Let's talk about L-Canceling.

[Twinkles]

L-Canceling doesn't completely remove landing lag though, it's half for any aerial. What this essentially leads to is a much faster game, and characters with absurd amounts of lag on their aerials (Ganondorf, Bowser, etc.) get a hefty boon so that they can at least compete with other characters.

A bigger argument would be whether it would be worth it to keep L-Canceling as a manual input or just halve the lag universally.

 

[Big-Cat]

I just THOUGHT that he wasn't bringing up the point that's been refuted over and over and over and over... That plus his follow-up sentence where he says that he'd rather have the game not be so aerial-based led me to believe that's what he meant.

Actually, screw you. I think I have sufficient reasons to believe my original interpretation is the correct one, so why don't we ask KumaOso what he meant?

KumaOso, what did you mean?

Gea's interpretation is the correct one.

My concern with aerials being so dominating is that I see a good amount of characters that use their aerials almost all the time with not so many ground attacks used. Aerials are only five moves out of the 20 something available to each character. I'd rather see more ground based combat and things like attacks for anti-airing. Make the combat flow from ground to air and vice versa.

Quality over quantity.

Way to dance around the question.

Smooth (or really anyone), have you thought of any ways to freshen up L-cancelling or make it work differently=???

I can't really think of anything outside of the manual or automatic debate or giving L-cancelling negative consequences of some sort.

Edit: LMAO at your double posts and inability to understand double posts.

You know me, I would rather just take apart the entire mechanics of the series and just analyze the necessity, implications, etc. behind each thing and look for new things that could possibly work.

I'm not sure what negative consequences L-Canceling could be given. We don't have meter in Smash (yet) so that's one is kind of out.

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

Gea's interpretation is the correct one.

My concern with aerials being so dominating is that I see a good amount of characters that use their aerials almost all the time with not so many ground attacks used. Aerials are only five moves out of the 20 something available to each character. I'd rather see more ground based combat and things like attacks for anti-airing. Make the combat flow from ground to air and vice versa.

More like 10 out of 26 with split B moves and not counting grabs or tethers.

There's a ****load of anti-air attacks, and ATs help make more anti-air mechanics. Also, the combat in Melee flows from ground to air and vice verse extremely nicely.

Way to dance around the question.

I didn't dance around it. I implied that I didn't.

 

[grizby2]

L-Canceling doesn't completely remove landing lag though, it's half for any aerial. What this essentially leads to is a much faster game, and characters with absurd amounts of lag on their aerials (Ganondorf, Bowser, etc.) get a hefty boon so that they can at least compete with other characters.

A bigger argument would be whether it would be worth it to keep L-Canceling as a manual input or just halve the lag universally.

reducing the lag in half universally? you mean for EVERY character?

but that would leave us with the same problem, only in a smaller proportion.
i guess that COULD solve the problem by a small margin, though there would still be those who still see "too much" landing lag.

 

[Vkrm]

What was the problem with lower landing lag? Combos or shield pressure? Or is having a more responsive and free flowing game a problem these days?

 

[Gea]

Which is exactly the problem some characters faced with some of their aerials.

Edit: in response to grizby

 

[Snakeyes]

My responses to your comparisons with other fighting games are under a spoiler tag to not detract from the main topic. I honestly don't feel like continuing that part of the argument because it doesn't add much to the discussion in this thread.

Spoiler

You don't seem to be able to read very well. I said that auto-l-cancel was analogous to making every move chaincombo or autocancel.

But it really isn't. The only thing an "auto" l-cancel is analogous to is the lack of recovery frames on any jumping normal. You know, what it's already like in every traditional fighting game.

That your anime otaku games for virgin autists made 1-framers easier does not take away that these 1-framers still require execution that can be considered a superfluous skill boundary under your notions given that practically under no cases does one intend to MISS a combo. Purposely missing it would be analogous to just simply not pressing the button.

