Let's talk about L-Canceling.

[Vkrm]

Strong bad really doesn't like me. Lol

 

[Kink-Link5]

The point is that almost nothing will change in high level play, but everyone else will be a lot better off. The only thing that what you call "rewarding dedication" will do is drive away people who don't want to put up with learning pointless things.

What you consider pointless and what other people consider pointless are not the same.



I'm not saying the anti L-canceling stance is wrong. Just that there haven't been any sensible arguments against the mechanic itself.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I don't consider it pointless. The top players miss enough cancels for it to be relevant. I really don't like the idea of any scrub being able to combo me and pressure my shield.

Why do you feel cheated when other players are simply using the tools given to them? Do you feel you need that crutch in order to win? Do you think that you would be able to perform on the same level if you couldn't rely on opponents messing up with no help from you?

 

[Vkrm]

I had to overcome the same skill gaps. Since I play Marth I ll be needing those mistakes from my opponent if I want to win. Thank god melee makes it hard to play a perfect fox. My opponent did miss said cancel but I bet I helped the situation by mixing up my defensive options. This is more or less the same argument from before about how manual cancels keeps things fair.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I had to overcome the same skill gaps.

So what you're saying is that you're just salty and want others to suffer the same as you?

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Frame perfect Fox isn't even a phantom threat in a Smash 4 discussion because they would obviously change characters in accordance to the way the engine operates. Try again, please.

 

[Vkrm]

So what you're saying is that you're just salty and want others to suffer the same as you?

No, not salty. But if I did it then it should be easy for everbody who has real talent.

 

[Vkrm]

Frame perfect Fox isn't even a phantom threat in a Smash 4 discussion because they would obviously change characters in accordance to the way the engine operates. Try again, please.

There probably won't be any changes to the air game in smash 4 from brawl. If my previous post was irrelevant then so is this whole thread. It's aimed at lcanceling in general. We could put tn either melee or brawl discussion and it would fit just as well.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

No, not salty. But if I did it then it should be easy for everbody else.

That is salt.

Everything about the way you phrased it is you being against the idea that others shouldn't have to do what could easily become unnecessary work. You want others to have to go through the same experience when, in reality, that experience drives away part of your potential player base.

In your last two posts, you haven't been phrasing your posts in order to use them as an example. You've not been putting forth "I am proof that it can be done, so everyone else can do it to and we don't lose players." For the record, that is also a bad assumption. No, what you've been doing is saying "I would resent other people being able to bypass putting in the work I had to despite the fact that said work could easily be removed. Why? Because I had to and so should they."

That, my friend, is definitely salt.

 

[Strong Badam]

Strong bad really doesn't like me. Lol

You're correct, I don't like you very much, and I'll explain why. You are one of many in the Melee community who realize that Melee is a great competitive game (probably because it's really fun and has a decent effort -> satisfaction ratio), but have completely no ****ing idea why it is actually a great competitive game, and your hilariously bad arguments consistently represent that fact. You insult the game every time you imply that Melee would be a significantly worse game if L-Canceling were automatic, or any similar argument (including that Smash 4 would be a worse game with Auto-L-Canceling than with Manual L-Canceling). Many high-top level players in both the 64 and Melee community recognize that L-Canceling is, for all intents and purposes, mindless and pointless as a mechanic, and they are all able to do it with 99.9% consistency in a tournament setting.

I'm going to pick apart a post or two of yours, then likely ignore list you, because I don't have the patience to engage someone in debate who is both terrible at debating and finds a cellular phone a suitable medium through which to debate.

I don't consider it pointless. The top players miss enough cancels for it to be relevant.

Starting off very strong there, Vkrm. How many misses is "relevant"? 2? 3? 5? Is it per minute, per match, per tournament? What if I think a pro player needs to miss 100% of their L-Cancels for missing to be relevant? It's entirely subjective.
A completely arbitrary statement, so absolutely useless.

I really don't like the idea of any scrub being able to combo me and pressure my shield.

....what? I... You-what.

Do you fully comprehend what this sentence means? You're implying that one aspect of having control of your character is the only one. Suddenly, because L-Canceling is no longer manual, your opponent, who hasn't played the game for very long (because he would need to be able to L-Cancel) is able to consistently space moves in a string, reacting to DI all the while, timing fastfalls correctly as well. And when hitting your shield, he's able to shine -> jump cancel with a shorthop -> aerial -> fastfall, mixing up the timings of the aerials and fastfalling, all of which he's suddenly capable of doing because L-Canceling is no longer manual. Yes. No. You're completely belittling everything else that goes into controlling your character in SSBM and I won't allow it. If you love SSBM so much, stop insulting it in this despicable manner.

