Because I'm terrible at resisting bait and just loooove arguing with Warlord...
Oh, before I dive into all the nasty stuff, thanks for the advertisement, agi.
Mogenar almost made Rool’s top 10? Pah! Rool’s weak voting him. Seems we have another Thief on our hands. Don’t let something we’ll all regret happen twice, people, because clearly Madeleine’s enthralling animations (Lol fireproof umbrella) are so much more character oriented then Mogenar and her playstyle so much more unique and flowing then Mogenar’s could ever be. What a joke.
Where to even
begin, man? My opinion on Mogenar is not set in stone; you know, we can't ALL read a set and instantly make a judgement call on it that we never ever let go of no matter what. I actually
reread sets I'm foggy on. Mogenar's oscillating at the moment, in transit, I suppose you could say.
Rool would have you believe Alucard is the best offensive set we have. Hahahhaahahhaha. . .Bahahahhaahahahha. . .BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Really, stop pushing me over the edge alongside you with your insanity, Rool. It has generic standards which are fast and thus automatically “flow” into a generic combo based playstyle (The most he has for “spacing” is his turning lag gimmick). That might’ve worked as an excuse for some very very very poor flow, but then his specials come into the picture. and are just irrelevant to godd*mn everything and insanely gimmicky. Versatality is now an excuse to have no legitimate playstyle. Seeing Sandshrew’s “playstyle” of hiding is contained in a single move while the rest of his set are generic attacks (Fast ones, like Alucard), Sandshrew could very easily be re-written to appear “versatile” by this pathetic definition.
Oh, I never said Alucard was entirely an aggressive set. Didn't say that. If generic standards AUTOMATICALLY flow, by my definition, why
don't I like Sandshrew? Long-range attacks tend to lend to spacing, that's what spacing
is. Versatility is not an excuse for anything, although it can be a central focus of a moveset, actively being capable of replying to anything.
And you're still, as you've always been, dodging my main point. I figure Alucard would be fun to play. Do you disagree with this, somehow? I'd say something like "who decided our definition of playstyle was the be-all and end-all of what is good in a moveset?", but I already know the answer.
This is also an example of how to CORRECTLY do a controversial writing style, unlike one that completely and utterly devours the entire moveset and everything in it like with Madeleine, where we’re forced to sit through unnecessary babbling that constantly interrupts our envisioning of the set. If I wanted to have a chat with you, Meadow, I’d be inviting you to the chat, not reading your movesets.
How malicious. It interrupts your
envisaging? Oh, dear god. We just can't have that. Can't have friendliness or "fun".
Don’t be fooled by this terrible set! Mario and Luigi’s combos are clearly new and innovative and a revolution in offensive characters! Seriously, though, how they go about the comboing is interesting what with the two desynched characters, but the more flashy stuff comes off as quite gimmicky and irrelevant to the trained eye.
Oh, come on; I never even
said any of that (hell, I LIKE Subaru). The "more flashy stuff" is not the reason I love the set, although I don't feel it detracts actively.
Oh, clearly Sandshrew is Sandslash’s equal! Generic attacks no playstyle whatsoever zero detail ftw! Rool, you proposal of wanting Sandshrew to evolve into Sandslash caterpie style is the worst idea I’ve ever heard in all of my MYMing. How DARE you even CONSIDER involving that ABOMINATION with this MASTERPIECE. Much less, you want to involve it in a way that resembles the HIDEOUS caterpie. Good GOD.
]
Dude, I blatantly and explicitly said Sandslash was the better set. My "proposal" was something I threw out there before even reading Sandslash, and frankly, it'd make Sandshrew feel a lot more complete. If you actually even replied to my
point instead of throwing around capitalized negatives, maybe we'd be getting somewhere, but, god forbid, that would require something OTHER than personal attacks and pig-headedness. I swear, sometimes arguing with you is like smashing your head into a brick wall.