Not really. Purposely interrupting a combo or blockstring allows you to bait reversals, bursts or go for a much more damaging reset. Purposely missing an L-cancel however... Besides, it's not like 1 framers in most games are there to add depth. They're just a natural byproduct of a balanced moveset. Increase an attack's stun count by a single frame to make a certain link easier, and you've inadvertedly created a powerful hit-confirm, high-low mixup or option select. In a traditional fighter with restricted movement options and no DI, it often means that a character could become broken overnight.

I did not say that mashable supers were the most important thing nor did I slightly suggest it, the point is that it is there for a reason and its inclusion conflicts with your notion of "there is no case where the other would be preferred".

OK, it's there. So what? There are fighting games with a few questionable mechanics but it doesn't make said mechanics wortwhile additions. In fact, not everyone was thrilled with the return of mashable Hypers.

And yeah, Marvel is very heavy on the incoming mix-up game. And guess what, in order to do them, you need to be able to wave-dash, which can easily be considered an arbitrary skill boundary too.

Wave dashing in Marvel is easier to learn than any Melee advanced technique. It's also not a technique that benefits the player in every dashing situation. Sometimes the length of a regular dash (or one that has been crouch canceled late) results in better spacing. Sometimes you may want to jump cancel instead of crouching. Sometimes you prefer to cancel the dash with an attack to carry over the momentum and extend its range.

Some games have more links than others. While you may think that Marvel is primarily based on chain combos and special move cancels, many important combos and juggles are tight frame links.

Not quite. Some characters have a few worthwhile tight links in Marvel but they're often seen as unreliable options in a tournament setting. You're much better off with a wide range of BnBs, smart use of X-Factor, clever mixups and well-timed assists.

And that is more apparent with games that aren't a DBZ-esque 10 hit per second galore.

Games like:

-Street Fighter
-The King of Fighters
-Mortal Kombat
-Darkstalkers
-The weeaboo bull**** games you play
-Tekken
-Last Blade 2
-Smash
-Soul Calibur
-Dragonball Z: Budokai 3 (lol)
-etc.

all count with high-reward high-execution requirement combos in tight frame links or juggles. Although most of these games count with target combos or chain combos, performing such combos really is the equivalent of doing AAA combos in Smash, and the metagame has advanced more towards dependence on these tight execution commands for combos.

That's all fine and dandy, but how many of those (other than Smash) require an additional input from the player just to follow up on a jump-in normal with a ground normal?

Oh, you mean universal techniques like wavedashing, safejumps, parrying, plinking, buffering, jc grab, frame links, Brawl run-buffering, KoF Free-canceling, UMK3 l-canceling, MK9 dash canceling, option-select, kara-canceling, etc? (My list was longer, but I had to rewrite this.)Honestly, without many of these advanced techniques, you're not going to make it very far anywhere in any of these games' respective competitive scenes. The only reason you see these as required is because the competitive scene has developed so much that the competitive metagame is heavily reliant on them.

A lot of the non Smash techniques you mentioned are either specific to certain moves or characters.

And even then, your case about Melee requiring every character to l-cancel seems a little misled. You can reach considerable proficiency with some characters (some more than others) without even being able to l-cancel. I, for example, been beaten by the Brawl playing AZ's Darklink's Jigglypuff when he couldn't even l-cancel.

And David Sirlin beat some other player at a Street Fighter Alpha tournament with nothing but crouching MPs. That you can become fairly decent with one or two characters (Jiggs and Kirby? Sorry, I mostly play Falcon and Fox.) without L-canceling doesn't add much to its defense.

Newcomers are "forced" to learn a bunch of things before they can even compete-- universal advanced techniques included. You can't expect a newcomer to compete with anyone in the first place. When was the time you saw someone in tournament play MvC in Easy Mode and get past the first round?

Not saying that it is the case, but it seriously just sounds like the only fighting game you know how to play is Brawl, where every AT is a weird, character specific, esoteric glitch.

Yawn.

