• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Little Mac is NOT OP! Here's why.

Do you think Little Mac is OP?


  • Total voters
    154

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
Lol, I think you have no idea what you are talking about, because most Little Mac player attack once with lagless ground moves and roll back. Furthermore, Little Mac thanks to his superior ground game has only his ground game approach, which naturally limits his gameplay style. As a Charizard nearly all my attack are useless expect maybe spacing tilits, godly Nair Flamethrower Rock Smash and of course the grabs. If being limited to so ""much"" attacks isn't boring for you, well, good for you.

Btw thanks for this **** designed character I and others are arguing in the first place. But of course we are all noobs and playing for fun is stupid yadda yadda. I see no point in arguing, because arguing in the first place shows how stupid it really is.
You're still blaming a character for things that you're doing yourself. Unless you're saying that it's functionally impossible for charizard's attacks to hit him because the game just wasn't programmed for Charizard to inflict any damage to Mac at any time, you can still land attacks on him. YOU, the player, are able to handle Mac anyway you see fit. You could just have fun like always, but instead you CHOOSE to handle him with a "boring waiting game" that you blame on him, and then proceed play the victim card by insinuating that I'm calling you a noob for having fun when the only person stopping you from having fun is yourself, and just after you make your argument, you passive-aggressively belittle the act of further defending Little Mac on a public forum dedicated to discussion. Please grow up.

Charizard vs Little Mac just happens to be a bad match up for charizard. As a Charizard main you should be well-aware that all of your attacks are too slow to be of any use against any character in the game because you're playing a bottom-tier character. Not just Little Mac. In fact, the fact that Little mac has limited options should only make him easier for you to deal with because it's less possibilities that you have to prepare yourself to react to.


To reiterate, you're blaming a character for things you yourself decide to do and your own unwillingness to have fun. 470
 
Last edited:

Shog

Smash Ace
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
926
Yeah, I totally decide the Frame 1 Jab from Mac or Super Armor smashes, clearly Charizard decides this, sure, go on with this, it totally makes sense. To have fun with this matchup, I have only one option. And that is boring. (Did you read your own points at all?)
And maybe you missed it, but what I do against this unfun matchup is simply blocking Little Mac mains, because other matchups are fun, even against Rosalina and Luma(which are clearly better than Mac).
Also I can't take you serious because of this: "As a charizard main you should be well-aware that all of your attacks are too slow to be of any use against any character in the game[...]" Clearly Bowser sucks in this game, eh ;)

And finally, you never gave optioins against little mac, all your points are empty. I am to blame for this matchup, while earlier you say that the matchup itself is bad lol. As I asked, did you read your own points at all?
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
Yeah, I totally decide the Frame 1 Jab from Mac or Super Armor smashes, clearly Charizard decides this, sure, go on with this, it totally makes sense. To have fun with this matchup, I have only one option. And that is boring. (Did you read your own points at all?)
And maybe you missed it, but what I do against this unfun matchup is simply blocking Little Mac mains, because other matchups are fun, even against Rosalina and Luma(which are clearly better than Mac).
Also I can't take you serious because of this: "As a charizard main you should be well-aware that all of your attacks are too slow to be of any use against any character in the game[...]" Clearly Bowser sucks in this game, eh ;)

And finally, you never gave optioins against little mac, all your points are empty. I am to blame for this matchup, while earlier you say that the matchup itself is bad lol. As I asked, did you read your own points at all?
I'm not trying to attack you personally but I can't make sense of your first sentence. Do you mind restating it? What do you mean "clearly charizard decides this?"

If you meant to say that you can decide what to do during the first frame of his jab then yes. It's called predicting and mindgames. Bating the other person into an action while preparing to do something as soon as he gets there. It's called "Thinking 2 steps ahead of the enemy".

Bowser is better than Charizard because he's stronger and significantly faster. The match up is bad for charizard. Your playstyle and what you decide to do is entirely your fault.

But let's put all that aside and stick to the matter at hand. If you tell me explicitly that none of Charizards moves except for his Nair, flamethrower, rocksmash and grabs have the potential or the physical capacity allowed by the programming of the game to ever hit Little Mac; and furthermore if you state that playing against Little Mac forces you to only play in one specific style and it is absolutely impossible to play differently with a Charizard vs Little Mac match I will immediately admit I was wrong about everything and **** off forever.
468
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
I'm not trying to attack you personally but I can't make sense of your first sentence. Do you mind restating it? What do you mean "clearly charizard decides this?"

If you meant to say that you can decide what to do during the first frame of his jab then yes. It's called predicting and mindgames. Bating the other person into an action while preparing to do something as soon as he gets there. It's called "Thinking 2 steps ahead of the enemy".

Bowser is better than Charizard because he's stronger and significantly faster. The match up is bad for charizard. Your playstyle and what you decide to do is entirely your fault.

But let's put all that aside and stick to the matter at hand. If you tell me explicitly that none of Charizards moves except for his Nair, flamethrower, rocksmash and grabs have the potential or the physical capacity allowed by the programming of the game to ever hit Little Mac; and furthermore if you state that playing against Little Mac forces you to only play in one specific style and it is absolutely impossible to play differently with a Charizard vs Little Mac match I will immediately admit I was wrong about everything and **** off forever.
468
Why would you fight little mac on his own terms though? His ground game is superior to 90% of the cast, super armor on his smashes, his intense running speed and roll speed, his jab combo being almost instant out of other attacks not to mention the fact that they do around 20-25% of damage (depending on the weight of the character). I don't really understand what you're arguing, semantics? Of course it's his decision to fight little mac that way, it's his only really good defense against him because fighting him on the ground is foolish.
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
Why would you fight little mac on his own terms though? His ground game is superior to 90% of the cast, super armor on his smashes, his intense running speed and roll speed, his jab combo being almost instant out of other attacks not to mention the fact that they do around 20-25% of damage (depending on the weight of the character). I don't really understand what you're arguing, semantics? Of course it's his decision to fight little mac that way, it's his only really good defense against him because fighting him on the ground is foolish.
I'd be willing to go as far as to say his ground game is better than 100% of the cast.

I'm not arguing about what someone should or shouldn't do against Mac. I'm arguing what Mac does or does not force people do. And he does not make you do anything. Everyone has the option to fight against Little Mac in any way they can think of(whether they would be effective or not). He blames the character because he said it forces him to fight in a boring way. There's absolutely nothing stopping him from fighting differently if he wanted to have fun like he's declaring.

463
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
I'd be willing to go as far as to say his ground game is better than 100% of the cast.

I'm not arguing about what someone should or shouldn't do against Mac. I'm arguing what Mac does or does not force people do. And he does not make you do anything. Everyone has the option to fight against Little Mac in any way they can think of(whether they would be effective or not). He blames the character because he said it forces him to fight in a boring way. There's absolutely nothing stopping him from fighting differently if he wanted to have fun like he's declaring.