I know I said I might pick apart two of your posts, but I don't want to subject myself to that level of stupidity again, so I'm just going to make a blanket paragraph here as to why L-Canceling sucks.

Advanced Techniques are important. We know this. However, L-Canceling is a very unique AT. And not in a good way. For Dash Dance, Wavedash, FastFall, Shorthop, etc.... they're all extra options that you can do or not do. The fact that you can decide between a shorthop and a full hop adds depth because now every time you jump, your decision tree branches. However, L-canceling... you never decide to not L-cancel. The mechanic doesn't add depth because right before you land, there isn't a decision tree, you just do it. Furthermore, unlike wavedashing, fastfall, etc. which are all mostly positioning tools, your opponent cannot interact with your L-Cancel. Like, if someone wavedashes back and you overshoot with an aerial to catch it, you've successfully interacted with and countered their WD back. There's literally nothing you can do to "punish" someone for L-Canceling. That on top of decision tree stuff is why L-Canceling sucks.
And don't bring up random dodging with landlag animations, it's not relevant, and I've known about it longer than you've been on Smashboards.

Hope that answers your question, Ryker.

 

[Vkrm]

I've already explained that my main reason for wanting l cancel to remain the way it is to keep the space animals from ****** the entirety of the cast. This argument only really works if you assume new players aren't gonna be able to learn lcancel which they can, I only wanted to provide evidence by using something I'm familiar with. That would be me.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

There probably won't be any changes to the air game in smash 4 from brawl. If my previous post was irrelevant then so is this whole thread. It's aimed at lcanceling in general. We could put tn either melee or brawl discussion and it would fit just as well.

Then why are you still arguing with me? You're backpedaling now. I've made it clear I'm talking about Smash 4 and you've made no objections. I've pointed out that right now execution is a balancing factor in Melee, but that that is bad game design. Any sweeping change is going to have to include balance tweaks to avoid it breaking the game, and I've been pointing that out over and over and over. So either you're backpedaling out claiming misinterpretation or you are rather dense in thinking that automated L-Canceling would be impossible to balance.

You STILL have not established why L-Canceling is a positive net gain.

You've pointed out that you can tilt your shield and when I said that it wasn't a significant interaction, you stopped challenging it.
You've said that it's a balancing factor. I've pointed out that it is bad game design and that in a better made game, L-Canceling would not be needed for balance.
You've said that other players should have to go through the same experiences you have and that is just you being petty and certainly not a reason to keep L-Canceling.

I would ask you to show me which of those is reason enough to continue contributing to a tech skill barrier or to bring up a new point that can outweigh the players lost on entry-level.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I've already explained that my main reason for wanting l cancel to remain the way it is to keep the space animals from ****** the entirety of the cast. This argument only really works if you assume new players aren't gonna be able to learn lcancel which they can, I only wanted to provide evidence by using something I'm familiar with. That would be me.

It's not though.

New players can =/= New players will

Spacies will not **** half the cast in a game that has automated L-Canceling because their options would be tailored to it. We've been through this one already. Execution, as a balancing factor, is TERRIBLE game design.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Thanks, Strongbad. I was simply curious.

 

[Vkrm]

If you're going to adjust the spacies why tweak the entire game to be less based on air moves. The way melee has it set the spacies are the best but they don't dominate the rest of the high tier.

What's wrong with cell phones strong bad?

 

[Strong Badam]

I'll answer that when you respond to the rest of my post.

 

[Vkrm]

Its really long though..... I'll try.

 

[Strong Badam]

And so you've answered your own question. That is what's wrong with using a phone for debate. My post is not very long.

 

[Vkrm]

Gonna be pulling a master knight for the sake of convenience. Sorry gents.

You insult the game every time you imply that Melee would be a significantly worse game if L-Canceling were automatic, or any similar argument (including that Smash 4 would be a worse game with Auto-L-Canceling than with Manual L-Canceling).

I'm only arguing for melee esque cancels in a game that resembles melee. I'm not trying to get lcanceling into smash 4. My only goal this entire time was to point out the purpose it serves in the game it's actually in.