After all, why not just make it so that wave-dashing auto-cancels? Why not make it so that characters auto-block or auto-parry when they're not in the middle of a move? Do you remember when SFxT tried including an auto-techgrab and an auto-block gem? Even at the cost of meter, how disgusted was the FGC?Why not make it so that hold charge moves don't require charging for 2 seconds and instead just come out like a regular move or with the tap of a single button? Remember Super Street Fighter IV DS? How ridiculous is it that Guile can just do constant Sonic Booms while walking forward or that Vega can just Ultra 1 anything that twitches?

Why? Because execution requirement is a valuable thing. Just like with l-canceling, although there may not be a time where you wanted to get hit outside of a move, tech a throw outside of a move, or hold a charge, there are times where your OPPONENT wants you to miss a block, miss a tech throw, lose a charge, or miss an l-cancel.

Furthermore, tech-skill requirement is a form of balance. If we make every wave-dash auto-cancellable, every linking move a chain cancellable, every jump-in a safejump, etc, then there's nothing preventing people just picking the top tier character to win like an even dumber Brawl. The game loses very considerable balance and depth.

You're throwing around so many different mechanics that honestly don't compare to l-canceling all that well. Parrying, holding a charge, seriously? Like I said earlier, the only thing that's slightly comparable to an "auto" l-cancel in traditional fighters is the lack of recovery frames on jumping normals, what it's already like in every game.

Then it seems that it's your intellectual faculties that are in question then.

As an apparent scholar, you should know that personal insults add very little to a verbal discussion, much less a written one. Moving on...

Please don't use logic terms you don't understand, especially when I'm a scholar in the subject.

Really now?

And yeah, why not do that? Do you think you're making a point? lol

My point was to throw the strawman back at you.

I do want to add though that advanced techniques like l-canceling, wavedashing, plinking, etc are just forms of micromanagement for the metagame general. They are simple commands that act collectively.

[...]

Moreover, it's just ludicrous that you said universal advanced techniques should be easily accessible as if a newcomer could just perform them off the bat. They're called ADVANCED TECHNIQUES for a reason.

And in some cases it's better for some of those techniques to become a bit more accessible to newcomers, and maybe even not be considered "advanced" at all.

Speaking of micromanagement, Starcraft 2 added a few newbie-friendly gameplay mechanics that made it easier to manage units without a huge reliance on actions per minute while opening up more options for advanced players. Did it turn into a poor competitive game as a result? No.

Large commands like SC2 Ivy's command throws or Zangief's supers pertain to a different category, but they do have a place and they're especially fun to buffer.

Absolutely! Like I said, character specific execution requirements are great.

Oh really? What are these "best fighting games"? I've had people tell me that they can't get into Street Fighter or KoF because it is too hard, and last time I checked, those games are regarded as two of the best in the genre.

Street Fighter 2 is a pretty good example. Strong emphasis on fundamentals, no gimmick mechanics, option selects are character-specific (as usual) and advanced stuff like renda canceling is useful only in a few situational combos. It's also one of the best selling fighters of all time, several million units ahead of other traditional fighting games that came out when the console market had expanded well beyond its size during the SNES era.

Ironically, I've had older dudes tell me they can't get into the newer SFs because they've become too bloated.

Anyone can just pick-up Melee or Mortal Kombat and play. Anyone can pick up those games. Do you know how many people I know have considered Melee and Mortal Kombat some of their favorite games despite being completely unaware of their competitive play? Again, you can't expect any newcomer for any game to have a fighting chance against a competitive player without proper practice and learning first, unless you introduce sufficient random variables.

This autistic dream of Brawl players thinking "in a game void of tech skill, my true genius will shine" is just unrealistic.

There will still be plenty of tech skill to go around without L-canceling as it existed in the first two Smash games. You'll still have character specific (and percentage specific) combos. You'll (hopefully) still have character specific techniques. Approaching and baiting the opponent will still play a huge part in landing a successful hit that leads to a combo.

And even if you are successful, guess what? You'll still need to read the opponent's DI to fully capitalize on the opportunity.

