Marth's Fair

[GHNeko]

I looked at the marth board frame data and I swear to god it said 4-8.

That and we were talking about removing frames and stuff, so I said there was frames removed.

@_@

I guess I'm mistaken.

 

[Yeroc]

Neko, for clarification, did you try full jump walling as well or just short hops? Depending on how big the change in the hitbox position is from frame 6 to 7, and depending on how big or small you think the punishment window is, would removing frame 7 be an option? Also, since I did apparently goof on the IASA, is that something that needs to be put back?

Final verdicts, everyone?

 

[GHNeko]

I stopped Full Jumped Walling because I got hit more than I wanted to. I'm not sure if it was me just not doing it well enough, but I kinda got tired of being hit from below. So it may be a successful change, but it could also be me, or even both.

As for the removal of Frame 7, It would definitely help with reducing effectiveness of FH Walling, but would also make it more difficult to hit opponents below Marth, and considering this is with the 32 frame IASA Fair, if you push it up to 34, it will be easier to punish FH Walling, so I don't believe the removal of Frame 7 would exactly be necessary if you push up the IASA back to 34 or 35.

 

[omegablackmage]

What characters exactly were completely unable to get through marth's walling before? I'm honestly finding it difficult to imagine how a character would have been unable to get through from above or even between fairs, etc. Maybe a video of vex abusing this would help?

 

[VietGeek]

I looked at the marth board frame data and I swear to god it said 4-8.

That and we were talking about removing frames and stuff, so I said there was frames removed.

@_@

I guess I'm mistaken.

it might be. fair comes out on frame 4, but the PSA timer for collision termination is originally 4 frames afterward, being 8 in total. even if we were to only add the timers as seen in psa, you'll have to add +1 frame for the real frame it occurs in-game, so 7+1=8 (obv).

yeroc's standalone fix already takes away the fail-safe hitbox anyway (1 frame less until collision termination and corey apparently goofed on the iasa so eh lol).

 

[GHNeko]

It's a shame because the IASA works so well with the physics. It's not even funny. :/

 

[VietGeek]

but of course it would rofl. it's giving you more leniency.

 

[GHNeko]

Eh. I suppose.

But more or less, I'm just talking about the overall feel. I guess I just got used Rarth. So it's a refreshing feeling.

Yeroc or Viet, if you could post up a pac with fixed IASA, for me to play with, that would be nice.

 

[VietGeek]

http://www.mediafire.com/?ztzoyny02yi

IASA @ frame 34 (33 in PSA if you wanna look neko oh wait you can't even use psa trashtalk )

also synced the sword glow GFX on fair to terminate the same frame as the hitboxes. you should now visually see a difference.

 

[GHNeko]

Your trolling is only a sign of brotherly affection Viet.

Testing it now.

 

[GHNeko]

This works well. Though I still like Yeroc's better for bias reasons. :p

 

[VietGeek]

bias sob

i actually like SHeLL's better for bias reasons.

*****es dun know my perfect wavedash into turnaround into bair into "b-sticked" db suicide

 

[GHNeko]

What we have now works hella good. And I've come across plenty of cases of fair not being able to hit small/grounded targets. @_@

I missed a standing Ness when I tried a FF'd drop down Fair from one of the bottom platforms on Wario Ware. :|

It was phantom hit actually, cuz I saw Fair do that grazing animation. x__x

 

[VietGeek]

Which one? The Corey or the SHeLL?

 

[GHNeko]

The one you posted.

 

[VietGeek]

oh the revised Corey.

kk.

you never told me ur final opinions on the SHeLL.

 

[GHNeko]

Doesn't the Yeroc pac use the SHeLL fix? My thoughts on it include SHeLL's animation fix. It works. It does what it intended to do. It's a double edged sword as it grants Marf more horizontal at the cost of vertical.

Or am I missing something?

 

[VietGeek]

I asked this so many times rofl. Corey never answered if his fix was to work in conjunction with SHeLL's animation fix or not. I only assumed "no" because Corey had already chopped off 1 frame of Fair's duration anyway which would of course, decrease range and hitbox durations.

Anyway your thoughts are kinda invalid now tbh.

SHeLL's motion fix already gets rid of the old vertical hitbox while keeping the duration the same (lasts 4 frames). Because you applied BOTH changes, you cut hitbox range twice over, and duration once. This would explain why you can't even seem to hit a short humanoid character like Ness.

Test both separately since mixing the two means you're basically testing a nerf more severe than either alone.

 

[GHNeko]

After further testing, It is possible to hit ness through drop down FF fairs and ledge hop fairs, it's just that the timing is different due to the lack of the frame wit the SHeLL/Yeroc/Viet Fair.

After testing SHeLL's fair, the vert range nerf is fine with the hitboxes being active 4-8, though this is just with basic testing and has no field testing yet.

 

[Shell]

4-8?

Do you mean 4-7 like mine was supposed to be? If you make it 4-8 then it's better than the default one.

 

[Veril]

Yeah that's not happening lol

its 4 to 7 in the image Shell posted. I don't know why people would say its supposed to be otherwise.

Hitboxes on 4, 5, 6, 7 just like before. Just like Melee.

All four frames. No frame eight to be seen anywhere. ...?

More Shell-based win.


The Yeroc .pac and the SheLL fix should be used in conjunction.

 

[GHNeko]

Viet keeps confusing me. ;_;

 

[VietGeek]

4-8?

Do you mean 4-7 like mine was supposed to be? If you make it 4-8 then it's better than the default one.

Then I'm confused. Aren't timers 1 frame early from the action?


