Melee community: would you have REALLY cared if L-canceling was automatic?

[MikeHaggarTHAKJB]

and the faster you repeat this process the more difficult it is to time your l-cancel properly.

because the window in which you can input that command is now greatly reduced.

Nope. It's always 7 frames (unless there is hitlag involved, then things change up a bit).

 

[jugfingers]

Nope. It's always 7 frames (unless there is hitlag involved, then things change up a bit).

no I was saying the time in which you have to press L before your 7 frames away from the ground is reduced.

not that you have less than 7 frames.


comprehension of what your reading is important too......



EDIT

actually you probably do have less then seven frames or around 7 frames from the peak of foxs shorthop to the ground if you fastfall at the first possible frame. Im not sure how many frames that is but its certainly not very many. and you definitely have more frames if you fastfall later then the first possible frame so either way you have a shorter window in which your going to hit the ground and thus a shorter window in which you can press L

 

[Darth Waffles]

It's still a minimal part in the overall skill required in melee. I'd even say that it's overall not a huge part in tech skill, but maybe that's because I play fox.

You're saying that it's a minimal part in the overall skill required, and you're saying that it's not a huge part in tech skill, yet you're also telling me that you're not meaning that it is easy?

You're also trying to split people into groups of "can't even L-cancel" and "m2k (always L-cancel)." You can't do that. Too many people are in-between those levels. Someone wrote a nice line about how Melee isn't an RPG. Once you learn a technique (L-cancelling), you don't/can't always automatically use it, even if it always helps you. What convinced Meta to relent on automatic L-cancelling in terms of the space animals was that the repetetive motion of pressing the button DID, in the long run, add depth and technical skill. As someone earlier made an example of, imperfect l-cancelling could actually cost you a stock or save your opponent from losing one. People who play the space animals, especially, have to deal with this, and they have a lot harder time with moving their fingers from doing an aerial to L-cancelling.

 

[BrawlLover]

loool either you l cancel or you don't

 

[Lirok]

loool either you l cancel or you don't

Very true words from the master himself.

 

[Darth Waffles]

loool either you l cancel or you don't

Fail...?

You could say "either you -->know how to<--- l cancel or you don't."
You can NOT say that you either ALWAYS L-cancel all of your aerials, shffled or not, whether they hit a shield, angled or not, or the ground (this makes a difference, in case you're ever pillaring somebody) or you NEVER cancel your aerials. It doesn't change how many frames you have to PRESS the button in order for L-cancelling to take effect. Certain situations, though, such as in the dashizwiz example, make it substantially harder for you to get your fingers to the buttons with good timing. You need to make sure that you get the aerial off, but that you can get an L-cancel off too, and continue to respond in the most efficient way possible. That may not be the best wording of it, but I'm pretty sure that it is what jug meant. With the dashizwiz example, if you can or can't L-cancel (and then follow up) 100% percent of the time, as he did, then it clearly does add depth to the game, or at the very least, retains that depth which automating L-cancelling would remove.

Again, there's a whole level of the MAJORITY of people who don't get every single L-cancel in a tournament. This is because their level of consistency isn't 100%. I'm not saying that it's automatically 0-10% of what it should be (100), but the fact that you can punish a missed L-cancel is, in my opinion, way too important for it to be automated and taken out as an option.

 

[BrawlLover]

darth, please.

 

[Magus420]

...The next day...
Thread: "Should falco's short hop laser be automatic?" Post: Pressing B on the ground is clearly worse in all cases than short hop lasering. Any tournament-viable falcos will have learned to SHL with ease. Therefore, pressing B while on the ground (not necessarily the ledge), should automatically start the jumping animation as well, eliminating the need to press the jump button itself. The control stick would still be used for momentum and air control, including fastfalling or not.
...Eventually...
Thread: "Should JC grabs be automatic if you're in range?" Post: Standard grabbing is clearly inferior to JC grabs if you're (only) in range of the latter. Any tournament-viable characters will always want to grab their opponent with a slightly increased range, rather than suffer from the lag of a missed grab. (etc.)

Shorthopping then shooting a laser in situations where the fact that standing lasers repeat faster than SHLs do isn't needed and is always the inferior option under these conditions isn't a game mechanic.