Many high-top level players in both the 64 and Melee community recognize that L-Canceling is, for all intents and purposes, mindless and pointless as a mechanic, and they are all able to do it with 99.9% consistency in a tournament setting.
I don't know about that. Im sure some people agree with me on the balance thing, and in my hood, *****s die over that 1 percent.



Starting off very strong there, Vkrm. How many misses is "relevant"? 2? 3? 5? Is it per minute, per match, per tournament?
I'd say just missing 1 is enough if your opponent plans on missing 0 when he nets that punish.

What if I think a pro player needs to miss 100% of their L-Cancels for missing to be relevant? It's entirely subjective.
A completely arbitrary statement, so absolutely useless.
this is stupid. I'd like what I said above to point out that anything more than zero missed cancels could lose the match for you, but its very rare that I post and people interpret it as what I really meant to say.


Do you fully comprehend what this sentence means? You're implying that one aspect of having control of your character is the only one.
What? How did I imply that

Suddenly, because L-Canceling is no longer manual, your opponent, who hasn't played the game for very long (because he would need to be able to L-Cancel) is able to consistently space moves in a string, reacting to DI all the while, timing fastfalls correctly as well. And when hitting your shield, he's able to shine -> jump cancel with a shorthop -> aerial -> fastfall, mixing up the timings of the aerials and fastfalling, all of which he's suddenly capable of doing because L-Canceling is no longer manual Yes. No. You're completely belittling everything else that goes into controlling your character in SSBM and I won't allow it.

None of that is particularly hard difficult as long as were talking about shield pressure. As long as DI is a part of the equation I guess I agree.

If you love SSBM so much, stop insulting it in this despicable manner.
I know I said I might pick apart two of your posts, but I don't want to subject myself to that level of stupidity again, so I'm just going to make a blanket paragraph here as to why L-Canceling sucks.

Advanced Techniques are important. We know this. However, L-Canceling is a very unique AT. And not in a good way. For Dash Dance, Wavedash, FastFall, Shorthop, etc.... they're all extra options that you can do or not do. The fact that you can decide between a shorthop and a full hop adds depth because now every time you jump, your decision tree branches. However, L-canceling... you never decide to not L-cancel. The mechanic doesn't add depth because right before you land, there isn't a decision tree, you just do it. Furthermore, unlike wavedashing, fastfall, etc. which are all mostly positioning tools, your opponent cannot interact with your L-Cancel. Like, if someone wavedashes back and you overshoot with an aerial to catch it, you've successfully interacted with and countered their WD back. There's literally nothing you can do to "punish" someone for L-Canceling. That on top of decision tree stuff is why L-Canceling sucks.

A very brawlist way of seeing it. Games like street fighter and marvel have no scruples about giving the more technical player the advantage in a few circumstances. Not mention you lose alot of chances to **** up your opponents cancel when the game cancels his lag for him.

And don't bring up random dodging with landlag animations, it's not relevant, and I've known about it longer than you've been on Smashboards.

If you already new about the reason not to attempt an cancel why wasn't this mentioned earlier when you said that there aren't reasons not to lcancel. I guess that's because l canceling is still the way to go.

My responses are in bold. Now i know why a cell phone doesn't really help me win arguments on SWF.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Lolllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

"brawlist" now i've seen everything

 

[Vkrm]

Did strong bad block me already? That would be unfortunate.

 

[Biz_R_0]

brawlist

You do know that Strong Bad is a Melee Back Roomer, right?

 

[Vkrm]

Im aware.



This is a bad feeling. strong bad always seems to catch me at my worst. This not a good way to start building a rep in smash.

 

[-LzR-]

By the way Vkrm. Why do you assume Lcanceling is in any way related to the skill of the player? Even if someone had no idea how to play Melee, didn't know anything about the game, he could Lcancel. It's not like after a certain point of skill level you just suddenly learn to Lcancel. It's just another annoying step that everyone has to do and it's fine, but the way it was done in Melee isn't really the best way to handle it.
If you think spacies would **** everyone if Lcanceling was automatic, are you saying space animals should be banned?

 

[DrinkingFood]

Vkrm please stop posting. People like you give Melee players a really, really bad name.

Not gonna lie, I too have found most of his arguments very weak, or not real arguments at all, regardless of me taking the same stance as him on the matter.

 

[Vkrm]

I think there ought to be a tutorial explaining exactly what l canceling is in the how to play video. They should be grouped in with things like jumping, shielding, and junk. I freaking love the flashy thing that happens in pm. That should have been in melee.

Let's they could put auto-lcanceling in melee. I wouldn't really want fox or falco banned, but I would be switching mains real quick.