This is a vBrawl Marth.pac:

So even if that does mean 4-7...then Yeroc's pac is only 4-6 then. Right?

 

[Yeroc]

Pro-tip: When Neko says 4-8, he means 4-7.

To be concise about my stance on the issue: I'm actually going to motion that we use the SHeLL fix with Viet's existing fix of my pac. Hitboxes on frames 4-6 and frame 34 IASA. It's been demonstrated that it's possible to hit small characters with proper spacing/timing, so there's no "unhittable region" and makes trying to zone with fair take a little more precision. Removing SHeLL's frame 7 cuts off roughly 15% of the arc, which is acceptable I think. It keeps the move's effectiveness biased towards offensive vs defensive uses, but doesn't leave Marth high and dry in the hands of a competent player.

 

[VietGeek]

So I gotta ask, why must we reduce the move's duration at all? Surely I'm missing the bigger picture here.

 

[GHNeko]

That's also part of what confused me. I thought we opted out for the animation fix rather than a frame removal.

 

[Veril]

No, we opted for an animation fix in addition because removing frame 7 alone was not sufficient at diminishing the "campbox" of the fair. The animation fix alone is silly because of the horizontal range buff.

Last night made it crystal clear that the 4-6 hitbox with Shell's adjustment is going to happen. This is a pretty substantial buff to Marth's fair (from 6.0) in several respects. You can continue to talk about this till you are blue in the face.


Gold (no Johns) Marth:
physics fix
aerial stop momentum nerf removed
fair hitbox from 4-6 with shells adjustment
fair iasa reverted to 34
loads of Sakurai angle fixes

 

[VietGeek]

lol @ blue in the face. might not mind that actually (would match my hair obv)

but yeah okay. no probs

EDIT: btw, idk if you interpreted it this way, but i wanted to know why we have to REMOVE MOVE DURATION? Why can't we just keep it to 4 frames and get the same range proposed via another animation tweak? why do we have to do it THIS way? i don't care about the quantity and wealth of benefits marth is receiving, you're avoiding the question/it was never answered.

i mean i guess if i was at the meeting i would've known huh? oh well too bad for viet obv

 

[Veril]

too bad indeed

 

[VietGeek]

Regardless, I respect the judgments made by the Marth mains whom you conversed with in the meeting last night.

 

[Veril]

I totally want to hear more from the Marth mains. They've been so helpful! Oh wait... Shell doesn't main Marth.

why do we have to do it THIS way? i don't care about the quantity and wealth of benefits marth is receiving, you're avoiding the question/it was never answered

we opted for an animation fix in addition because removing frame 7 alone was not sufficient at diminishing the "campbox" of the fair. The animation fix alone is silly because of the horizontal range buff

That is why I'm done with this discussion. And... you aren't willing to speak with me over the phone. And you didn't show in the IRC discussion.

If you have a real problem with this feel free to leave.

 

[VietGeek]

I totally want to hear more from the Marth mains. They've been so helpful and clearly don't have an intense bias.


That is why I'm done with this discussion. And... you aren't willing to speak with me over the phone. And you didn't show in the IRC discussion.

If you have a real problem with this feel free to leave.

I've read that part of the post, it doesn't answer my question as to why move duration (not range/sword arc) has to be affected too, when we can make the sword arc face do a completely 360 the other way if we wanted to by motion.pac modifications.

Also sorry for seeming bitter towards you personally. There's a clear communication issue here. It's not that I didn't want to personally talk to you, but I don't own a cellphone because I don't need one and my family has been trying to cut costs down. You're in New York; I'm in Georgia. I would have to pay one way or another to contact you via phone. Also you would be bored to death anyway, I'm monotone and quite uninteresting.

Also I asked kindly (or so I believe) to alert me if you plan to hold an IRC discussion, as well as doing it before 10 PM EST if so possible. I go to school at 6 in the morning so I sleep rather early (similar to JCaesar's situation). Since neither conditions were met, the chance of me being on the IRC was...very low; especially if I've already gone to bed.

EDIT: Oh yeah I'm aware you're done looking at this thread.

 

[leafgreen386]

You've gotta be kidding me. We're using an animation tweak that was specifically designed so that we wouldn't have to cut off frames from the hitbox, and what do I come back to see? We're using that animation tweak, but now we're also cutting off the last frame of the hitbox from it. What is the point of this?

I finally got a chance to play some matches with the fair at vbrawl duration (hits 4-7 and IASAs frame 34) with the animation tweak. It plays fine. It has a clear hole in its range that can be abused if you try to FH fair wall (protip: FH fair walling doesn't work). There's no reason to take away the frame 7 of the animation tweak, because the animation tweak already does its job. Honestly, if someone can't get through FH fair walling with the animation tweak in place, then they're missing something in the matchup. It's not like before, where you not only had to get inside marth's range but you also had to outspeed him, which was rare for a character to be able to do. If you can get beneath marth, you can get inside his range, and you can **** him for trying to FH fair wall you, because he can't hit you back.

The FHDF wall can be gotten through. With this animation, it isn't matchup-winning. It's not even that good of a tactic. Me and DS may only play a small selection of the cast, but given the weaknesses I saw in it today, I'm having a very hard time thinking of a character that would not be able to beat it.

 

[Veril]

Talked to Viet and all is copacetic with him. It makes sense to me, given what I've heard from him and Leaf, that fair can keep its vBrawl duration if we implement Shell's hitbox tweak.

I need to hear from the people who are against that as I am not willing to argue against what seem like completely rational arguments from the Marth mains here.