Running, jumping, then grabbing during the jump startup lag in situations where the better speed or range of some characters' dash grabs isn't needed and is always the inferior option under these conditions isn't a game mechanic.

The not getting hit game mechanic is also clearly superior to getting hit in situations where getting hit is always the inferior option, so not getting hit should be automatic as well in these cases.

 

[Geist]

The not getting hit game mechanic is also clearly superior to getting hit in situations where getting hit is the inferior option, so not getting hit should be automatic as well.

LOL
amazing.

 

[Johnknight1]

I wouldn't really mind. Sure the more skilled players will miss less often then the lesser experienced players, but it really isn't too bad of a margin. Within a few hours of learning L-cancelling, I was landing 90% of L-cancels, so it really isn't that huge of an issue. SO yeah, it's not that big of a deal either way to me. Either way is good.

 

[jugfingers]

so magus your pro auto l-cancelling? or are you just refuting that specific argument

 

[Magus420]

I feel l-canceling is a poorly designed mechanic, having zero risk/cost or reason not to use it in any situation regardless of whether it fails or not, but acknowledge the small amount of depth it adds to the game. The input for it could be better utilized if it had pros/cons to its use so that it not only required timing, but skill in using it most effectively.

 

[Darth Waffles]

Shorthopping then shooting a laser in situations where the fact that standing lasers repeat faster than SHLs do isn't needed and is always the inferior option under these conditions isn't a game mechanic.

Wobbles' view that L-cancelling should be automated had nothing to do with the fact that it was a game mechanic. It was all about how there was no reason not to do it, and that automating it only changed the fact that you wouldn't have to press the button. How often are you going to want to shoot standing lasers? Not very often, compared to the amount of times that you will be SHL-ing them. Is this not comparable, then, to what Wobbles then said when he wrote how he would be willing to "sacrifice these situations" in order to put more emphasis on other aspects of strategic choice and/or technical ability?

Running, jumping, then grabbing during the jump startup lag in situations where the better speed or range of some characters' dash grabs isn't needed and is always the inferior option under these conditions isn't a game mechanic. .

Same thing, though with a worse example, I'll admit. It was originally supposed to be something like "I'm on the ground (facing and near my opponent) and I press the button/s required to grab. My grab should automatically come out as the fastest grab possible which would reach my opponent, since I don't want to just do a (non-reaching) grab, miss, and suffer the lag. Since I've pressed the grab button(s), I obviously want to grab my opponent immediately, and making effecient grabs automated would just reduce the need to press the other buttons."

It's not about whether or not it is a game mechanic; it's about whether or not it should be automated, and why. These two examples, although they may not be the absolute best ones, are similar to examples of what could happen if people kept going along these lines.

The not getting hit game mechanic is also clearly superior to getting hit in situations where getting hit is always the inferior option, so not getting hit should be automatic as well in these cases.

...Yea... Where do you draw the line on what should be automated and what shouldn't be?

 

[MikeHaggarTHAKJB]

You're saying that it's a minimal part in the overall skill required, and you're saying that it's not a huge part in tech skill, yet you're also telling me that you're not meaning that it is easy?

Yes.

You're also trying to split people into groups of "can't even L-cancel" and "m2k (always L-cancel)."

No, I'm not. Sorry if it seemed like I was saying that. I'm saying that just because L-canceling makes people who suck suck even harder it doesn't mean melee has more depth.

no I was saying the time in which you have to press L before your 7 frames away from the ground is reduced.

...................

 

[jugfingers]

I feel l-canceling is a poorly designed mechanic, having zero risk/cost or reason not to use it in any situation regardless of whether it fails or not, but acknowledge the small amount of depth it adds to the game. The input for it could be better utilized if it had pros/cons to its use so that it not only required timing, but skill in using it most effectively.

I agree with the thought process somewhat but l-cancelling is simply a skill that makes your character faster so yea there's no situation where you would not want to have at least the option to move quickly after performing an aerial attack even if you choose to just stand motionless after an aerial for whatever mindgame.

but its a physical skill that requires timing and concentration to make your character move quickly. if we start taking out mechanics that require timing and concentration then are we really making the game any better? no were just making it more accesible to people who don't have the necessary timing and skill to make there character move quickly.