463
There's no point in this argument then, you both are arguing different things because he was making a point in saying that the best way to beat mac is to edge camp with any other way being a one sided fight in mac's favor thus making both options for fighting him not fun, while you're just arguing semantics by saying "it's your fault because you chose to fight him in that manner which isn't fun" you're technically right but why argue something as trivial as that?
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
There's no point in this argument then, you both are arguing different things because he was making a point in saying that the best way to beat mac is to edge camp with any other way being a one sided fight in mac's favor thus making both options for fighting him not fun, while you're just arguing semantics by saying "it's your fault because you chose to fight him in that manner which isn't fun" you're technically right but why argue something as trivial as that?
Even if Little Mac isn't OP, the fights with him are boring. I mean what is entertaining about playing a boring waiting and gimping game? Ugh. There is a reason i block people online who play him, no matter if I win or if I lose.
I'm not the one who moved the goal post.
This is a message board where arguing, debate, and discussion literally the sole purpose of this board's existence. No matter how trivial
An entire victim's complex is a very serious mental problem and shouldn't be considered as trivial.
460
 
Last edited:

JingleJangleJamil

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Oct 7, 2014
Messages
536
I am not entirely sure how I feel about him being OP or not. I am getting way better at dealing with them and gimping them,but I hate the KO punch, all of his super armor, and how easy he is to use. All you have to do with him is spam roll and do side smash to win with him. I can go against the crappiest player ever and they can still do good if they do what I said before with him. He is so boring to fight and I can not feel satisfied whether I win or lose against them. The only good :4littlemac:players I have gone against were some dude who took great advantage of short hop Nair to throw me off and get some pretty good combos. The second good :4littlemac:I have gone against if Zef, who is one of Shofu's friends if you have ever heard of Shofu. He barely rolled and he destroyed in seconds with my main.
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
I'm not the one who moved the goal post.
This is a message board where arguing, debate, and discussion literally the sole purpose of this board's existence. No matter how trivial
An entire victim's complex is a very serious mental problem and shouldn't be considered as trivial.
460
The purpose becomes lost when you're arguing two different things though, especially when you're deliberately ignoring key parts of the post in favor of a technicality.

Also, you say he's gotten a victim complex because he's solely blaming little mac for his lack of enjoyment when fighting him. Aren't you kind of doing the same thing by only blaming him? If not how's it different? Because you seem pretty sure of it being only his fault, but hey semantics, right?
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
The purpose becomes lost when you're arguing two different things though, especially when you're deliberately ignoring key parts of the post in favor of a technicality.

Also, you say he's gotten a victim complex because he's solely blaming little mac for his lack of enjoyment when fighting him. Aren't you kind of doing the same thing by only blaming him? If not how's it different? Because you seem pretty sure of it being only his fault, but hey semantics, right?
But I've stayed on point this entire time. Everything I've said up til now has been pertinent in disagreeing with what this was originally about: Whether or not Little Mac forces the other player to act in a certain way. I'll admit I'm only arguing for arguing's sake but that doesn't make my points any less valid.

The act of putting responsibility onto someone else for something that you are doing to yourself

is different from

The act of stating that one is responsible for one's own actions.

One is a victim's complex, the other is not. It's hardly even a matter of semantics since it's a very clear and easy to understand concept.


459
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
But I've stayed on point this entire time. Everything I've said up til now has been pertinent in disagreeing with what this was originally about: Whether or not Little Mac forces the other player to act in a certain way. I'll admit I'm only arguing for arguing's sake but that doesn't make my points any less valid.

The act of putting responsibility onto someone else for something that you are doing to yourself

is different from

The act of stating that one is responsible for one's own actions.

One is a victim's complex, the other is not. It's hardly even a matter of semantics since it's a very clear and easy to understand concept.


459
What you're basically doing yourself is blaming the women for being ***** for the clothes she wore or blaming the pedestrian for being hit by a drunk driver because they were outside. So does he have a victims complex? Or are you just victim blaming?

You're arguing that he has options regardless of their effectiveness, why argue that? He's obviously aware he has options, otherwise he wouldn't have come to the conclusion that he had to edge camp mac. You're not even giving him tips to help solve the problem so why try to argue something that pointless without a solution? This isn't a crime so it doesn't matter who's the victim, the point is to help solve the problem, not confuse it
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
What you're basically doing yourself is blaming the women for being ***** for the clothes she wore or blaming the pedestrian for being hit by a drunk driver because they were outside. So does he have a victims complex? Or are you just victim blaming?

You're arguing that he has options regardless of their effectiveness, why argue that? He's obviously aware he has options, otherwise he wouldn't have come to the conclusion that he had to edge camp mac. You're not even giving him tips to help solve the problem so why try to argue something that pointless without a solution? This isn't a crime so it doesn't matter who's the victim, the point is to help solve the problem, not confuse it
whoawhoawhoa. You really want to bring **** into this? Alright then.

Both of your analogies are wrong. In both scenarios, the person is suffering from a situation directly inflicted upon them by another person against their will. What would be an accurate comparison would be if the girl chose to have sex or if the pedestrian chose to throw himself in front of a moving car and then they complained that they didn't enjoy it. Like I said before, playing against Little Mac can't force anyone to do anything. They should be held responsible for their own actions if they choose to fight him in a boring way.

You say that he's aware that he has options, but is he actually? Not once did he ever even hint that it might be possible to choose to play differently than the way that he deemed "unfun". i'm not obligated to give him foolproof strategies on how to beat Little Mac. My goal this entire time was to inform him that he has options in ways to fight Little Mac. And that's exactly what I've been doing.

edit: In fact I did give him a tip. His problem was that fighting Mac isn't fun because of how he chose to play against him. My tip and the solution to his problem was to just play and have fun. And then he responded with with passive aggression, a victim complex, general nonsense and an unwillingness to consider bettering himself. 472
 
Last edited:

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
whoawhoawhoa. You really want to bring **** into this? Alright then.

Both of your analogies are wrong. In both scenarios, the person is suffering from a situation directly inflicted upon them by another person against their will. What would be a closer comparison would be if the girl chose to be ***** or if the pedestrian chose to throw himself in front of a moving car. Like I said before, playing against Little Mac can't force anyone to do anything. They should be held responsible for their own actions if they choose to fight him in a boring way.

You say that he's aware that he has options, but is he actually? Not once did he ever even hint that it might be possible to choose to play differently than the way that he deemed "unfun". i'm not obligated to give him foolproof strategies on how to beat Little Mac. My goal this entire time was to inform him that he has options in ways to fight Little Mac. And that's exactly what I've been doing.472
How are my analogies wrong? It's not like he knew he was going to fight little mac, nor did he tell the other player to choose little mac. I'm definitely not saying that a game is as serious as DUI or ****, but you certainly make yourself sound like those politicians who only blame the victims. Anyway I do apologize for bringing that up in the first place, I'm not saying you're that type of person at all.

