Landing Lag: A solution?

[Ulevo]

Ulevo, your idea is overly complicated and convoluted.

It sounds that way, but it really isn't. I guess the way I explained the theory behind how it could be applied makes it sound a little more complicated then it actually is. The basis of it is this:

1. The longer an aerial stays out before you land, the less landing lag you have. The shorter you have the aerial stay out before you land, the the more landing lag you have, but there will still landing lag reduced.
2. There's a minimum amount of landing lag that move will have even if you land with the aerial really late to ensure aerials are not completely lag free and unpunishable.
3. What determines this is based on a %. It doesn't have to be.

 

[Big-Cat]

That's nice and all but that's more than currently implemented in Smash 4.

1. Highly rewarding aerials have more recovery when landing if the animation is cut -i.e. a short hop approach.

2. Poking aerials, combo fillers, etc. will not have as much recovery as their rewards aren't as big. Some attacks like Marth's FAir may be an exception due to it having a disjointed hotbox that makes it safer.

What you're suggesting calls for more material to learn than is necessary, especially in terms of matchups. The above is more if-else than what you're suggesting and is easier to apply across matchups.

 

[Ulevo]

That's nice and all but that's more than currently implemented in Smash 4.

1. Highly rewarding aerials have more recovery when landing if the animation is cut -i.e. a short hop approach.

2. Poking aerials, combo fillers, etc. will not have as much recovery as their rewards aren't as big. Some attacks like Marth's FAir may be an exception due to it having a disjointed hotbox that makes it safer.

What you're suggesting calls for more material to learn than is necessary, especially in terms of matchups. The above is more if-else than what you're suggesting and is easier to apply across matchups.

For starters, I don't see what sets the standard for what is and isn't more learning than necessary. This isn't even particularly difficult to understand from a gameplay perspective, especially since it is based on a more intuitive approach to playing, it's just a lot to talk about based on specifics with frame data. Secondly, based on what you've just said, I don't think you understand what I'm talking about because if you did you'd realize there is a big difference between your observations on how Smash 4 conducts things and what I've suggested.

 

[Big-Cat]

The big picture is risk vs. reward. That determines what should or shouldn't have a lot of recovery. It's up to the developers to determine that.

The moment you bring up frame data is when this starts to get complicated. The difference between what's in now and yours is that you try to add additional circumstances for different recovery times. Eventually it becomes random for how much time you save.

 

[Ulevo]

The big picture is risk vs. reward. That determines what should or shouldn't have a lot of recovery. It's up to the developers to determine that.

Okay, but this is a hypothetical discussion. I hardly see how the reality that the developers make all the choices has any weight bearing on what we discuss here. That's kind of irrelevant. And as it pertains to risk versus reward, this suggestion promotes and has its basis centered around the idea of risk versus reward.

The moment you bring up frame data is when this starts to get complicated. The difference between what's in now and yours is that you try to add additional circumstances for different recovery times. Eventually it becomes random for how much time you save.

I'm bringing up frame data to more accurately illustrate the idea to those people who would appreciate such specifics. Like, this isn't complicated stuff. I'm just talking about frames for moves. It's not like I'm talking about coding.

And no, it wouldn't be random for how much time you save. The entire point behind this idea is that the player chooses how much time he wants to save on the ground when landing by choosing how much time he spends in the air. That's a player choice, focused around allocating advantages. You know, risk versus reward. Do I want to fast fall my aerial so I strike faster with longer landing lag because I know when to hit my opponent? Or do use the soft part of my sex kick to create an opening for a follow up because my ending lag is reduced?

 

[ryuu seika]

No, this wouldn't work for the same reason I think auto cancelling is a worse mechanic than l cancelling It. It punishes those who wish to speed up the game with a quick air move and it essentially has no choice in why you do it you just do when you can. is highly hidden and restricting what frames it is possible to get low landing lag is just bad design since it is even more hidden. Not only that, it is something a casual player would actively have to learn and obviously wouldn't know about beforehand. It is better to just decrease landing lag across the board so it satisfies competitive play and is very accessible to casual play.

Umm, no. Landing lag decreasing as time spent in the air goes up is way more intuitive than a secret input window will ever be. Its effects would not be too big a deal at entry level but would be enough that repeat players learnt what was happening and from there could choose to put the effort in to learn it. I don't see how you could possibly think L-cancelling less confusing than this.

I've already made a post about what I think would be the best solution for landing lag on aerials so I'm just going to repost it
I prefer that than your method just because it gives a you a little more in terms of options instead of just having it automatically do it all the time.

Both ideas sound equally good to me.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

If this is implemented, characters with sex kicks will be screwed.

 

[smashbro29]

You wouldn't for every aerial if you apply my suggestion and talor it to characters based on the values of the aerial.

What this does is create a risk and reward system with specific aerial attacks. Certain aerials would and should be safe regardless, but others would be more involved in the system. This would create really interesting interactions with things like like Pikachu's dair, or attacks that have strong and soft hit box properties. It will also change how the combo game works.

It's more fun for players and less work for developers to just make stuff fast.

 

[smashbro29]

Yeah, fast and offensive for exactly one player and hitstun city for the other. The exact opposite of boring...

Combos don't last that long and you can DI out of things. You're never not playing.

 

[Black Hayato PTA]

It's not a bad idea. I think people aren't really getting it though. (Correct me if I'm wrong Ulevo) They seem to be saying there's a baseline landing lag that would already exist as a maximum so you wouldn't have more landing lag you'd only have that baseline or better. From what i understand they are saying if you make it through 50% of the move half of that baseline will go into effect (30 frame landing lag would now be 15 frames since you did half of it in the air) and possibly a cap to how many frames that can be shaved no matter how low it is to keep the move balanced (90% of the move done in air on a 30 frame landing lag move still results in 6 frames instead of 3 since 6 frames is cap for that move).

So in short, The movement lag would either A) remain the same as it is now / barely change when you do it too low or B) get faster when more of the moves is completed in air before hitting the ground. This would make no move worse just only better.

I've personally been in the just make "L-canceling" a known tech in an advanced tech tutorial (make it sound super expert so casuals feel accomplished that they are MLG360N0Scop3 pro now) with more frames to make it easier to do (higher frame window and project M style flash when done correctly) and a clear defined way to do it or just reduce landing lag across the board to make diff character types. But this is a novel solution that I think is legit and not very complicated at all lol.

That being said, the landing lag might be there for a reason that we're unaware of (perhaps more aggressive ground games?) so we'll just have to see whats going on when it's out, but yea landing lag in my opinion might need a little love.

 

[Kamiko]

@ Ulevo : That percentage system is a great idea. Mind if I add that to the OP?