I enjoy getting technically better at a technically demanding game such as smash
especially with fox/falco but other characters as well that you can progress alot with in terms of technical ability to make your character more dangerous and powerful.

ness is a good example, because nobody can djc his aerials as fast as the game allows, so there is always room to improve your technical ability, making a technical aspect of speed automatic makes the game less apealing from a progessive learning standpoint.

 

[MikeHaggarTHAKJB]

Taking away L-canceling wouldn't take away the aspect of timing at all. Timing your attacks properly in combos, timing a grab properly after your opponent missed an arial, etc are examples of things that take great timing. Try dd-grabbing a marth's fair before he can dash away or jab you. In fact, these things are much harder then L-canceling, so it's clear that people with good timing will be the ones that are good at the game anyway.

BTW-I'm pretty sure there are people who can DJC his arials as fast as the game allows. Atleast I'm sure there are people who could, question is if anyone cares about ness enough to spend their time on that.

 

[Magus420]

Wobbles' view that L-cancelling should be automated had nothing to do with the fact that it was a game mechanic. It was all about how there was no reason not to do it

You sure? That would be a very dumb argument. Something that vague could apply to ALL kinds of silly things like "Winning the match", or countless hypothetical situations with one best course of action.

It's not about whether or not it is a game mechanic; it's about whether or not it should be automated, and why.

Part of that 'why' is because it is a single game mechanic/'advanced technique', that aside from 1 or 2 absurdly situational cases which aren't even that useful to begin with, has no reason not to use it.

This is something I brought up before:

Just because it's how l-canceling worked in the previous smash games and is just what you may be used to (believe me, I am quite accustomed to it as well), doesn't mean that it isn't bad game design.

Seriously. How many good fighting games are there that contain intentional game mechanics/advanced techniques that:

1) Offer great reward for its success in execution at ZERO risk/cost to the player.
2) Failure in its execution always results in the exact same risk/cost/punishment as NOT attempting to perform it.
3) Attempting it in 100% of all cases is essentially 100% of the time the superior "option" to not attempting it, even if it were to FAIL each and every single time as failure will always result in the exact same outcome as not trying to perform it.

...Yea... Where do you draw the line on what should be automated and what shouldn't be?

Nothing else in the game really fits into the above description, so there isn't much of a slope to worry about anyway.

 

[jugfingers]

Taking away L-canceling wouldn't take away the aspect of timing at all. Timing your attacks properly in combos, timing a grab properly after your opponent missed an arial, etc are examples of things that take great timing. Try dd-grabbing a marth's fair before he can dash away or jab you. In fact, these things are much harder then L-canceling, so it's clear that people with good timing will be the ones that are good at the game anyway.

BTW-I'm pretty sure there are people who can DJC his arials as fast as the game allows. Atleast I'm sure there are people who could, question is if anyone cares about ness enough to spend their time on that.

taking away l-canceling would take away the aspect of timing your l-cancels.
not timing in general.


seriously watch that clip of dashizwiz I posted and tell me that the second dair he drops off the bush didn't take any real skill to do if you've already learned l-canceling, and anyone who knows how to l-cancel can do that so lets just make it automatic.



also in regards to ness djc aerials, nobody can play there character to its technical limits especially when it comes to ness's djc aerials, you think silentwolfs shffld shines in zelghandi is as fast as technically possible? no one has mastered anything technically speaking in this game, which makes trying to get better alot more rewarding.
taking away an obstacle instead of mastering it is for the weak and lazy.







EDIT

Magus, theres no reason not to use it because it makes your character faster and your in a fight


all your advocating is taking the skill out of moving faster.....

 

[MikeHaggarTHAKJB]

taking away an obstacle instead of mastering it is for the weak and lazy.

Oh my god. Is this the attitude this community is getting?

By the way- I am not looking to "take away" an obstacle. It's impossible to do anyway, unless we start hacking melee, which we really have no reason to do. I'm merely arguing about wether or not L-canceling adds depth or not, and so far I haven't been given any compelling arguments.