Also you say he's unaware of his options, how? One doesn't simply come to a conclusion without first experimenting with other options, if he was having fun with purely fighting mac head on don't you think he wouldn't resort to the "unfun" tactic of bait and wait? Little mac's play-style is about applying pressure and force your opponent to make mistakes, so the real question is if little mac's play style is like that and the person playing wants to use that as an advantage, how is it only the opponents fault in that situation?

No one is asking you for a full proof way of beating mac, but by telling someone it's all of their fault doesn't solve their problem nor does make them believe you because your not even telling them why other than the shallow response of "you had other options." But hey we seem to be arguing in circles anyway.


"edit: In fact I did give him a tip. His problem was that fighting Mac isn't fun because of how he chose to play against him. My tip and the solution to his problem was to just play and have fun. And then he responded with with passive aggression, a victim complex, general nonsense and an unwillingness to consider bettering himself."

This tip is garbage btw because it's not saying anything helpful, that's literally the intention behind buying the game.
 
Last edited:

Shog

Smash Ace
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
926
Both of your analogies are wrong. In both scenarios, the person is suffering from a situation directly inflicted upon them by another person against their will.
The analogy is perfect as I can't decide beforehand if I fight against a Little Mac in For Glory :rolleyes:

[...] And then he responded with with passive aggression, a victim complex, general nonsense and an unwillingness to consider bettering himself. 472
General nonsense? My initial point was that as a Charizard main, my only option for playin Lil'Mac is the bait and wait game(or however it is called) and that is boring for me, having only one gameplay style(as I said already). I have a victim complex for saying that I don't enjoy the matchup because as a Charizard, I am only left with a complete defensive option which in my opinion isn't what Charizard is about, it simply isn't fun. It is the same as fighting against Chain Grab Ice Climbers in Brawl, I bet other agree with me that this simply isn't fun to play against. NOT the same situation here, but the analogy is mentioned just to give an idea how I feel about Lil'Mac Charizard matchup. Also
NO **** this, it is worthless arguing about this, KingTeo doesn't seem to get simple analogies and thinks saying "you bring xy into this?" makes the point any less valid. The analogies were spot on and described exactly what it is all about, because of how For Glory works.
Furthermore your tip is complete garbage, and if you can't understand that having little to no EFFECTIVE options in Smash in a MatchUp isn't enjoyable than there is literally no point in arguing.
 

Sparky15

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
245
Location
United States
NNID
Elec-Wolf
3DS FC
2578-3364-0347
I PERSONALLY think that Little Mac isn't broken or OP or anything. He's perfectly balanced (like the overall character roster) and the KO Punch everyone is ranting about is starting to make everyone else rant and rave, You don't need to force yourself to gimp him all the time. Just play smart. He's a good character, but too many people play as him on FG, which is understandable,

And I'm suprised no know one brought this up for everything he has, but the only trouble I have with Little Mac is his low-lag moves. I swear, its heard to AT LEAST get a grab or a mediocre punishing move after shielding his attacks. I can't be the only one with this instance.
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
How are my analogies wrong? It's not like he knew he was going to fight little mac, nor did he tell the other player to choose little mac. I'm definitely not saying that a game is as serious as DUI or ****, but you certainly make yourself sound like those politicians who only blame the victims. Anyway I do apologize for bringing that up in the first place, I'm not saying you're that type of person at all.

Also you say he's unaware of his options, how? One doesn't simply come to a conclusion without first experimenting with other options, if he was having fun with purely fighting mac head on don't you think he wouldn't resort to the "unfun" tactic of bait and wait? Little mac's play-style is about applying pressure and force your opponent to make mistakes, so the real question is if little mac's play style is like that and the person playing wants to use that as an advantage, how is it only the opponents fault in that situation?

No one is asking you for a full proof way of beating mac, but by telling someone it's all of their fault doesn't solve their problem nor does make them believe you because your not even telling them why other than the shallow response of "you had other options." But hey we seem to be arguing in circles anyway.


"edit: In fact I did give him a tip. His problem was that fighting Mac isn't fun because of how he chose to play against him. My tip and the solution to his problem was to just play and have fun. And then he responded with with passive aggression, a victim complex, general nonsense and an unwillingness to consider bettering himself."

This tip is garbage btw because it's not saying anything helpful, that's literally the intention behind buying the game.
Why do I assume that he's unaware of his options? Because when I suggested that he try to play the game in a way that he thought was funner, he responded by implying that it was impossible and that he didn't know what i was talking about. This entire debate would be completely different if he ever once said that his main priority was to just win. In which case I would have said "Yea, that sounds like a boring fight but you gotta do what you gotta do if you want to win"

But he didn't. He only said "I hate Mac because fighting him isn't fun because of how I choose to fight him" and then he started acting like the idea of just having fun was a complete impossibility.

You don't seem to understand that there's a huge difference between being the victim of something forced upon you against your own will, and choosing to act in a certain way of your own free will but blaming another thing and saying it's forcing you to do something when it is not. 470
 
Last edited:

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
The analogy is perfect as I can't decide beforehand if I fight against a Little Mac in For Glory :rolleyes:


General nonsense? My initial point was that as a Charizard main, my only option for playin Lil'Mac is the bait and wait game(or however it is called) and that is boring for me, having only one gameplay style(as I said already). I have a victim complex for saying that I don't enjoy the matchup because as a Charizard, I am only left with a complete defensive option which in my opinion isn't what Charizard is about, it simply isn't fun. It is the same as fighting against Chain Grab Ice Climbers in Brawl, I bet other agree with me that this simply isn't fun to play against. NOT the same situation here, but the analogy is mentioned just to give an idea how I feel about Lil'Mac Charizard matchup. Also
NO **** this, it is worthless arguing about this, KingTeo doesn't seem to get simple analogies and thinks saying "you bring xy into this?" makes the point any less valid. The analogies were spot on and described exactly what it is all about, because of how For Glory works.
Furthermore your tip is complete garbage, and if you can't understand that having little to no EFFECTIVE options in Smash in a MatchUp isn't enjoyable than there is literally no point in arguing.
Instead of just ignoring me and waiting for someone to share your opinion so you so you can agree with them and act as though that validates you and you were right all along, why don't you at least have some respect for yourself and just answer me directly?

Tell me explicitly whether or not any of Charizards moves except for his Nair, flamethrower, rocksmash and grabs have the potential or the physical capacity allowed by the programming of the game to ever hit Little Mac.