Not necessarily, but I don't see why you need to fix something that is not broken. L-canceling as it is present in Melee is like a holy grail in advanced techniques even if it's under-appreciated by lowly brawl scene. Besides, the dev's team "fix" sounds miles more intelligent than your proposed fixes.

It was deemed "broken" enough to be removed from the game. Don't see how less laggy aerials across the board would make the game worse as drastically as you make it sound here since 64 turned out pretty decent with completely lag free aerials (especially when l-canceling had a massive window), huge shield stun and very weak DI... but whatever.

True, but as anyone that played Melee before Brawl could tell you, the inclusion of l-canceling in Brawl would have proved a very significant improvement in the pacing of Brawl, particularly for shield pressure purposes.

You'd still have the low hitstun (and canceling), the floaty physics, the bugs, etc... Would it have made Brawl a bit more exciting? Perhaps. But it would still be a pretty bad game compared to its predecessor because of everything else.

As anyone that has played Melee before can tell you, increasing attack lag on blocked aerials would just kill the shield pressure game. It's the equivalent of getting rid of blockstrings or frametraps in other fighting games.

You're also getting of a significant part of potential aerial landing whiff punishes.

And that's why we're having this discussion. There's plenty of possible ways to achieve balance; look at frame data, figure out what could (and should) be punishable on reaction, an appropriate punish window, etc...

Maybe my comment about l-canceling in the OP was a bit harsh, so I'll just elaborate on my attitude a bit;

At the end of the day, here's what the situation is looking like right now: Sakurai and his team have made a conscious effort to remove L-canceling from Brawl and unless his design philosophy makes a complete 180, it's safe to assume that the mechanic as we know it will not be returning in future installments. I'd love to eat crow on this, but even a huge community effort wouldn't make Ninty change their mind. So at some point its time to move on, and try to figure out a way to retain the positive aspects of l-canceling (combos, defense) while staying compatible with Sakurai's vision (regardless of what we think of it).

If the choice is between another Brawl and a slightly more newbie friendly, albeit less technical Melee, I'll take the second option every single time (and I'm not sure how anyone could argue otherwise). That's all.

 

[Gea]

I almost forgot.

Actually, screw you. I think I have sufficient reasons to believe my original interpretation is the correct one, so why don't we ask KumaOso what he meant?

KumaOso, what did you mean?

Gea's interpretation is the correct one.

I'm awaiting your heartfelt apology admitting that you are indeed the dunce.

Spoiler

It's okay, I know you aren't going to man up on your mistake

 

[Snakeyes]

What was the problem with lower landing lag? Combos or shield pressure?

Shield pressure.

Basically, you'd lose the small opportunity window to defend yourself after a mistimed l-cancel caused by the aerial bouncing off your shield.

Your "on hit" comments make it seem like you're still a bit confused as to what it means. On hit means that you wouldn't need to L-cancel *only* if the aerial connects (with the opponent, not the shield).

 

[Vkrm]

So after scoring a true hit the cancel is automatic and shield and whiff require manual input? If that is what you're saying I would say it works well enough. It just doesn't really add anything, it would only seem to please people who play brawl and aren't trying to learn canceling as it functions in melee.

 

[Snakeyes]

So after scoring a true hit the cancel is automatic and shield and whiff require manual input? If that is what you're saying I would say it works well enough. It just doesn't really add anything, it would only seem to please people who play brawl and aren't trying to learn canceling as it functions in melee.

Well, you gotta start somewhere

 

[Delta-cod]

So why can't we just have the lag on everything halved automatically exactly? The game would play the same way, still.

 

[Vkrm]

With nothing to time, rushdown will dominate. If you think the spacies **** now, just wait. It also makes getting out of shield pressure way harder.

 

[Delta-cod]

So does that mean players are still missing L cancels at top level play? And I mean tippy top level play.

 

[Big-Cat]

With nothing to time, rushdown will dominate. If you think the spacies **** now, just wait. It also makes getting out of shield pressure way harder.