 

[ridikulus]

this thread is a ****ing waste of time.
sum it up
some people thing its an unneeded press, and it would be bette for people who dont want to over come the obstacle of always doing it.

everyone else thinks that those people are lazy *** holes and that lcanceling manually adds more depth to the game than just cancelling ****ing lag.

everyone shut the **** up and could a mod please close this goddam thread.
its taking away from the possibly intelligent debates that could be taking place in other possible threads.

also meta should stop making threads.
theyre always stupid and useless and eventually turn into ****ing stupid debates about something stupid.

 

[jugfingers]

Oh my god. Is this the attitude this community is getting?

By the way- I am not looking to "take away" an obstacle. It's impossible to do anyway, unless we start hacking melee, which we really have no reason to do. I'm merely arguing about wether or not L-canceling adds depth or not, and so far I haven't been given any compelling arguments.

no thats my specific view that in no way reflects the attitude of anyone else.


l-cancelling is a skill that allows you to move faster, does moving faster add depth?

I don't think so, and never was arguing that ever. some people were arguing that the possibility of miss l-cancels adds depth but that was never really the main argument.



l-cancelling makes moving quickly a skill based process, period.


if you don't feel its necessary to learn a skill in order to move quickly in a fighting game then your a scrub, and probably weak and lazy.

this is my opinion not the communities.

 

[Magus420]

Magus, theres no reason not to use it because it makes your character faster and your in a fight


all your advocating is taking the skill out of moving faster.....

I'm not advocating taking anything out. I'm saying there would be no slippery slope in making it half lag by default, and that l-canceling is s***ty design for a fighting game technique because it is.

Since it's already in the game and contributes a small amount to the game I'm not fully in agreement with the idea of removing it entirely being a good thing, but if it weren't in already and there was the option to add it in I'd think it'd be a dumb idea when you could just put something that offers far more to the game in its place.

l-cancelling makes moving quickly a skill based process, period.


if you don't feel its necessary to learn a skill in order to move quickly in a fighting game then your a scrub, and probably weak and lazy..

So if all ground attacks, B moves, grabs, rolls, dodges, jump landings, etc all required you to l-cancel them or you would lag twice as long the game would only be better and more skill based because of it right? Also, anyone who thinks it'd be unnecessary would be a scrub and is being lazy?

 

[Darth Waffles]

You sure? That would be a very dumb argument. Something that vague could apply to ALL kinds of silly things like "Winning the match", or countless hypothetical situations with one best course of action.

Fair enough, catching me being lazy like that. That post wasn't ALL about how it should be automatic because there's no reason not to do it. Like Meta's argument in the beginning, it was a combination of being necessary yet easy, and not "teaching" you anything or adding depth, but instead giving you better/lower-lag moves. He was arguing for more emphasis on strategic choice by eliminating the "need" to push a button to L-cancel.

Part of that 'why' is because it is a single game mechanic/'advanced technique', that aside from 1 or 2 absurdly situational cases which aren't even that useful to begin with, has no reason not to use it.

This is something I brought up before:

Just because it's how l-canceling worked in the previous smash games and is just what you may be used to (believe me, I am quite accustomed to it as well), doesn't mean that it isn't bad game design.

Seriously. How many good fighting games are there that contain intentional game mechanics/advanced techniques that:

1) Offer great reward for its success in execution at ZERO risk/cost to the player.
2) Failure in its execution always results in the exact same risk/cost/punishment as NOT attempting to perform it.
3) Attempting it in 100% of all cases is essentially 100% of the time the superior "option" to not attempting it, even if it were to FAIL each and every single time as failure will always result in the exact same outcome as not trying to perform it.