 

[Vkrm]

Not gonna lie, I too have found most of his arguments very weak, or not real arguments at all, regardless of me taking the same stance as him on the matter.

You're only saying that cause strong bad kicked my **** in. I guess I should try to get my ideas across more clearly. I don't think its my ideas that are wrong, I just do a bad job of expressing myself via text.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Noirscythe is just as bad if not worse, Vkrm. Same with most arguing against L-canceling.

Same with most people who argue about anything. I'll get on my little structure functionalist soap box here.

Without fully understanding the mentality behind why something exists, understanding its purpose and its reasoning, you can not make an accurate analysis of it. This doesn't mean being well versed in the application of a subject, but it does mean being well informed and having this mentality in analyzing anything. If you don't want to ask why something exists, you can't properly say whether its existence is a definitively good thing or not.

Like I and most people with a bit of sensibility have said here, the stance on L-canceling one holds is merely a result of where they want to draw the line between execution and feedback. You do things, the game provides feedback. You do more/other things, the game gives different feedback. How many inputs is acceptable for a certain feedback? That's the line drawn.

There isn't even an argument that can be made to persuade someone whether it's a good or bad thing, because it's entirely a personal issue where a person draws the line.

line

drawing

artform

examining

structure functionalism

dumb threads

 

[DrinkingFood]

You're only saying that cause strong bad kicked my **** in. I guess I should try to get my ideas across more clearly. I don't think its my ideas that are wrong, I just do a bad job of expressing myself via text.

Correction, I only decided to post that because Strong Bad said it. I'd been thinking as much since your first few posts in this thread as well as in the P:M thread, but didn't feel the need to voice my frustration until someone else expressed the same.

 

[Arcansi]

How many inputs is acceptable for a certain feedback? That's the line drawn.

There isn't even an argument that can be made to persuade someone whether it's a good or bad thing, because it's entirely a personal issue where a person draws the line.

This is something I don't think I understand yet, and you seem like a sensible person on that side of the fence, so.

Why do you think L-cancelling is a good thing?

Not extensively looking to argue here, unless you bring something up that's wrong. I'll respect your opinion.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I feel like it aptly rewards a demand for execution in a fast-paced environment, and that it's effect on the game (Being safer aerials preformed closer to the ground) is a positive one. Even though it is executed more poorly than it could be, low lag aerials in general is not the best alternative anymore than super laggy aerials with no way to lower them is.

Another way to see it is "Why do you think automatically low landing lag is a bad thing?" which I feel is more to-the-point.

Low lag overall, well, more depends on the environment. Brawl's nature is to always go back to neutral after each hit, so the aerials could well be lagless, and be so automatically, and it would have little or no negative effect with a positive effect on the neutral game.

In a game where punishment and reward is stronger though, I feel that the demand for technical precision is a vital component to the input:feedback ratio. When playing a long match or when nerves become an issue, combos get dropped and L-cancels do get missed in a competitive setting, and this technical error is a big part of what can even the playing field in a game where the neutral game DOESN'T always return after each hit.

There's also the small amount of variability that goes into L-canceling's timing when interacting with shield angling, spot dodging, and crouch canceling that I feel could be easily expanded upon in the right environment.

I guess I didn't really answer your question very well, but I feel like the answer to it isn't really one that can be expressed easily with my lexicon. It's just where I sit on the issue of the level of technical demand in relation to reward it provides. I don't find that its demand is very large, nor do I feel its reward is relatively large.

 

[Biz_R_0]

Arcansi, thank you for posting something other than "Vkrm is dumb". I really don't see why that even needs to be said or how it's a special case, a good portion of the people I see daily on Smashboards are about the same level intelligence, which is why I didn't have an account until yesterday.

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

It did give me a great signature though.



Am I to assume you ignored me because you have no counter argument?

Kind of in the same way that I ignored that kid Master Knight DH? lol

Well no, it's a little bit different. It's just that trying to reason with you is like trying to play this game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dwfMkCg36U

Noirscythe is just as bad if not worse, Vkrm.

This is completely false. I'm good at logic and argumentation. It's the only thing true in the world.

 

[Big-Cat]

IDK about your logic, but your attitude is utter ****.

 

[Vkrm]

I feel like noirscythe cares more about winning the argument then he cares about actually being right. When he's representing an argument that is proven to be ineffective at demonstrating his points he defaults to insults. I mean it's funny, but everytime it happens we lose sight of what were actually supposed to be discussing. Noirscythe, do you feel the need to respond to rykers or strongbads post? You should be able to find some holes.