Also, give me a straight answer on whether or not playing against Little Mac forces you to only play in one specific style and it is absolutely impossible to play any differently with a Charizard vs Little Mac match

469
 
Last edited:

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
I PERSONALLY think that Little Mac isn't broken or OP or anything. He's perfectly balanced (like the overall character roster) and the KO Punch everyone is ranting about is starting to make everyone else rant and rave, You don't need to force yourself to gimp him all the time. Just play smart. He's a good character, but too many people play as him on FG, which is understandable,

And I'm suprised no know one brought this up for everything he has, but the only trouble I have with Little Mac is his low-lag moves. I swear, its heard to AT LEAST get a grab or a mediocre punishing move after shielding his attacks. I can't be the only one with this instance.
You're right that is a huge issue, one that I also have with him. I disagree with him being perfectly balanced because he has a defined strength and a defined weakness, those two things don't affect each other.

Comparing mac to other characters:

Mario

Pros

- great combo game
- fairly agile
- an okay projectile

Cons

- has extremely short reach on his attacks making it hard for him to approach
- easily gimpable
- has a really hard time killing at high percents

Ganondorf

Pros

-Extremely powerful

Cons

- doesn't have any reliable method for approaching

- attacks are extremely slow and have a lot of ending lag

Sheik

Pros

- extremely fast
- great combo potential
- can gimp really easily

Cons

-Lacking K'O power at higher percents

(I know there's more just need to do a little more research)

My point here is that no matter how many or little weaknesses a character that I mentioned has, it has a direct affect on the strengths they possess, little mac doesn't have that, his weaknesses are in direct contrast of his strengths. when would his terrible air game ever affect his great ground game? Never right? In my opinion he's only balanced in theory, not execution
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
Why do I assume that he's unaware of his options? Because when I suggested that he try to play the game in a way that he thought was funner, he responded by implying that it was impossible and that he didn't know what i was talking about. This entire debate would be completely different if he ever once said that his main priority was to just win. In which case I would have said "Yea, that sounds like a boring fight but you gotta do what you gotta do if you want to win"

But he didn't. He only said "I hate Mac because fighting him isn't fun because of how I choose to fight him" and then he started acting like the idea of just having fun was a complete impossibility.

You don't seem to understand that there's a huge difference between being the victim of something forced upon you against your own will, and choosing to act in a certain way of your own free will but blaming another thing and saying it's forcing you to do something when it is not. 470
1. Telling someone to have fun is very generic and vague advice, so I'm not surprised he didn't understand because I don't even understand what that means. Plus doesn't the whole idea of winning go without saying? No one enjoys losing, so if winning is a pain why in the world would losing be more fun?

The main problem that I have with your argument is it's extremely unimportant. Your argument is only "it's your fault because you had other options" or "you could've just had fun" but hey if that's it then I guess you won, he did have options, he could've played single player a little bit longer each day before playing online to avoid those mac players, or he could've not played the game that day, or he could've just not bought the game in the first place. Those are different options, all of them are terrible and hindsight filled, but options none the less.

Here's a question I have for you, what would you have done in the situation of potentially fighting a losing battle with mac? Don't give me any vague crap about having fun either, I want details
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
You're right that is a huge issue, one that I also have with him. I disagree with him being perfectly balanced because he has a defined strength and a defined weakness, those two things don't affect each other.

Comparing mac to other characters:

Mario

Pros

- great combo game
- fairly agile
- an okay projectile

Cons

- has extremely short reach on his attacks making it hard for him to approach
- easily gimpable
- has a really hard time killing at high percents

Ganondorf

Pros

-Extremely powerful

Cons

- doesn't have any reliable method for approaching

- attacks are extremely slow and have a lot of ending lag

Sheik

Pros

- extremely fast
- great combo potential
- can gimp really easily

Cons

-Lacking K'O power at higher percents

(I know there's more just need to do a little more research)

My point here is that no matter how many or little weaknesses a character that I mentioned has, it has a direct affect on the strengths they possess, little mac doesn't have that, his weaknesses are in direct contrast of his strengths. when would his terrible air game ever affect his great ground game? Never right? In my opinion he's only balanced in theory, not execution
strengths and weaknesses having direct and tangible effects on each other are not a necessity for them to work. Look at magician-type characters in almost any game. They have strong magic, and their weakness is that they have physically weak defense and weak physical attack. Does this have an affect on how strong their magic is? The fact that Little Mac's strengths are so blatant and his weaknesses are so obvious to take advantage of(He can be gimped at 30%) makes him pretty balanced. Add to that the fact that he's neither top nor bottom tier.

It's the fact that he's such an extreme character in regards to his strengths and weaknesses that are throwing people off and making him think he's either too op or even too underpowered

468
 
Last edited:

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
1. Telling someone to have fun is very generic and vague advice, so I'm not surprised he didn't understand because I don't even understand what that means. Plus doesn't the whole idea of winning go without saying? No one enjoys losing, so if winning is a pain why in the world would losing be more fun?

The main problem that I have with your argument is it's extremely unimportant. Your argument is only "it's your fault because you had other options" or "you could've just had fun" but hey if that's it then I guess you won, he did have options, he could've played single player a little bit longer each day before playing online to avoid those mac players, or he could've not played the game that day, or he could've just not bought the game in the first place. Those are different options, all of them are terrible and hindsight filled, but options none the less.

Here's a question I have for you, what would you have done in the situation of potentially fighting a losing battle with mac? Don't give me any vague crap about having fun either, I want details
Look at the posts that started this.

"i hate playing against little mac because I always have to fight in the same boring way"

"You can always just play in a way you think is funner"

"No I literally cannot do that"

There wasn't anything vague about it. you say winning goes without saying, but he stated specifically that it doesn't matter whether he wins or loses. So once again, on the basis that winning isn't his main priority, and that he doesn't even win all the time regardless of what he does, why not just have fun? Winning is a pain because of how he wins. Anyone could get a kill, and then run away for 5 or 6 minutes and win that way. But no one does because it's boring. I could beat my friends 100% of the time by playing a zoning game with link or Ness but I choose to play as Captain Falcon and lose the majority of my fights because I'd rather have fun instead. Winning =/= Fun and Losing =/= less fun than winning.

Those are options and pretty bad ones. But you know what other options he had that aren't bad? Instead of playing a boring waiting game and act like the other character is forcing him to, he could've just tried to go ham with charizard. He could've tried to test his abilities with his character against a horrible match up. He could have experimented with it and least had a more interesting match and allowed himself to enjoy it, But instead he insists on playing a lame bait-n-wait game or whatever "boring" strategy he's using and complains about not having any choices and tries to tell people that a character is forcing him to play that way.

