Let's talk about L-Canceling.

[DMG]

It's only seems meanless if you're already convinced that tech skill is a bad thing. Even then it's take it or leave it with the pros not out weighing the cons of auto canceling. There maybe a better alternative for endlag but its certainly not auto canceling or screwing with the frame data.

What are the cons of auto cancelling though? It's not as if when you take away the L cancel tech barrier, all of a sudden everyone can play like robot M2K Marth mode. Taking away L cancelling and replacing it with auto cancel/less lag universally does not mean players will be on the same page strategically or technically as the pros. Taking it out will not turn every Falcon Dthrow into a Hax/Darkrain combo video. It won't lead to every Fox player ever being able to waveshine flawlessly. Etc.


I feel that there are already enough gameplay "nuances" or facets to master that can visibly put a pro over a different player, that you don't need L cancelling to "separate" the lower players from someone actually good. Knowing which DI or SDI is best for the situation, knowing your CC options intimately, being able to on the spot vary and extend your combo based on their weight, character, %, and DI/SDI choices. Knowing how to edge guard and/or recover optimally vs the cast. Knowing stage boundaries and features. Having strategy for baiting and for approaching. Knowing your OOS options and how their effectiveness may change based on the other character.


To me, it doesn't serve to enrich the game when you have an alternative that arguably would then let players focus more on the "next step" of gameplay and get some of their strategy and combos down better to begin with.

 

[Vkrm]

I agree that smash would have depth without l canceling. I just don't think it's nessessary to lower the barrier for entry when it's already pretty low compaired to the likes of street fighter and marvel. And on top of that it's satisfying to successfully l cancel. Overall I'm not sure if the game would be any better without it than it already is.

 

[Delta-cod]

Please read arguments before assuming anything about them.

If this is directed at me, I believe you should be the one following the thread more closely. Behold:

Yes, I'm quite the looker.

Auto canceling would **** up the balance between offense and defense.

Taking away the chance of potentially mistiming a cancel would muck up all kinds of things and make offense vs defensive lopsided imo. There's that and that l canceling happens to feel really good because of how intuitive the comands for SHFFL'ing are. Smash 4 doesn't need L cancel per say, buy they planned on making air moves AC, I'd ask why stop there. Why not just shift smash towards having a more dynamic ground game with all aerials move keeping their endlag intact? At that point it wouldn't really feel like smash to me so they might as well give me something new.

Form an actual argument.

No, if you do that then, like, 10 aerials will be more vulnerable to one OoS option. Also, if you don't agree then you just suck and you're johnning.

This post means absolutely nothing because you're assuming that the balancing occurred and that this was the result of it.

Also, it assumes that there's something wrong with having 10 aerials (in a game with 30 characters, there are 150 aerials) become more vulnerable to OOS options. Maybe you just shouldn't use those aerials against a shield, and try a better, safer option? After all, in a well balanced game, that's what would be possible.

I also approve of your personal attack of my character. It sure did make your point look stronger.

 

[DMG]

All you do is plank the edge with eggs Delta-Cod. Attack... SUCCESSFUL!

<3

 

[Zekersaurus]

There's nothing wrong with shields doing their job. If you don't wanna keep getting punished for attacking your opponent's shield then time your better instead of relying on a game mechanic to save you.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Except people at the top level still miss l cancels.

And brawl does suck so your argument is wrong.

cause the top level melee community is still years away from playing the actual game because of how technically difficult it is. But we're talking about a mature meta.

 

[-LzR-]

Powershielding is a 4 frame window in brawl and 2 in melee, bizarro.

I think 2 frames was for projectiles. For other moves, Melees powershield is easier. The reason why it feels harder is because the moment you press L the powershield mode activates, meaning if you hold L when you are in the air, land and start shielding, you cannot powershield anymore. In Brawl powershielding begins the moment your shield pops up so it appears more common to just hold L and get a powershield immediately. Oh and the lightshielding thing also makes thing harder.
In Melee I hold R when I input my controller so it removes the option to ligthshield from that button and it really does make powershielding seem to be as easy as it is in Brawl.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

There's nothing wrong with shields doing their job. If you don't wanna keep getting punished for attacking your opponent's shield then time your better instead of relying on a game mechanic to save you.