The come up with stuff to counterbalance it.

 

[Twinkles]

Yes.

It happens less often than at lower levels of play, trade off is missing an L-cancel at tippy top level is the equivalent of signing a death warrant for your stock.

EDIT: responded to delta-cod

 

[Snakeyes]

So why can't we just have the lag on everything halved automatically exactly? The game would play the same way, still.

L-canceling DOES give the opponent an option to try and force a harder, laggier landing on block against an opponent using an aerial through use of shield angling or light shielding mixed up with CCing and forcing whiffs with dodging or other movement.

This is why. But I don't think L-canceling is the only solution to the problem.

Speaking of these defensive options, do you guys have some frame data for blocked aerials?

 

[Vkrm]

Why counter balance with bizarre mechanics that add complexity without adding flexibility. In my opinion, canceling worked best in melee. If it ain't broke, don't break it.

 

[Delta-cod]

I'm sure there could be some rebalancing as far as frame data/shield mechanics go to avoid having l-canceling, but if it's still solving the problem at top level play, then I suppose the mechanic is serving an adequate purpose.

Thanks for the responses.

 

[Snakeyes]

Yes.

It happens less often than at lower levels of play, trade off is missing an L-cancel at tippy top level is the equivalent of signing a death warrant for your stock.

EDIT: responded to delta-cod

I don't think it's that drastic TBH. If all else fails, you can often DI yourself to safety.

This ain't Smash Bros 64. Hell, even that game still holds up pretty well despite its massive shield stun, completely lagless l-canceled aerials (with a much bigger cancel window) and almost nonexistent DI.

 

[Twinkles]

I'm exaggerating slightly, but seriously, you get punished HARD the better the opponents get. Top players are really good at escaping combos and dealing combos, but being real, that **** is difficult. I'm not saying missing an L-Cancel will literally be a stock, but it could easily put someone in a bad enough situation that a 0-to-death occurs if the opponent is looking for that miss.

And I think it's part of what makes Melee an incredible game.

 

[Vkrm]

You main falcon right? Then your post is exaggeration free.
Hopefully there's l canceling in smarsh 4.

 

[Snakeyes]

I'm exaggerating slightly, but seriously, you get punished HARD the better the opponents get. Top players are really good at escaping combos and dealing combos, but being real, that **** is difficult. I'm not saying missing an L-Cancel will literally be a stock, but it could easily put someone in a bad enough situation that a 0-to-death occurs if the opponent is looking for that miss.

And I think it's part of what makes Melee an incredible game.

Fair enough, and agreed about Melee.

 

[Twinkles]

@Vkrm Too true <3

But yah, thinking more about it, L-Canceling is a really suprisingly balanced mechanic. Never thought it was bad, but my appreciation for it grows after actually thinking about it. Still, dunno how Namco's gonna handle it if they handle it at all.

 

[Vkrm]

The only stike against l canceling that's some what legit is the added difficulty. In a game like smash melee where there just so many things you can adjust and influence, a high techskill requirement just comes with the territory.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Is Master Knight finally gone?

Are we finally free?

...

We're free!

We're free children! Go! Run! We are finally free again! The thread can finally absolve its willful ignorance of Master Knight's terrible approach to examining games and his adamant and rude nature when posting because we are free!

Praise Byakuren we're free!

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

My responses to your comparisons with other fighting games are under a spoiler tag to not detract from the main topic. I honestly don't feel like continuing that part of the argument because it doesn't add much to the discussion in this thread.

Spoiler

But it really isn't. The only thing an "auto" l-cancel is analogous to is the lack of recovery frames on any jumping normal. You know, what it's already like in every traditional fighting game.


Not really. Purposely interrupting a combo or blockstring allows you to bait reversals, bursts or go for a much more damaging reset. Purposely missing an L-cancel however... Besides, it's not like 1 framers in most games are there to add depth. They're just a natural byproduct of a balanced moveset. Increase an attack's stun count by a single frame to make a certain link easier, and you've inadvertedly created a powerful hit-confirm, high-low mixup or option select. In a traditional fighter with restricted movement options and no DI, it often means that a character could become broken overnight.