Hopefully none? Offering great reward for ZERO risk/cost to the player is clearly the basis of a broken technique. How does this relate to your argument of pro-automatic L-cancelling? Since manually doing it clearly isn't broken, isn't this, if it's relevant, proving why manual L-cancelling should stay IN...? These three criteria constitute a broken technique, with great reward for no risk. L-cancelling is NOT under these, for the simple reason that there is always risk. It might be a simple push of a button, but it's possible to mess up on (1). If you miss an L-cancel (2), it increases the risk/cost/punishment to you. Statment 3 doesn't apply to manual L-cancelling because there is a difference based on whether or not you're successful 100% of the time. Automating L-cancels clearly makes it all three of these things, and having great reward for no risk is a bad thing, decreasing the overall competetiveness

 

[Ojanya]

Yes, it is one of the things that makes Melee harder to play. It requires skill and timing. Sure, eventually it becomes automatic, but mastering it gave me a sense of accomplishment.

This, and it gives more room for error, expanding gameplay. I would definately care.


Also, eff Brawl+, play Melee.

 

[MikeHaggarTHAKJB]

Hopefully none? Offering great reward for ZERO risk/cost to the player is clearly the basis of a broken technique. How does this relate to your argument of pro-automatic L-cancelling? Since manually doing it clearly isn't broken, isn't this, if it's relevant, proving why manual L-cancelling should stay IN...? These three criteria constitute a broken technique, with great reward for no risk. L-cancelling is NOT under these, for the simple reason that there is always risk. It might be a simple push of a button, but it's possible to mess up on (1). If you miss an L-cancel (2), it increases the risk/cost/punishment to you. Statment 3 doesn't apply to manual L-cancelling because there is a difference based on whether or not you're successful 100% of the time. Automating L-cancels clearly makes it all three of these things, and having great reward for no risk is a bad thing, decreasing the overall competetiveness

I think you misunderstood him. He's saying that since there is no point in not doing it, there is no reason you should be able to not do it (correct me if I'm wrong magus)

no thats my specific view that in no way reflects the attitude of anyone else.


l-cancelling is a skill that allows you to move faster, does moving faster add depth?

I don't think so, and never was arguing that ever. some people were arguing that the possibility of miss l-cancels adds depth but that was never really the main argument.



l-cancelling makes moving quickly a skill based process, period.


if you don't feel its necessary to learn a skill in order to move quickly in a fighting game then your a scrub, and probably weak and lazy.

this is my opinion not the communities.

Like you proved earlier when you said that some people shffl faster then others... moving quickly in this game would still demand timing, skill and practice, since timing one move ASAP after the other is so important.

Whatever, my main and only argument was that L-canceling doesn't add depth of any kind. If you're not arguing about I don't even what we're arguing about, lol.

It's funny you're calling me a weak and lazy scrub when I have mastered L-canceling. Do you realize that I don't even play brawl? I haven't even played the game since BEFORE it was released in europe, and I live in europe. I've never owned Brawl. I don't even have a wii. I have no plans of wasting my time on brawl+ either.
You've still got the definition of scrub wrong, by the way.

 

[Magus420]

Hopefully none? Offering great reward for ZERO risk/cost to the player is clearly the basis of a broken technique. How does this relate to your argument of pro-automatic L-cancelling? Since manually doing it clearly isn't broken, isn't this, if it's relevant, proving why manual L-cancelling should stay IN...? These three criteria constitute a broken technique, with great reward for no risk. L-cancelling is NOT under these, for the simple reason that there is always risk. It might be a simple push of a button, but it's possible to mess up on (1). If you miss an L-cancel (2), it increases the risk/cost/punishment to you. Statment 3 doesn't apply to manual L-cancelling because there is a difference based on whether or not you're successful 100% of the time. Automating L-cancels clearly makes it all three of these things, and having great reward for no risk is a bad thing, decreasing the overall competetiveness

Wtf?

What increased risk do you have by attempting to l-cancel over not attempting to l-cancel? I don't think you're reading it the right way at all.

 

[Darth Waffles]

I'm clearly not, because that question seems kind of redundant from the way I'm interpreting it now. What increased risk do I have by attempting to l-cancel over not attempting to l-cancel?

Assuming my aerial's animation is still going (so I'll never airdodge by accident), there's plenty of risk in me NOT L-cancelling, because I get NO reward: halved landing lag after aerials. This gives my opponent more time to punish me.

There's significantly LESS risk of my opponent punishing me when I do L-cancel, ASSUMING I pull them off 100% of the time, because I DO get the reward: halved landing lag after aerials.