To answer your question, if I was fighting Little Mac and I knew thatmy chances of winning were slim if I didn't lame it out and I wanted to have fun instead of win, I would experiment. Losing wouldn't bother me and I would test different things. See if I could land a lucky punch, see if I could bait him into killing himself or becoming predictable, see if I could win by playing a completely different playstyle, see if I could get a funny kill. What I wouldn't do is pretend that Little Mac is by some magical force controlling how I play. 467
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
strengths and weaknesses having direct and tangible effects on each other are not a necessity for them to work. Look at magician-type characters in almost any game. They have strong magic, and their weakness is that they have physically weak defense and weak physical attack. Does this have an affect on how strong their magic is? The fact that Little Mac's strengths are so blatant and his weaknesses are so obvious to take advantage of(He can be gimped at 30%) makes him pretty balanced. Add to that the fact that he's neither top nor bottom tier.

It's the fact that he's such an extreme character in regards to his strengths and weaknesses that are throwing people off and making him think he's either too op or even too underpowered

468
Alright well let's talk about dark Phoenix from mvc3, she is very powerful but has very low health so she can be killed very easily, but if you have your super meter maxed she gets revived as dark Phoenix, her damage out out becomes twice as strong and since she uses projectiles mainly she can chip you out from full health without having to approach you, that's a prime example of why a character shouldn't be balanced in such a linear manner.

I definitely worded incorrectly when I said they're in direct contrast of one another because that's only half true. Mac's weaknesses don't affect his strengths at all but his multiple strengths on the ground definitely help hide his weaknesses. little mac is intentionally op because it was assumed that the terrible recovery and weak air attacks would be enough to balance it, you can actually tell they were afraid of making him too weak because of the weak air game, that's why he has so many attributes on the ground that help protect him from being sent flying unlike the other characters.

So he's definitely not mid tier, high tier is where I would rank him, I watched numerous tournaments with him doing fairly well against shieks and ZSS'.
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
Alright well let's talk about dark Phoenix from mvc3, she is very powerful but has very low health so she can be killed very easily, but if you have your super meter maxed she gets revived as dark Phoenix, her damage out out becomes twice as strong and since she uses projectiles mainly she can chip you out from full health without having to approach you, that's a prime example of why a character shouldn't be balanced in such a linear manner.

I definitely worded incorrectly when I said they're in direct contrast of one another because that's only half true. Mac's weaknesses don't affect his strengths at all but his multiple strengths on the ground definitely help hide his weaknesses. little mac is intentionally op because it was assumed that the terrible recovery and weak air attacks would be enough to balance it, you can actually tell they were afraid of making him too weak because of the weak air game, that's why he has so many attributes on the ground that help protect him from being sent flying unlike the other characters.

So he's definitely not mid tier, high tier is where I would rank him, I watched numerous tournaments with him doing fairly well against shieks and ZSS'.
I don't know anything about the MVC3 scene but I'm aware enough to know that there are several characters that are controversially considered broken.

Let's look at it without all of the faulty analogies. Balance can be determined by a checks and balances system. A character can have as many extreme strengths as he wants, and will remain balanced if his weaknesses are of equal value. In other words, a character who has moderate strengths and equally as moderate weaknesses can be just as well balanced as a character who has extremely potent strengths to take advantage of if he has weaknesses that are just as apparent, just as decisive, and just as easy to be taken advantage of.

He isn't top tier because his weaknesses are too easy to take advantage of if you know what to do. It isn't uncommon for Mac to die at 20 or 30% just from a single grab or smash attack and a well timed gimp. He's the best at what he does and completely defenseless against everything else. He only seems better than he actually is because he's an easily accessible character who happens to have the exact toolset to dominate low level play. Once people are good enough to take advantage of his weaknesses he immediately starts to lose his effectiveness. I say he's about a upper-middle tier character. But whether he's mid tier or high tier doesn't matter since he's still in the middle of the roster regardless. The only problems with balance would be characters who are top tier or absolute bottom tier by a wide margin.

By no means is Little Mac a well-rounded character. But he is balanced when comparing his strengths and his weaknesses, and when comparing him as a whole to the rest of the cast

466
 
Last edited:

Shog

Smash Ace
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
926
Instead of just ignoring me and waiting for someone to share your opinion so you so you can agree with them and act as though that validates you and you were right all along, why don't you at least have some respect for yourself and just answer me directly?
Good for you, constantly jabbing at me with your insults is damn annoying. Maybe a mod will agree...
Those are options and pretty bad ones. But you know what other options he had that aren't bad? [...]
Again no real tip, good job.

I make this simple for you:
-Main intention of playing For Glory: To win and to have fun with it
-Playing against any other character: Depending on the enemy PLAYER different stuff can be done.
-Playing against Mac: Only one thing can be done to be effective against him, that's boring. Any other option doesn't really help.

The fact you assume I didn't try it shows your lack of commonsense and (again) jabbing at me overall. Isn't it pretty obvious with the amount of little macs that I tried ? Want proof? Here:

See? I tried that. Too bad it doesn't work like...let's say 99% of the Mac player, in fact I think this Mac was a CPU because the real player disconnected. As he 2stocked me before. While I tried my "other options" seen in the Video. They simply doesn't work with the intention of a win in the for glory mode.
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
Good for you, constantly jabbing at me with your insults is damn annoying. Maybe a mod will agree...

Again no real tip, good job.

I make this simple for you:
-Main intention of playing For Glory: To win and to have fun with it
-Playing against any other character: Depending on the enemy PLAYER different stuff can be done.
-Playing against Mac: Only one thing can be done to be effective against him, that's boring. Any other option doesn't really help.

The fact you assume I didn't try it shows your lack of commonsense and (again) jabbing at me overall. Isn't it pretty obvious with the amount of little macs that I tried ? Want proof? Here:

See? I tried that. Too bad it doesn't work like...let's say 99% of the Mac player, in fact I think this Mac was a CPU because the real player disconnected. As he 2stocked me before. While I tried my "other options" seen in the Video. They simply doesn't work with the intention of a win in the for glory mode.
Before I say anything else and give you an opportunity to keep dancing around the topic at hand, just answer this one question in a simple "yes or no" manner to help both of us understand each other.

Does the act of playing against Little mac physically force you to play in a specific way, against your own will and make it impossible to act in any different way?

462
 
Last edited:

Shog

Smash Ace
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
926
Does the act of playing against Little mac physically force you to play in a specific way, against your own will and make it impossible to act in any different way?

462
No idea what you are talking about
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
No idea what you are talking about
Lmaooooo. alright. I'm done with you. i've been trying to genuinely care about your opinion this whole time but it's obvious you aren't even giving me the common courtesy of even being serious. You refuse to consider the possibility that you might be wrong, you continue to victimize yourself over nothing and use petty passive aggressive remarks while hypocritically accusing me of insulting you, you stay quiet and then try to use someone else's agreement with your opinion as though it somehow validates it, you and you insist on blaming a character for your own actions instead of accepting the reality that you have the freedom of choice in a video game. Usually I'd just continue just for continuing's sake but there's a difference between having a logical argument with someone who has a differing opinion and talking to someone who doesn't have the capacity to understand. Please continue to do what you've been doing.