OK, it's there. So what? There are fighting games with a few questionable mechanics but it doesn't make said mechanics wortwhile additions. In fact, not everyone was thrilled with the return of mashable Hypers.


Wave dashing in Marvel is easier to learn than any Melee advanced technique. It's also not a technique that benefits the player in every dashing situation. Sometimes the length of a regular dash (or one that has been crouch canceled late) results in better spacing. Sometimes you may want to jump cancel instead of crouching. Sometimes you prefer to cancel the dash with an attack to carry over the momentum and extend its range.


Not quite. Some characters have a few worthwhile tight links in Marvel but they're often seen as unreliable options in a tournament setting. You're much better off with a wide range of BnBs, smart use of X-Factor, clever mixups and well-timed assists.

That's all fine and dandy, but how many of those (other than Smash) require an additional input from the player just to follow up on a jump-in normal with a ground normal?


A lot of the non Smash techniques you mentioned are either specific to certain moves or characters.


And David Sirlin beat some other player at a Street Fighter Alpha tournament with nothing but crouching MPs. That you can become fairly decent with one or two characters (Jiggs and Kirby? Sorry, I mostly play Falcon and Fox.) without L-canceling doesn't add much to its defense.


Yawn.


You're throwing around so many different mechanics that honestly don't compare to l-canceling all that well. Parrying, holding a charge, seriously? Like I said earlier, the only thing that's slightly comparable to an "auto" l-cancel in traditional fighters is the lack of recovery frames on jumping normals, what it's already like in every game.


As an apparent scholar, you should know that personal insults add very little to a verbal discussion, much less a written one. Moving on...


Really now?


My point was to throw the strawman back at you.


And in some cases it's better for some of those techniques to become a bit more accessible to newcomers, and maybe even not be considered "advanced" at all.

Speaking of micromanagement, Starcraft 2 added a few newbie-friendly gameplay mechanics that made it easier to manage units without a huge reliance on actions per minute while opening up more options for advanced players. Did it turn into a poor competitive game as a result? No.


Absolutely! Like I said, character specific execution requirements are great.


Street Fighter 2 is a pretty good example. Strong emphasis on fundamentals, no gimmick mechanics, option selects are character-specific (as usual) and advanced stuff like renda canceling is useful only in a few situational combos. It's also one of the best selling fighters of all time, several million units ahead of other traditional fighting games that came out when the console market had expanded well beyond its size during the SNES era.

Ironically, I've had older dudes tell me they can't get into the newer SFs because they've become too bloated.


There will still be plenty of tech skill to go around without L-canceling as it existed in the first two Smash games. You'll still have character specific (and percentage specific) combos. You'll (hopefully) still have character specific techniques. Approaching and baiting the opponent will still play a huge part in landing a successful hit that leads to a combo.

And even if you are successful, guess what? You'll still need to read the opponent's DI to fully capitalize on the opportunity.

It was deemed "broken" enough to be removed from the game. Don't see how less laggy aerials across the board would make the game worse as drastically as you make it sound here since 64 turned out pretty decent with completely lag free aerials (especially when l-canceling had a massive window), huge shield stun and very weak DI... but whatever.


You'd still have the low hitstun (and canceling), the floaty physics, the bugs, etc... Would it have made Brawl a bit more exciting? Perhaps. But it would still be a pretty bad game compared to its predecessor because of everything else.


And that's why we're having this discussion. There's plenty of possible ways to achieve balance; look at frame data, figure out what could (and should) be punishable on reaction, an appropriate punish window, etc...