Yes, this is starting to become the "I always -->want<-- to L-cancel" argument. What am I missing?

EDIT: To directly answer your question, there is NO MORE risk by trying to manually L-cancel, but there is a reward for it. The risk of failing to get this reward, however small, is still present. This risk would be removed if L-cancelling were automatic.

 

[jugfingers]

So if all ground attacks, B moves, grabs, rolls, dodges, jump landings, etc all required you to l-cancel them or you would lag twice as long the game would only be better and more skill based because of it right? Also, anyone who thinks it'd be unnecessary would be a scrub and is being lazy?

lol it definitely would be more skill based if that was the case.....

the gap between noobs and pros would be much larger and if someone were wanted to compete at a high level but was unwilling to master these techniques the only possible reason is weakness of some form or another.

I think you misunderstood him. He's saying that since there is no point in not doing it, there is no reason you should be able to not do it (correct me if I'm wrong magus)



Like you proved earlier when you said that some people shffl faster then others... moving quickly in this game would still demand timing, skill and practice, since timing one move ASAP after the other is so important.

Whatever, my main and only argument was that L-canceling doesn't add depth of any kind. If you're not arguing about I don't even what we're arguing about, lol.

It's funny you're calling me a weak and lazy scrub when I have mastered L-canceling. Do you realize that I don't even play brawl? I haven't even played the game since BEFORE it was released in europe, and I live in europe. I've never owned Brawl. I don't even have a wii. I have no plans of wasting my time on brawl+ either.
You've still got the definition of scrub wrong, by the way.

the original argument of this thread was whether it should be automatic or manual not whether it added depth, the depth argument came up as a point on both sides for it to be manual or automatic but is not the original argument.


and I was never calling YOU weak and lazy I said anyone who doesn't feel that its necessary to learn a skill in order to move quickly in a fighting game is weak and lazy.

also I never insinuated that you play brawl, and I posted a link to the def of scrub earlier but you seem to ignore or not read most of what I or anyone else has posted in this thread.

I've posted a link to a dashizwiz match twice now commenting on a specific example of skill based l-canceling that everyone ignored, so you should watch that and refute it instead of constantly posting useless information about how you live in europe and don't play brawl.

P.s.

nobody has mastered l-cancelling,

 

[Magus420]

What am I missing?

The thing we were originally talking about.

What slippery slope effect?

V

Where do you draw the line on what should be automated and what shouldn't be?

V

...game mechanics/advanced techniques that:

1) Offer great reward for its success in execution at ZERO risk/cost to the player.
2) Failure in its execution always results in the exact same risk/cost/punishment as NOT attempting to perform it.
3) Attempting it in 100% of all cases is essentially 100% of the time the superior "option" to not attempting it, even if it were to FAIL each and every single time as failure will always result in the exact same outcome as not trying to perform it.

V

Nothing else in the game [besides l-canceling] really fits into the above description, so there isn't much of a slope to worry about anyway.

 

[Darth Waffles]

(My quote)
Where do you draw the line on what should be automated and what shouldn't be?

V
(Your Quote)
...game mechanics/advanced techniques that:

1) Offer great reward for its success in execution at ZERO risk/cost to the player.
2) Failure in its execution always results in the exact same risk/cost/punishment as NOT attempting to perform it.
3) Attempting it in 100% of all cases is essentially 100% of the time the superior "option" to not attempting it, even if it were to FAIL each and every single time as failure will always result in the exact same outcome as not trying to perform it.

You tell me that these three reasons are "the line" of whether or not something should be automated. If you made L-cancelling automatic, THEN it would fulfill these three requirements. As of now, L-cancelling does not. Where are you going with this?

Anything that's automated simply because it is the "superior option" offers zero risk for a "reward" (that is now worthless because of the lack of risk). What's disappearing, though, is the ("minimal") risk that it took to get the reward in the first place, when it wasn't automatic. I'm arguing that this original risk is important enough to affect even higher-level play, which means that I would care if L-cancelling was automatic. Going a step further, this eventually leads to other techniques, such as the SHL one, if you consider it valid, going the same way. There's a risk of not doing it right, even though you'ld never really want to, except in those "rare occasions." That's what the slippery slope argument is really about.