Let’s kick it up a notch and attack yet another set, shall we? Sandslash is easily the most intriguing MYM character to play in CTF (Outside Spy, of course, whom was specifically designed for the bloody thing) what with his ability to hide allied traps as well as his own. He can even go on the offensive by using his sandstorm to mask him as he goes into the foe’s base. But no, clearly the generic trap character Badman is among the most intruiging CTF characters! He can’t conquer the map – that was just leftover Junahu admitted he forgot to remove because he originally planned Badman to function differently. The only difference between Badman and regular trap characters in CTF is that he’s booted outside the base due to the others not wanting his minions to interfere. Obviously Badman doesn’t work in real Brawl either. . .But oh wait! Badman clearly works in 50 stock matches! Good for you, Badman. What trap character that keeps his traps around when he loses a stock DOESN’T dominate 50 stock matches? Badman is a very interesting set, for certain, but he has no mode to play in, at least no mode where he stands out from anyone else to warrant his learning curve.
Just for the record, this part was
not addressed at me.
Clearly the Punch Out set of the year is Aran Ryan, not this POS! So says Rool. Okay, so Aran Ryan has very little playstyle. That’s not an option. He doesn’t claim to be versatile, that’s out. It’s written by Kupa, so it obviously can’t hypnotize Rool with “good” writing. It’s not even character oriented! That doesn’t leave you with much of any excuse to like it, Rool. Oh wait, it just dawned on me. You love characters with no clear playstyle that have blatantly generic moves. That’s a viable playstyle to you. Kay. I’ll be sure to include a Roonahu version of my next set like with Huff’s Kapatultar version.
Dude, I switched out Aran Ryan for Macho Man in my votes soon after our talks yesterday; I wasn't set on it, I took a look back at both sets and made the more objective call. Characters with no clear playstyle with blatantly generic moves... riiiight. Huff N Puff and Harbinger
totally fit the bill.
But clearly Strangelove’s un-smashness makes him unplayable along with that steep learning curve! Good god, un-smashness is not the problem, in-smashness is. I don’t know why you’d ever want to make a moveset feasible to be implemented in the horrendous game that is Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Un-smashness is a plus. Of course, if you can make a GOOD moveset that can somehow fit within Brawl’s INSANE constraints, more power to you, but most of the time we end up getting, y’know, Madeleine.
Okay, I'm just going to emphasize this:
Good god, un-smashness is not the problem, in-smashness is. I don’t know why you’d ever want to make a moveset feasible to be implemented in the horrendous game that is Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Un-smashness is a plus.
Good god, un-smashness is not the problem, in-smashness is. I don’t know why you’d ever want to make a moveset feasible to be implemented in the horrendous game that is Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Un-smashness is a plus.
...How can I possibly ever agree with you when you're trying to create a better game than Brawl (which I'm not saying is any great feat)? I'm not a game designer. When I read a set, I'm not looking for something that creates a new bloody game. Comments like this are
exactly the reason I'm not making sets any more. You're the enabler here.
Rool’s a genius who lacks common sense. When he actually puts his intelligence to use to make actually good sets instead of fapping to a moveset I could’ve made in under an hour (From a gameplay stand-point – because this is clearly a contest to see who can apologize the most times in a moveset), we get this. A Pokemon Trainer with 3 Pokemon that actually all work together. This is how to –correctly- do versatility, as rather then just a bunch of completely randomly scattered moves to counter everything like with Alucard Rool has many methods for accomplish some very succinct playstyles. It never comes off as forced either what with 3 whole movesets to work with, and these various playstyle”s” are all great stuff that’s well worth the read. However; Rool’s a blatant hypocrite about demanding people to be “character-oriented” MYMers with that blatantly OOC Houndour. . .
Christ, when have I ever demanded ANYBODY be character-oriented? I mean, obviously I prefer sets that are implementations to characters (although most of MYM is made up of game designers like yourself and therefore disagree with me), but that's not any sort of... you know, my-way-or-the-highway thing!
The rest is pretty much the only part of your whole top ten that I actually enjoyed reading. How nice of you to grant me this one bright spot in this nasty venom-spewing spiel of yours.