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

Starting off very strong there, Vkrm. How many misses is "relevant"? 2? 3? 5? Is it per minute, per match, per tournament? What if I think a pro player needs to miss 100% of their L-Cancels for missing to be relevant? It's entirely subjective.
A completely arbitrary statement, so absolutely useless.

How many times does the player have to lose for it to be relevant? 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9? It's entirely subjective, amirite?

....what? I... You-what.

Do you fully comprehend what this sentence means? You're implying that one aspect of having control of your character is the only one. Suddenly, because L-Canceling is no longer manual, your opponent, who hasn't played the game for very long (because he would need to be able to L-Cancel) is able to consistently space moves in a string, reacting to DI all the while, timing fastfalls correctly as well. And when hitting your shield, he's able to shine -> jump cancel with a shorthop -> aerial -> fastfall, mixing up the timings of the aerials and fastfalling, all of which he's suddenly capable of doing because L-Canceling is no longer manual. Yes. No. You're completely belittling everything else that goes into controlling your character in SSBM and I won't allow it. If you love SSBM so much, stop insulting it in this despicable manner.

Yeah, it's paradise right there, I envision it. I could just do drillshine infinites and falco shield pressure against people my level before any of us even develop the tech-skill to do anything out of shield.

Advanced Techniques are important. We know this. However, L-Canceling is a very unique AT. And not in a good way. For Dash Dance, Wavedash, FastFall, Shorthop, etc.... they're all extra options that you can do or not do. The fact that you can decide between a shorthop and a full hop adds depth because now every time you jump, your decision tree branches. However, L-canceling... you never decide to not L-cancel. The mechanic doesn't add depth because right before you land, there isn't a decision tree, you just do it. Furthermore, unlike wavedashing, fastfall, etc. which are all mostly positioning tools, your opponent cannot interact with your L-Cancel. Like, if someone wavedashes back and you overshoot with an aerial to catch it, you've successfully interacted with and countered their WD back. There's literally nothing you can do to "punish" someone for L-Canceling. That on top of decision tree stuff is why L-Canceling sucks.

Look at this man, laying it down. I'm honestly shocked no one even brought up this argument before. Shame on you guys.

This guy has all his words at the bullseye-- he's absolutely right. We should make perfect-shielding automatic just like he says.

There's literally nothing you can do to "punish" someone for L-Canceling.

And don't bring up random dodging with landlag animations,

it's not relevant, and I've known about it longer than you've been on Smashboards.

How many years does it take for it be relevant? 1,2,3,4,5,6,7?

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

I feel like noirscythe cares more about winning the argument then he cares about actually being right. When he's representing an argument that is proven to be ineffective at demonstrating his points he defaults to insults. I mean it's funny, but everytime it happens we lose sight of what were actually supposed to be discussing. Noirscythe, do you feel the need to respond to rykers or strongbads post? You should be able to find some holes.

No, I actually care more about logic. If someone presents an argument that logically disproves mine, I'll shift to it once I understand it.

I acquaint yourself with what the word "prove" means and how it works. It's actually quite different from "assert with utter unwarranted confidence in a way it will probably impress the uneducated."

 

[Kink-Link5]

No, I actually care more about logic. If someone presents an argument that logically disproves mine, I'll shift to it once I understand it.

I acquaint yourself with what the word "prove" means and how it works. It's actually quite different from "assert with utter unwarranted confidence in a way it will probably impress the uneducated."

That's all well and fine, but the nature and cause of someone's stance in this discussion isn't something that can be persuaded in one direction or the other by argument. Neither side is right in this particular case. Or most cases really. That's why debates don't award points for being right, but rather for presenting your argument and why you stand where you do on it properly. "I've decided I'm right until I can be proven wrong" sounds like angry 16-year-old logic, no offense.

 

[Arcansi]

No, I actually care more about logic. If someone presents an argument that logically disproves mine, I'll shift to it once I understand it.

I acquaint yourself with what the word "prove" means and how it works. It's actually quite different from "assert with utter unwarranted confidence in a way it will probably impress the uneducated."

>'I care about logic'.

>'I don't like YOUR logic, so I'm going to ignore it.'

And you..study this kind of stuff?

Where in this did they teach you to ignore legitimate arguments?

 

[Kink-Link5]

I hope you got what you were looking for from my post, Arcansi.