 

[Magus420]

If you made L-cancelling automatic, THEN it would fulfill these three requirements. As of now, L-cancelling does not.

WOW.

10seriouslydudewows

 

[Pink Reaper]

Wow. I leave for a few hours and we have scrubs trying to argue with Magus? What is the world coming to?

 

[Grunt]

I'm pretty sure landing has no Risk/Reward since there's no other option because there is no canceling.
lololol

 

[Darth Waffles]

Alright then, let's just go from you explaining the positives of your side and/or the negatives of my side to "WOW." You haven't convinced me that your viewpoint is any more right than mine is wrong. I don't see any new arguments for your side that you've brought up that haven't already been circulating and discussed (unsuccessfully) for the last 20 pages.

 

[Darth Waffles]

I'm pretty sure landing has no Risk/Reward since there's no other option because there is no canceling.
lololol

It's the risk between landing without l-cancelling vs landing with l-cancelling, with l-cancelling being done manually. The risk is that you don't get halved lag, the reward is that you do. I don't think I can make it any clearer than that :\

 

[Pink Reaper]

Alright then, let's just go from you explaining the positives of your side and/or the negatives of my side to "WOW." You haven't convinced me that your viewpoint is any more right than mine is wrong. I don't see any new arguments for your side that you've brought up that haven't already been circulating and discussed (unsuccessfully) for the last 20 pages.

This is mostly because of your failure to realize what's being argued. The Auto-L side is saying that there is L-canceling has no options and the Manual-L side is saying "We like to hit alot of buttons really fast." There is no argument here, there are no options in L-Canceling, there's no reason to NOT do it(Unless maybe you're Peach) The added button press doesn't change gameplay after a certain point, only at the beginner level does it really matter. No, forcing your opponent to miss an L-Cancel has nothing to do with L-Canceling itself. No, pressing that one button is not technical skill. No, making Auto-L would not lead to a slippery slope because it's not being advocated to make the game easier, it's mostly because, for the most part, L-Canceling is simply more work for the sake of more work.

 

[Grunt]

"Not getting 1/2 lag" isn't a risk since it happens normally without any attempt at rewarding yourself.
EDIT:
quick posting is cool because both our posts were on the last page 2 seconds ago.

 

[jugfingers]

lol at the only people in this thread arguing for auto l-cancelling is
a ganon main
a kirby main
an ice climber main



Wheres all the space animals????


EDIT

pink reaper the argument i've put forward is that it takes skill to press buttons really fast, and using a skill such as pressing buttons really fast with precise timing that allows you to move faster is better/more fun in a fighting game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig2kVduNIAM

1:16-1:21

specifically 1:18-1:19

dropping off a platform bush and l-canceling a dair into the ground below in a split second takes skill that not everyone who can "l-cancel" posses. and effectively makes auto-l-cancelling a handicap for people who have less technical skill.

why is physical ability not a desirable attribute in melee? or any competetive sport.

 

[Grunt]

Wheres all the space animals????

*Raises hand*

 

[Darth Waffles]

Have you read my post on the bottom of page 15, or the pages before it? This was all discussed either before or at the time of that post. I've already argued the difference between wanting to L-cancel and being able to 100% of the time. Please read the posts after that one as well, because it gets into how you can't split people into "always does it" or "never does it". Even 99% of the time is still different from 100%. We've even talked about how it DOES add depth and gameplay, which is why Meta, the creator of this thread, changed his views regarding L-cancelling in terms of the space animals, or at the very least, in terms of counting as "tech skill" in regards to the space animals.

We're going in circles here, and the original question was "Melee community: would you have really cared if L-cancelling was automatic?" My answer is yes, and yours is no. After a certain point, which I think we're reaching, the thread is just devolving into agreeing or disagreeing, specific points or not

"Not getting 1/2 lag" isn't a risk since it happens normally without any attempt at rewarding yourself.

Uhh...
It happens normally? I specifically wrote that this is based off of MANUAL l-cancelling. You have to press the button. If you don't, that's a risk. Everything else in that argument is based off of this point