Don’t be fooled! Kamek’s insanely predictable frail minions should easily sway your vote! No? How about how the movesets of caterpie and Elves that were entirely devoured just for the sake of organization? Again, moveset making contest, not a gift card making one, Rool.
Kamek again? Balance quibble again? Geez, man, I go back and write that the minions have 20 more health and a few more attacks and you'd love them, is that what you're saying? And you say
my opinions on sets can be random.
caterpie is not about organization, just like Elves is not a bloody serious entry. Once again, there's that crazy "fun" idea, but we wouldn't want to hear of any of that? Ignoring that everybody seemed to enjoy the Elves until you posted, of course.
Junahu’s opinions aren’t dartboard. I’ve been spending the entirety of this MYM figuring him and Rool out, and they juts simply like generic movesets with no playstyle for no apparent reason, and I will never ever stop tearing them apart limb for limb because of it.
I've been in MYM for well over a year. I've read hundreds of sets. If, at this point, I've stopped being enamoured every time someone has a few clever ideas, why is that so terrible? I prefer to see a set I can actually, you know,
imagine using. Not just in Brawl, but using. Which brings me to...
This is what happens when DM stops worrying about feasibly trying to implement his movesets into a terrible terrible game with laughable restrictions and goes crazy with his button inputs. It’s flaws? It’s clearly not character oriented! God, will you stop expecting us to make characters with zero character character oriented? That’s apparently the only difference between Huff and Golem that’s big enough to be Super Vote to Weak Vote. Feasibility/Learning Curve? Videoman is certainly leagues more feasible then other sets like Strangelove and Lucy which you **** over, Rool.
Sorry, what was that about "stopped worrying about feasibility" and "leagues more feasible"? Dude, you're like a parrot squawking back the same words without ever really getting what they
mean. Playing VideoMan would take countless hours of practice. Playing VideoMan
well is nigh impossible. He's a fun theoretical exercise, and the game designer in you "jizzes" over that.
I like the concept of Huff N. Puff more than the concept of Golem. I liked reading Huff N. Puff more than reading Golem. I'd prefer using Huff N. Puff to using Golem. WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO GRASP?
If you need further prove of Rool’s constant teetering over the edge of insanity, he can’t decide whether to f*cking super vote Lunge or to zero vote him. His opinion on movesets depends entirely on his mood and is very inconsistent and undefined. What he likes in movesets contradicts so much that it shouldn’t be possible to like both at the same time. I feel outraged to have my movesets on that top 10 placed anywhere those ABOMINATINOS.
Lunge is the only set I'm unsure of so wildly - again, I actually
reread sets, and reevaluate my opinions of them. It shouldn't be possible to like both at the same time? I guess I must be lying then, if you figure it shouldn't be
possible. Couldn't be that I have an open mind and can appreciate more than one thing in different sets.
This is why I want to become a game designer, so feasibility is thrown out the motherf*cking window and I can stop designing movesets for a bad game. That, and organization no longer exists either. All those apologies on Madeleine which you somehow find attractive and secretly fap to don’t show up in-game, Rool.
But you know what? We're not in-game. We're not implementing these sets. At the end of the day, this is a moveset contest, and as much as it may pain you that we're not seeing the pure genius of your ideas unfettered by pointless tidbits like "explanation", that's not what we're here doing. How you present your ideas
does matter, and frankly I'm here to read sets that I
A) Can see in Brawl
B) Can see enjoying in Brawl
C) Enjoy as sets.
Is that really
so bad?
What a bunch of cheap shots made specifically to make me sound like the antichrist. Warlord, if everyone agrees with you, we have MYM 4. Isn't this
better? And another thing - stop taking it so da
mn seriously, for the love of god. You approach MYM like a fight to the death and once in a while I think you should sit back, take a deep breath, and calm down. I can vaguely see what Daddy meant when he said you just make everything personal instead of actually debating - you didn't address
anything I specifically said in my top ten, dude! I mean, what the hell?