461
 
Last edited:

Shog

Smash Ace
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
926
Lmaooooo. alright. I'm done with you. blah blah blah

461
Oh, so you finally will stop? That was easier than I thought. Next time we can make a codeword if you annoy the **** out of people, okay? So no people are harmed and annoyed by your points and jabs, what ya say? Of course I would listen to it, too.

[My remark was mostly made because the video clearly showed that there is an other way. The fact that you ignored it was my main reason for the reply, because it is obvious now that you ignore my posts completly - the video showed what you could possibly do.]
 

Shack

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
466
Location
NYC
NNID
ShackShack
3DS FC
1392-5021-7831
F-Smash requires proper spacing or else he'll completely miss, only his down smash is a problem for people who can't handle him.

Or if your good enough get a hit on him then he loses it. There's times where the K.O punch doesn't actually K.O.

If you get caught by K.O punches then its your own damn fault, its got somewhat short range after a few seconds he loses it after taking one hit.

And again i know this thread isn't about Sheik, but i'm simply saying if you put Mac is an OP character than Sheik is a step above that i just find it ironic how you call Mac OP when you use someone like Sheik a lot(i think). From now on mac is OP so Sheik and Rosalina are BROKEN, cheers. :)


yet you call him OP. lol i'm done.
F-Smash requires proper spacing or else he'll completely miss, only his down smash is a problem for people who can't handle him.

Or if your good enough get a hit on him then he loses it. There's times where the K.O punch doesn't actually K.O.

If you get caught by K.O punches then its your own damn fault, its got somewhat short range after a few seconds he loses it after taking one hit.

And again i know this thread isn't about Sheik, but i'm simply saying if you put Mac is an OP character than Sheik is a step above that i just find it ironic how you call Mac OP when you use someone like Sheik a lot(i think). From now on mac is OP so Sheik and Rosalina are BROKEN, cheers. :)


yet you call him OP. lol i'm done.
Man I don't even get your point, it's like you're arguing just for your own ego without even listening to what I'm saying. I'm never said he was the best character in the game, I said he has OP mechanics and options available to him that no one else in the cast has. Yes, I think Sheik is way better than him as a solid character, but regardless, she does not have an automatic win button. You pretty much have to gimp him early because the longer the fight goes on, the more likely that you run the risk of getting hit by a KOP.

This has nothing to do with how good you might be and is irrelevant because what if the Lil Mac person is slightly better than you? This is about the tools the character has, I am not talking about online scrubs, I'm talking about skilled tournament level players using and abusing Lil Mac's abilities. Yes you can hit him out of KOP, but then you run the risk of losing that stock as well, your best bet is to run and use projectiles which might not be an option depending on the time left in the match.

Saying getting caught be KOP is your own fault is kind of dumb because according to that logic, no skilled player should ever get hit by Jigglypuffs Rest, Warios Fart, Luigis Uppercut, Megamans Uppercut, Flacon Punch, etc. It happens sometimes and people have set ups to guarantee it. The KOP is pretty much an instant move so there is no way for your to react.

If you do not see the potential that Lil Mac has, that is ok, I can't force you to see it, but at least bring up valid arguments in regards to the points I brought up other than your personal experiences and, "well, you shouldn't get hit by it in the first place" or "if you're good enough". Those are not valid points because they are skill reliant and it is possible for the other player to be skilled enough to land KOP and Smashes.
 

lRasha

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
116
I like the way Little Mac is. To me, characters don't always have to be created in a "Fast, but Weak" or "Strong, but slow" way. Why not have a Fast and Strong character and figure out a way to balance him? His recovery is bad so if you knock him off the stage enough then he'll end up dying. I can see how the KO punch seems a bit much though. On the other hand, I like that unique part of him. This is just how I personally feel.
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
I like the way Little Mac is. To me, characters don't always have to be created in a "Fast, but Weak" or "Strong, but slow" way. Why not have a Fast and Strong character and figure out a way to balance him? His recovery is bad so if you knock him off the stage enough then he'll end up dying. I can see how the KO punch seems a bit much though. On the other hand, I like that unique part of him. This is just how I personally feel.
I see what you mean, but little mac isn't the way to do it. 80% of the match is held on the ground, little mac has the best ground game out of the cast which means he is at a huge advantage from the start. Now wether or not you find it easy to gimp him is negligible because it represents a huge flaw in his design, now regardless of wether or not you play as, or against little mac, the match always begins with the idea of gimping little mac because any other option is never really in their favor. I think if he had a slightly worse ground game and slightly better air game he would be that big of a deal, but when you start giving him advantages like super armor, no ending lag on attacks that have super armor, and a K'O punch, it makes the weakness seem less important
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
I see what you mean, but little mac isn't the way to do it. 80% of the match is held on the ground, little mac has the best ground game out of the cast which means he is at a huge advantage from the start. Now wether or not you find it easy to gimp him is negligible because it represents a huge flaw in his design, now regardless of wether or not you play as, or against little mac, the match always begins with the idea of gimping little mac because any other option is never really in their favor. I think if he had a slightly worse ground game and slightly better air game he would be that big of a deal, but when you start giving him advantages like super armor, no ending lag on attacks that have super armor, and a K'O punch, it makes the weakness seem less important
You can't really say that the majority of the match is played on the ground. When people have the ability to only approach mid-jump, and each attack knocks people into the air, "80% of the match is held on the ground" isn't really true.

His weakness in recovery isn't a flaw in his design either. It was a conscious decision that works. All of the advantages you mentioned are still balanced pretty fairly with the fact that he can be killed fairly easily at 20%.

And about everyone knowing that they should gimp Mac: That isn't really a flaw in his design either. Every type of character has a hard-counter strategy against them. Keep-away characters are weak to Rush down characters for example. Tanks are weak to keep-away. etc. Considering that Little Macs strengths and weaknesses are so extreme it's only natural that his counter strategies are obvious.

425
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
You can't really say that the majority of the match is played on the ground. When people have the ability to only approach mid-jump, and each attack knocks people into the air, "80% of the match is held on the ground" isn't really true.

His weakness in recovery isn't a flaw in his design either. It was a conscious decision that works. All of the advantages you mentioned are still balanced pretty fairly with the fact that he can be killed fairly easily at 20%.

And about everyone knowing that they should gimp Mac: That isn't really a flaw in his design either. Every type of character has a hard-counter strategy against them. Keep-away characters are weak to Rush down characters for example. Tanks are weak to keep-away. etc. Considering that Little Macs strengths and weaknesses are so extreme it's only natural that his counter strategies are obvious.