This is kind of how I feel too, I don't understand all the hate for brawl's shields. I like melee's and 64's too, and find them to both be pretty valid ways to approach defense, but brawl's shields are fine too. Melee players dramatically overstate how safe they are, yes they are very strong, but almost every good character (and several bad ones) have strong anti-shield tools, you just have to know what they are instead of hitting shields with anything because it is almost always safe to do so.

Unless, you're playing MK, then you can just do anything.

 

[Ove]

SSB64's shield useful for defense? I disagree. It's good for shield dash, otherwise I wouldn't recommend using it too much.

 

[DMG]

64 and shielding never go together. Shielding has got to be one of the worst options in 64, you're literally better off dashing jumping attacking or eating a ham sandwich. Shield stun in 64 is so massive, I'm almost positive you can Falcon punch a shield, then run up and grab the guy while he's still in shield lag. You can spam some Utilts on shield and guarantee a shield break. Guaranteed grabs for the attacker on like 60% of stuff no problem.

If you mean the actual mechanics of blocking an attack, sure. Shields worked fine in 64 in that regard. But shielding as a defensive option was ****in terrible and was near equal to standing there and getting hit in the first place in many cases.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

If you mean the actual mechanics of blocking an attack, sure.

yep

10char

 

[Nintendo 64]

For me, the shield mechanics of smash 64 is perfect, not so safe when your adversary is a djc dair happy Ness.

 

[Biz_R_0]

@Delta I wasn't being serious, I was mocking the people who seriously think that's a good argument. C'mon, I've been against L-cancelling all thread.

 

[DrinkingFood]

cause the top level melee community is still years away from playing the actual game because of how technically difficult it is.

I hope you don't actually believe this
because it's dead wrong

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

cause the top level melee community is still years away from playing the actual game because of how technically difficult it is. But we're talking about a mature meta.

Not sure what let up to this, but as I understand it this feels sort of true. At least, I think players who are still playing will come a long way in future. There are many things which are difficult to do consistently that you do so a few people managing to pull off fairly regularly. Shield drop into aerials or powershield projectiles, etc.

 

[Johnknight1]

What are the cons of auto cancelling though? It's not as if when you take away the L cancel tech barrier, all of a sudden everyone can play like robot M2K Marth mode. Taking away L cancelling and replacing it with auto cancel/less lag universally does not mean players will be on the same page strategically or technically as the pros. Taking it out will not turn every Falcon Dthrow into a Hax/Darkrain combo video. It won't lead to every Fox player ever being able to waveshine flawlessly. Etc.

I feel that there are already enough gameplay "nuances" or facets to master that can visibly put a pro over a different player, that you don't need L cancelling to "separate" the lower players from someone actually good. Knowing which DI or SDI is best for the situation, knowing your CC options intimately, being able to on the spot vary and extend your combo based on their weight, character, %, and DI/SDI choices. Knowing how to edge guard and/or recover optimally vs the cast. Knowing stage boundaries and features. Having strategy for baiting and for approaching. Knowing your OOS options and how their effectiveness may change based on the other character.

To me, it doesn't serve to enrich the game when you have an alternative that arguably would then let players focus more on the "next step" of gameplay and get some of their strategy and combos down better to begin with.

To sum this all up, L-cancelling is inefficient. It is something that should be done automatically because there is literally no consequence for doing it right. Which is exactly why it would be preferably if we just had minimal air-to-land aerial vulnerable frames as if we were always L-cancelling (aka automatic L-cancelling). It would lead to more offense, and it rewards players for attacking in the air and on the ground, which itself rewards offense (and without offense, smash has no action).

Brawl would be quite a bit better IMO if it had the Melee-esk frames (as if L-cancelling was automatic), and the offense would be quite a bit better IMO.

 

[DrinkingFood]

ITT: People only look at l-canceling from the attackers side and ignore the defender
not theory bros-ing hard enough

 

[Vkrm]

@ John knight what l canceling actually does is emphasize deliberate inputs and precise timing. Brawl reduced everything to a choice. That's not the proper way to view l cancel. Its not about if you should or should not. It's about if you can. Same as perfect shielding or teching off the stage. You could reduce teching to basically pressing l to not die, still i don't think we would want that to be automatic.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

ITT melee fans pretend the defender has any significant impact on l-cancelling to make it appear more involving than it actually is

 

[Vkrm]

ITT melee fans pretend the defender has any significant impact on l-cancelling to make it appear more involving than it actually is

It's pretty involving dog. That's why even top players can occasionally miss a cancel. Really think about how many different options a shielding player has to adjust when hitlag activates. If aerials AC'ed all the situations would be identical to the attacker because the game is going to cancel his lag for him.

