complain about FADC's, so why should we bicker about something that's been around for so long and works?

It's all a matter of perspective.