Maybe my comment about l-canceling in the OP was a bit harsh, so I'll just elaborate on my attitude a bit;

At the end of the day, here's what the situation is looking like right now: Sakurai and his team have made a conscious effort to remove L-canceling from Brawl and unless his design philosophy makes a complete 180, it's safe to assume that the mechanic as we know it will not be returning in future installments. I'd love to eat crow on this, but even a huge community effort wouldn't make Ninty change their mind. So at some point its time to move on, and try to figure out a way to retain the positive aspects of l-canceling (combos, defense) while staying compatible with Sakurai's vision (regardless of what we think of it).

If the choice is between another Brawl and a slightly more newbie friendly, albeit less technical Melee, I'll take the second option every single time (and I'm not sure how anyone could argue otherwise). That's all.

You need to take a logic class and learn what a straw man and an argument from analogy really are.

You attributed certain properties to l-canceling in order to say it shouldn't be there. I pointed out that those ATs share the same properties, thus they're analogous. Try again.

Also broken enough to be taken off the game? If you recall any of Sakurai's interviews, he didn't remove the ATs for breaking the game, he removed them because he wanted to make the game casual friendly. He wanted to remove the game's depth.

Repeating that Brawl has many other factors that work against it doesn't suddenly refute my point, when my point is based on that premise to begin with.

Oh yeaah, let's just have Smash 4 have no landing lag so that like in Smash 64 Ness can just DJC dair and break shields with 0 tech skill requirement and Fox gets free pressure. Smash's gameplay is sufficiently different from other games for there to be value landing cooldown. Removing aerial landing cooldown from smash is like removing it from Soul Calibur or Tekken.

I almost forgot.
I'm awaiting your heartfelt apology admitting that you are indeed the dunce.

Spoiler

It's okay, I know you aren't going to man up on your mistake

I already apologized. :l

And I also pointed out that I had sufficient reasons to backup my interpretation to save me from being a dunce, you cawkboy.

 

[-LzR-]

I guess I am the only one who thinks aerials need some more lag to them. I mean Brawl is not slow and campy because of the "laggy" aerials that are safe on shield when well spaced and timed, but because on hit they don't lead into amazing followups unlike in Melee. And because of that people are not looking as much into those hits but instead to protect themselves from getting hit. Lcanceling has nothing to do with Brawls slowness. And seriously why couldn't aerials have low lag without Lcanceling? Just look at Brawl Peach for example. Or Marth. They can attack a shield just fine, of course with correct timing and spacing. Instead of pressing L at the correct time, they have to input the aerial and their fastfall if needed at a proper time. It's the same thing to me really. Strong moves like the knee should be laggy and hard to hit with but give a great reward. Brawl could have done this so much better I admit, because right now it's a crappy move. But with Brawls airdodge system the knee actually can works unlike if it was in Melee it would be a sad move. Don't compare Melee and Brawl in such a black and white way. Of course it will seem crappy like that. If you start mixing up the games mechanics of course they won't fit. Both games are perfectly fine as they are and I consider them equal. /rant

 

[Vkrm]

Dont you think it would be harder to camp quicker characters? It's astounding how many of the characters become threats when they can preform adequate frame traps/ true shield pressure. So that adds balance. I've tried it both ways, I really do think a game that give total control is better then one that doesn't. We've already went over how broken auto l cancelling would be in earlier posts.

 

[Big-Cat]

Let's keep everything exactly like it was in Melee! That's the only solution!

Let's not think of different ways to make offense-defense more in depth, flexible, fluid, whatever you want to call it and keep living in the past.

 

[Twinkles]

Strong moves like the knee should be laggy and hard to hit with but give a great reward. Brawl could have done this so much better I admit, because right now it's a crappy move. But with Brawls airdodge system the knee actually can works unlike if it was in Melee it would be a sad move.

What exactly are you talking about, ooc?