 

[DrinkingFood]

High light shield / high full shield / mid or forward) light shield / mid or forward full shield / whiff / hit all have different L-cancel timings
Of course you mostly see only full shields used unless someone wants to get pushed off an edge (because of the additional block stun) and the difference between high full shield and mid light shield is negligible or non-existent (idk frame data but they look about the same height) but that still gives the attacker a lot of options to make the opponent miss an l-cancel

So realistically there are 3 options there, excluding getting hit, to make your opponent whiff an l-cancel. But that's better than the 0 options provided by either auto lag reduction (favoring the attacker always) or lack of any lag reduction (favoring the defender always). Depending on the attacker's jump height, attack's block lag, and other factors, however, I have no doubt that some characters have a very specific (one or two frames at most) timing during which they will l-cancel at the end of the window if they whiff and at the beginning if they hit a shield, a window which I have no doubt technically adept players could hit, especially using characters will easy shffls such as the spacies/falcon. Other characters, based on the same factosr, probably have enough of a difference that you can react to the blocklag and input an l-cancel a second time (since there is no fail window) in order to be safer on landing.

How to solve these? Not remove l-canceling, but actually make the timing stricter (maybe 4 aerial frames+landing frame instead of 6+1) and add a fail window before it, probably of the same duration for consistency, unless balancing testing shows otherwise.
I would also, however, be in favor of adding situations where characters gain by not l-canceling, such as more attacks having landing hitboxes when not l-canceled, and by losing those hitboxes when l-canceling. Not every attack needs these, we aren't trying to make Super Bland Bros 4 of course, but most characters could have at least one, someone like GaW or Wario could get like as much as 4, and everywhere in between.

I also want to make clear that respective sides of the discussion arguing "there's never a time you don't want to do it" and "it adds more technical skill to the game" are using bad arguments, especially the former, given above.

EDIT:
I finally made a serious post, happy Bizarro?

EDIT2:
Also wanted to make clear that some of the pro-l-cancelers (possibly including myself) may have exaggerated the desire to see l-canceling return in some form, but it's mostly to avoid appearing apathetic. We do care, but I think we realize it's not the end of the series as we know it, even if we do think it'd be for the worse.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I think it's also pretty universally agreed-on by supporters of the technique that its execution is what is poorly handled, not its inclusion. Lack of a fail window is a genuine concern, but it isn't something that can't be addressed, and solutions have been proposed and ignored/dismissed in this thread.

I don't think anyone is against anti-mash mechanics, for example.

 

[Delta-cod]

No but actually, why can't all the aerials just have balanced landing lag?

 

[Vkrm]

No but actually, why can't all the aerials just have balanced landing lag?

Why? Not everybody is convinced that execution is a bad thing.

 

[Delta-cod]

I'm not even saying that execution is bad.

What's the point of having L-Canceling in if the game can just be balanced to not have it in? This literally beats every argument I've seen for the mechanic EXCEPT the execution one.

Why can't we balance L-Canceling away and then put more thought into execution of other aspects of the game?

Why is the execution of L-Canceling specifically so important?

Why do I feel like you think I'm arguing against all execution ever?

 

[Vkrm]

The game is better with it than without it.

 

[Delta-cod]

So what you're saying is that you don't have a real answer.

 

[El Duderino]

I'd say you are both right. The execution and variety L-canceling adds is a good thing. Makes matches more interesting when there's some reasonably challenging technique to execute or mess up. But also to Delta-cod's point, the game fundamentally could use some balancing around having the lesser aerial lag in the first place.

I'm open to replacing it with something else, thought it may be difficult to match the level L-canceling increases your engagement in a match given how prevalent it is.

 

[Ove]

I don't see the reason with L-cancel in the first place. It's just tedious to manually correct your aerial landings. That's something the game, not the player, should do.

Execution can still be challenging, satisfying the core gamers. Just add more combo opportunities or maybe even cancels.

 

[El Duderino]

I don't see the reason with L-cancel in the first place. It's just tedious to manually correct your aerial landings. That's something the game, not the player, should do.

You could say the same thing about teching, though tedious is really not the right description here. It may be an unnecessary player input, but neither make the game dull or tiresome.