425
I'd like to think I'm right about the match being mostly on the ground, there isn't a character who can fly indefinitely so you have to land some time and I rarely see maches filled with pure air combat unless the characters have mutliple jumps or it's edge hogging. 50% is too low because when I knock you in the air towards the blast zone, I don't fly with you, I wait in preparation for your recovery towards the stage and act accordingly, the moments where both players are in the air arent as much as when you're both on the ground and if you are sent in the air then you're being forced out, but hey maybe you've experienced differently than I.

Also I understand it was a conscious decision, but that doesn't make it a good one. Little mac as a character shouldn't have such a linear perception from the players, his balance seems extremely lazy, it's too simple of an idea to have had any real thought behind. I would have made his recovery as good as Ganondorf's but he would've lost his super armor and his attacks would've had the same speed but they would also have more ending lag thus giving both players more options for the match
 
Last edited:

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
I'd like to think I'm right about the match being mostly on the ground, there isn't a character who can fly indefinitely so you have to land some time and I rarely see maches filled with pure air combat unless the characters have mutliple jumps or it's edge hogging. 50% is too low because when I knock you in the air towards the blast zone, I don't fly with you, I wait in preparation for your recovery towards the stage and act accordingly, the moments where both players are in the air arent as much as when you're both on the ground and if you are sent in the air then you're being forced out, but hey maybe you've experienced differently than I.

Also I understand it was a conscious decision, but that doesn't make it a good one. Little mac as a character shouldn't have such a linear perception from the players, his balance seems extremely lazy, it's too simple of an idea to have had any real thought behind. I would have made his recovery as good as Ganondorf's but he would've lost his super armor and his attacks would've had the same speed but they would also have more ending lag thus giving both players more options for the match
The majority of the match might be fought on the ground, but what about the time spent actually fighting? One hit leads to someone getting knocked into the air and any sort of follow up has to be done mid-air. Watch some high level fights and most of the actual fighting revolves around one person trying to land back on the ground. Unless it's a low-skill level match that involves someone spamming roll and the other person unable to punish, the actual fight is in the air. One of Little Mac's weaknesses is his low potential for combos because he can't follow up very well in the air.

Making Mac so extreme in terms of strengths and weaknesses was a good choice that kept to the spirit of his games and in my opinion was the least lazy route they could've taken. It's easy to make a well-rounded character. You have dozens of examples that you could've looked at and based his strengths and weaknesses on. it wouldn't have been hard to just look at characters like Mario, Fox, Link, Lucina and whoever else and based the character on their characteristics to make a "complex" and well rounded character.

Having to balance a character like Little Mac who has an unprecedented and unequal strength in groundgame with an equally as outrageous airgame is a lot harder. They managed to add someone who is undoubtedly the BEST at a certain thing in the game while still making him balanced compared to the rest of the roster. And the fact that no one really considers him top tier OR bottom tier and he's sort of in the middle only proves that he's balanced comapared to the rest of the roster.

Weakening his groundgame and strengthening his airgame wouldn't make him anymore balanced than he already is. The only thing it would do is make him less unique as a character.
420
 
Last edited:

Judo777

Smash Master
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
3,627
I'm gonna re-post this in here.

"I actually feel like Mac is a relatively weak character overall. What I mean is that Mac when playing against medium level players will have a VERY hard time. As stated Mac has stellar ground game and tons of tools to get in a hit at neutral. The problem is he NEEDS these tools because practically every time gets a hit it will be at neutral. As stated he has horrible follow up capability because he has no air game. The only real trapping you can do it trapping landings or getting people from off the edge and then only if there aren't any platforms at all.

In tournament Mac will never get to play on FD it will get banned everytime. So literally his play style will be get in their face at neutral and try to hit them before they hit you, if you succeed cool, you let them land on the platform and eventually get to the ground and try again. However in the situation above if you fail and get hit yourself, you get thrown into a hirrble position where you can theoretically take 70% trying to get back to the stage, with almost no form of retaliation, so either you get hit or you manage to escape and at best you are on even footing again.

Little Mac is basically never in an advantageous spot, he is just more solid at neutral, with the flipside of being able to be put in horrible lose-tie situations.

Playing against medium level players and above, little mac will require ALOT of focus because you need to control the match the whole game and win at neutral about 3 times as often as your opponent does.

The real reason people don't like him is he is a scrub slayer (just like wolf and GW in brawl) and becomes significantly better on wifi where strong fast moves become god-like, FD is the only stage, and timing juggle traps is really difficult (basically exploiting macs weakness is hard on wifi)."
 

XxBHunterxX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
366
NNID
Bryan
3DS FC
2766-9402-2187
The majority of the match might be fought on the ground, but what about the time spent actually fighting? One hit leads to someone getting knocked into the air and any sort of follow up has to be done mid-air. Watch some high level fights and most of the actual fighting revolves around one person trying to land back on the ground. Unless it's a low-skill level match that involves someone spamming roll and the other person unable to punish, the actual fight is in the air. One of Little Mac's weaknesses is his low potential for combos because he can't follow up very well in the air.

Making Mac so extreme in terms of strengths and weaknesses was a good choice that kept to the spirit of his games and in my opinion was the least lazy route they could've taken. It's easy to make a well-rounded character. You have dozens of examples that you could've looked at and based his strengths and weaknesses on. it wouldn't have been hard to just look at characters like Mario, Fox, Link, Lucina and whoever else and based the character on their characteristics to make a "complex" and well rounded character.

Having to balance a character like Little Mac who has an unprecedented and unequal strength in groundgame with an equally as outrageous airgame is a lot harder. They managed to add someone who is undoubtedly the BEST at a certain thing in the game while still making him balanced compared to the rest of the roster. And the fact that no one really considers him top tier OR bottom tier and he's sort of in the middle only proves that he's balanced comapared to the rest of the roster.