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

I guess I am the only one who thinks aerials need some more lag to them. I mean Brawl is not slow and campy because of the "laggy" aerials that are safe on shield when well spaced and timed, but because on hit they don't lead into amazing followups unlike in Melee. And because of that people are not looking as much into those hits but instead to protect themselves from getting hit. Lcanceling has nothing to do with Brawls slowness. And seriously why couldn't aerials have low lag without Lcanceling? Just look at Brawl Peach for example. Or Marth. They can attack a shield just fine, of course with correct timing and spacing. Instead of pressing L at the correct time, they have to input the aerial and their fastfall if needed at a proper time. It's the same thing to me really. Strong moves like the knee should be laggy and hard to hit with but give a great reward. Brawl could have done this so much better I admit, because right now it's a crappy move. But with Brawls airdodge system the knee actually can works unlike if it was in Melee it would be a sad move. Don't compare Melee and Brawl in such a black and white way. Of course it will seem crappy like that. If you start mixing up the games mechanics of course they won't fit. Both games are perfectly fine as they are and I consider them equal. /rant

"Oh yeah, hey. Everyone look, Metaknight, Peach, and Marth don't need l-canceling because they're all floaty now and and their aerials autocancel. That means that Brawl is not slow because l-canceling is there.

Oh, what about Mario, Ganondorf, Falcon, Fox, etc etc etc? I don't know. I don't play hard characters."

It's like you people have a problem understanding the concept of a "contributing factor".

Let's keep everything exactly like it was in Melee! That's the only solution!

Let's not think of different ways to make offense-defense more in depth, flexible, fluid, whatever you want to call it and keep living in the past.

Instead of adapting and refining gameplay mechanics that are proven to work for the franchise, let's just reinvent the wheel and wholly substitute them by some out of place mechanic from some fruity glittery obnoxious game for virgins!

 

[Jockmaster]

lzr:

Have you ever watched Melee without l-canceling? It is relatively pretty damn slow...especially for the likes of Ganon/Bowser/Link/etc

 

[Big-Cat]

Instead of adapting and refining gameplay mechanics that are proven to work for the franchise, let's just reinvent the wheel and wholly substitute them by some out of place mechanic from some fruity glittery obnoxious game for virgins!

You just love to use aggressive language don't you? All you're doing is just showing weakness in your argument.

Pray tell how looking at other concepts and think how they could work for Smash Bros. a bad thing if you stop thinking in a Melee vacuum. To say this and that has worked is a really bold statement to make as each game has run into more than its share of balance issues and questionable design.

Maybe reinventing the wheel isn't such a bad idea if you want the series to grow in its potential.

 

[DrinkingFood]

why use a circle for a wheel when we can use an octogon
I mean c'mon guys
it's better than the square, we tried that and most of us can agree it sucks
but then there are those guys that like the square
and they've been raised on the square and don't even know how to use a circle
so let's start using the octogon so they can feel a little less left out

Spoiler

not intended to be an actual argument, so don't get your jimmies all up in a rustle

 

[Big-Cat]

But you could put spikes on the wheels, or paint it red so it'll spin faster.

 

[Vkrm]

Wheel worked best in melee.

 

[Big-Cat]

It worked best SO FAR. You're acting as if you could never top Melee, as if it's the holy grail of videogames.

 

[Vkrm]

.....it is

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

You just love to use aggressive language don't you? All you're doing is just showing weakness in your argument.

Pray tell how looking at other concepts and think how they could work for Smash Bros. a bad thing if you stop thinking in a Melee vacuum. To say this and that has worked is a really bold statement to make as each game has run into more than its share of balance issues and questionable design.

Maybe reinventing the wheel isn't such a bad idea if you want the series to grow in its potential.

Yeah sure, whatever magic rules of argumentation people that never have learned argumentation.

Melee's design isn't really to blame for the balance issues. At its core, anyone who knows how to play can tell you that the pieces of the mechanics just fall into place beautifully, and balance issues are more character specific.

You're just all too eager to claim that the game suddenly needs a mechanic from another ****ty game, but don't quite make a case for the consequences of it. What I'm making a case against these suggestions. Your suggestions are kind of on par with saying that Street Fighter should suddenly have half of its attacks trigger a wallbounce or that the health bar should be replaced with a bloody screen like in modern shooters.