 

[Vkrm]

@ Ove sounds like you want the game played for you. I really like the feel of things overall. Doesn't seem tedious to me. We could make all aerials AC and then tweak frame advantage as needed. After all that extra effort what was really added? We lowered the already low tech requirement? Definitely not worth it.

 

[JOE!]

You could say the same thing about teching, though tedious is really not the right description here. It may be an unnecessary player input, but neither make the game dull or tiresome.

The difference with teching is that you can then tech in-place, forward or backward which leads to the manual choice of how you wanna do it.

 

[DrinkingFood]

But why not allow players to hold down the shoulder button for a tech rather than worrying about that pesky success window and fail window.

 

[Gea]

I think 2 frames was for projectiles. For other moves, Melees powershield is easier. The reason why it feels harder is because the moment you press L the powershield mode activates, meaning if you hold L when you are in the air, land and start shielding, you cannot powershield anymore. In Brawl powershielding begins the moment your shield pops up so it appears more common to just hold L and get a powershield immediately. Oh and the lightshielding thing also makes thing harder.
In Melee I hold R when I input my controller so it removes the option to ligthshield from that button and it really does make powershielding seem to be as easy as it is in Brawl.

You pretty much got ignored but this so much.

Melee's is more difficult if only because of buffering in Brawl and lightshielding in Melee. You cannot powershield with a lightshield, meaning you have to press the trigger all the way down to get the reflect. And Brawl has that buffering which allows for things like dash -> shield which powershields so much. Had we been able to map shield to a button consistent PSing would probably be a thing.

 

[El Duderino]

But why not allow players to hold down the shoulder button for a tech rather than worrying about that pesky success window and fail window.

Because the extra required timing adds to the player experience... oh wait.

 

[XUnlimitedAlchemistX]

My stance on this is really simple: Either A: Make it an automatic thing (I really liked the sound of reduced lag on aerials, because let's face it, that sucks as it in right now) or B: Add L - Canceling back, but make it alittle easier to use, because in competitive play, you need to learn that ****.

What I basically want is a smaller barrier between "party - play" and "competitive play" because I enjoy alot of both. I like option A alittle better, as it gives more people the chance to play better. We'll (hopefully) have a higher concentration of "pros"

 

[Kink-Link5]

L-canceling, I find, has problems BECAUSE of how easy it is to use, on top of the problems addressed with "why would you ever not do it." Lack of a fail window means L, R, and Z can all be mashed in quick succession to safely option select and have the L-cancel occur over any variety of timings. The 6 frame window is also relatively large, but that itself is fine enough. What would be better to encourage proper timing would be to include a 10-20 or so frame fail window where-in a shield input sets a flag. If a mash L-cancel is then attempted, the landing lag is actually increased.

If the flag is set but shield inputs are not mashed, the aerial just has its normal landing lag.

Couple this with higher hitlag (and appropriately higher shieldstun attributed on a per-move basis) and the proper window for an L-cancel becomes something to actively pay attention to while providing proper reward for attentive players and punishing those attempting to abuse the mechanic through mashed L-cancels. Along with attention put into seeing what out of shield options can punish a: Canceled aerial, normal aerial, and failed aerial, the entire dynamic of player interaction is increased. If it were so desired, there could even be a visual indication for what kind of input is done to assist the shielding opponent: a proper L-cancel flashes the executor white, and a mash input flashes red or some other deep "negative" colour.

What is the downside of this?

 

[DMG]

Is it really necessary to go out of the way and punish someone for mashing the L cancel input? Not cancelling the lag should be more than enough.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Is it really necessary to go out of the way and punish someone for mashing the L cancel input? Not cancelling the lag should be more than enough.

Depends on the dynamic desired for the game. It's the same principle as asking if counterhits are necessary in regular fighting games to increase hitstun. Isn't it punishment enough that you messed up and got hit?

Same idea, it just makes it so there are other punishment options available for the defending player.

You can probably tell with my colour flash suggestion (inspired in part by Project M's own), that I am very big on games providing player feedback to assist the learning process as well as the involvement observation has in game playing.

 

[Gea]

As long as the flash is optional. Some of us can tell the difference by visuals alone. I do agree whatever Smash 4 winds up with, a more robust tutorial/training mode is very much needed.

Though I'm unsure about how competitive it will be. As in the feasibility of tournaments as is. The Wiiu is very... not-friendly for that sort of thing as it stands now.