Weakening his groundgame and strengthening his airgame wouldn't make him anymore balanced than he already is. The only thing it would do is make him less unique as a character.
420
He plays more like mike Tyson than little mac, his games weren't about him applying overwhelming pressure, mac is hard to punish in this game for whiffing smash attacks, forward tilts and jab combos come out almost immediately afterwards. I'll give him one thing, he makes you feel like mac from the original punchout
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
He plays more like mike Tyson than little mac, his games weren't about him applying overwhelming pressure, mac is hard to punish in this game for whiffing smash attacks, forward tilts and jab combos come out almost immediately afterwards. I'll give him one thing, he makes you feel like mac from the original punchout
Well in punch out Mac was a pretty fast puncher. He plays pretty much the same as in Punch Out. he even gets hit by the same types of things(Hit a block, get punished for it by a grab). The only thing that could've made him feel more like he did in Punch Out would be if he had a stamina bar that got depleted each time he whiffed or hit a block. which...actually may have been an awesome addition. 419
 

warriorman222

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
983
Location
Meanwhile in Canada...
3DS FC
3866-8698-4754
Well in punch out Mac was a pretty fast puncher. He plays pretty much the same as in Punch Out. he even gets hit by the same types of things(Hit a block, get punished for it by a grab). The only thing that could've made him feel more like he did in Punch Out would be if he had a stamina bar that got depleted each time he whiffed or hit a block. which...actually may have been an awesome addition. 419
Uh, no. to make him faithful to his games, The K.O Punch would be an OHKO if they just whiffed, and not very strong if they didn't. His moves would be drastically faster and weaker, and his speed would be improved both on ground and air. Each of hid moves would have a defined use, and he'd be an extremely technical character.

Stamina bar would just be stupid. Mac would be the worst charcter, period.
 

KingTeo

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
183
Uh, no. to make him faithful to his games, The K.O Punch would be an OHKO if they just whiffed, and not very strong if they didn't. His moves would be drastically faster and weaker, and his speed would be improved both on ground and air. Each of hid moves would have a defined use, and he'd be an extremely technical character.

Stamina bar would just be stupid. Mac would be the worst charcter, period.
KO punch mechanics aside, what you say isn't exactly wrong for the most part. His moves could be a little bit weaker, but his ground speed and attack speed are already pretty much the fastest in the game. I really don't think they need to be even faster. His airspeed could go either way. On one hand, he's a boxer and completely ground based so air speed can go hand in hand with poor air game. But on the other hand he is speedy so his airspeed could also be pretty fast. What would you do to give each of his hits a defined use though? Just give each punch a very specific launch angle? Maybe a punch or two that are shield breakers? Each attack having a defined use is actually sort of hard to interpret into smash.

And as he is now the stamina bar(and by that I actually mean the Hearts) would be a pretty balanced fit. You start with 20, lose a heart everytime you hit a guard with a single attack or jab combo, dodging through attacks regains a heart and if they run out you cant attack for 5 seconds. It probably wouldn't affect him very much except for maybe forcing people to be a little less reckless with just spamming attacks and making people run away for 5 seconds every time their hearts run out. He'd be far from the worst.

Either way, what they did to Little Mac as is, is pretty great. 418
 

warriorman222

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
983
Location
Meanwhile in Canada...
3DS FC
3866-8698-4754
KO punch mechanics aside, what you say isn't exactly wrong for the most part. His moves could be a little bit weaker, but his ground speed and attack speed are already pretty much the fastest in the game. I really don't think they need to be even faster. His airspeed could go either way. On one hand, he's a boxer and completely ground based so air speed can go hand in hand with poor air game. But on the other hand he is speedy so his airspeed could also be pretty fast. What would you do to give each of his hits a defined use though? Just give each punch a very specific launch angle? Maybe a punch or two that are shield breakers? Each attack having a defined use is actually sort of hard to interpret into smash.

And as he is now the stamina bar(and by that I actually mean the Hearts) would be a pretty balanced fit. You start with 20, lose a heart everytime you hit a guard with a single attack or jab combo, dodging through attacks regains a heart and if they run out you cant attack for 5 seconds. It probably wouldn't affect him very much except for maybe forcing people to be a little less reckless with just spamming attacks and making people run away for 5 seconds every time their hearts run out. He'd be far from the worst.

Either way, what they did to Little Mac as is, is pretty great. 418
He'd be far from the worst? lolno. With that mechanic of yours, he would succeed Ganon for having no advantageous or even matchups, he would be the worst in the series and likely get his own tier for himself at the bottom just for that. You are encouraging shield-grab spam, pls no. Mac players can't just be shelded and have to run away every few seconds then lose a stock because you don't like him as is. I deal with enough kirbys and grapplers every day, I'm considering dropping Mac because of the extreme prejudice against him, the spam and hate i deal with on GFAQs for being a notorious Mac main, and the fact that one slipup costs you the game. Uphill battles don't exist, you just lose if you die first. There needs to be some reward in that system.

Like you start with 10/20, but dodging increases them by 2, and maxing out increases your ground game, air game, recovery (Like alot), and weight for 10 seconds, while burning out has the effect of 5 second shield break that can't be mashed out of and gives you super armor(no, not heavy armor) so they just rack damage on you. Still a horrible, nonbeneficial system, but not nearly as bad as yours.

And yes he needs to be faster if we're making him weaker. At least his aerials. If underwhelming power is gonna be his new weakness, speed is going to be his new strength, and his air game will have to be sped up and powered drastically. Like make every aerial stronger in knockback but weaker in damage, allow them to be slightly less endlaggy, or linger longer. Or be actually goddamm useful!

Every special mechanic in the game has a trade-off, not just pure benefit(except KO Punch). Monado has drawbacks and benefits, while the latter coming of on top. Luma is just all good absorbing hits and possesing the best projectile in th e game(Shooting star bit is basically Falco laser 4* better), the only drawbacks being if he dies, you have 2-3 useless specials. Pikmin have no drawback because Pikmin pluck, and recovery is a non issue, while i'm falling i ditch some of my Pikmin. Oil Panic's nerf is a double edged sword, allowing a max or forty-something% max damage, but allowing crap alike PIkawatch and Megwatch to exist.

K.O Punch is all benefit, i get that. That doesn't mean we nerf an already struggling character by taking away everything good about him, giving him more bad mechanics, and leaving him to rot. We rebealance him by lowering the armor on his smashes, and inproving his recovery, making his f-tilt and dash attack less spammy, give all his air attacks uses. K.O Punch only raises by giving hits, but you can no longer lose it form tumble, rather from an extra 50% damage taken(and being warned too), as well as thirding the damage requirement to 100%. 300% is just absurd, nobody does that much and lives. Now not only is Little Mac a better, the complaints cease, and he maintains a much better ground game then air game. This is assuming none of the above happens.


Like Thor said, the hate about Mac is because his benefits make noob tactics better like smash and tilt spam, drawbacks are about stuff noobs suck at like recovery, follow-ups and aerials. So he caters to noobs, and therefore deserves to be worse than Brawl Ganon? No. Just no. Being noob-friendly is usually a bad thing, as your character is stale and pretty bad in a competetie scene. MAc sucks. He is mid->midlow tier, everybody knows how to deal with him, he is hard countered by Shiek(Same way ROB went down for being hard countered by Metagame-Nerf, going form top tier to low tier). He isn't going to get better. And your nerfs aren't going to help.

tl;dr your mechanic is horrible, he needs an overhaul or fix, not nerfs. Little Mac isn't that great, and with some help could become a better but less unbalanced character.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom