My original fears of Nintendo balancing Smash are coming true.

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

It's not like Roy has other problems that hinder him. Like an anti-tipper that makes it hard for him to combo with non-spaced and to ko with spaced moves. Or fast-falling speed and poor recovery that leads to 0 to death chain throws. Or being completely outclassed by Marth?

I see that ATs can affect balance (which really isn't the sole case for Roy), but it doesn't mean that they should be removed.

I'm not saying it would. I'm challenging the notion that ATs don't cause inblance because they very clearly can and have in the past.

Crouch Cancelling though is awful in terms of how it cancels hitstun, that's bad game design.

 

[MegaMissingno]

Everything affects balance. If a butterfly flaps its wings in Africa, that'll affect the balance. It's never going to be perfect, and trying to cut out techniques just because you think that'll help balance is stupid. It's not like DACUS's existence suddenly ruined most of the cast or anything.

Remember that Nintendo only balanced around FFAs and the For Glory format, but I don't see anyone saying we should restrict ourselves to that just to keep it balanced. Sometimes a little bit of possible imbalance is a small price to pay for a better and deeper game.

 

[Shaya]

Remember that Nintendo only balanced around FFAs and the For Glory format, but I don't see anyone saying we should restrict ourselves to that just to keep it balanced. Sometimes a little bit of possible imbalance is a small price to pay for a better and deeper game.

Well in this case it's balancing between trusting ourselves verses trusting the developers. Considering Sirlin-like logic, we keep the game the way it's given to us and deal with it, this time we're given the opportunity to see the transitions stages towards whatever point Sakurai plans to take this game to.

Going by recent patch notes, it seemed pretty obvious that the balance team took into consideration the early Japanese tier list their community made, with most balance changes focused on the top and bottom 5 characters on the list. That's kinda crazy in and of itself. Sakurai has stated in interviews he reads all messages to his twitter, English or Japanese, but he will not reply to them. I think it would be wrong for us to say to him "make the game the way we want it! Bring back X/Y/Z", but it seems the message of "Character balanceeeeeee" does get through.

Technical Fixation vs Balance Fixation. I'm in the latter group and it seems to be the side with the most leeway in urging this game towards the best it can possibly be.

 

[CodeBlue_]

I'm not saying it would. I'm challenging the notion that ATs don't cause inblance because they very clearly can and have in the past.

Crouch Cancelling though is awful in terms of how it cancels hitstun, that's bad game design.

Ok ATs can cause imbalance... does this invalidate the positive effects they can have on the game?

Crouch Canceling cancels knockback not hitstun. It can only be done from ~30-40% anyway. You can say it's bad for complicating punishes, but it's more about allowing more approach options since the defending player is aware that he can't simply throw out a move at these specific percents. It can also be used to deal with incoming pressure when you know you are going to get hit.

Well, there may be an imbalance between how safe one can make those options, but they're faster than reaction speed options nevertheless that can cover mid range distances. You shouldn't underplay the 'always available' options in that scenario. Jumping, rolling (NEW NEW NEW NEW) and side-bing is a pretty good range of options every character has.

In a round about way, there is inherent risk in doing these things and you cannot do limitless 'stalling' (baiting/etc) to force different timings on people (dash dancing or WDing at variable speeds). But there's no way a player can cover all of those options at the same time.

An easier way to explain true pivots would be that you can freely dash in the opposite direction during the initial dash ("dash dance"), If you return the stick to neutral in the turning animation (1 to 2 frame window) you'll turn around and have cancelled your dash.

So

(up to X (5?) frames) -> -> -> Any action you want.

This was mildly touched upon by the top level Brawl players (it exists in Melee too obviously, but there's just easier options that exist in that game that replace that technical barrier; 64 players still have to rely on it though). It's very hard to do things with it, most people can practise and get true pivot jabs to a reasonable consistency. With c-stick set to tilts/specials you could do things easier, but most characters relied on C-stick smashes for buffering actions.

We've got a different engine with different buffering, reliance on c-stick smashes for fast/optimal play may be over.

So the perfect pivot is in 64 too. I see you point, but I unfortunately do not believe the players will optimize the uses of perfect pivot as the window is Guilty Gear level difficult and will choose to approach normally (dash to shield, foxtrot).

Also roll approach is my favorite approach lol (I have no idea if it is a viable strategy). How could I forget it?

But I can see your point on someone not being able to punish all possible approaches. It's whether there are an adequate amount of safe approaches are available to the one approaching that the defending can't react to. I think we would need top level play to really tell.

 

[Shaya]

From what I see, the true imbalance to all smash games (since melee) is potency from grabs. If you can grab something (a 7 frame action OoS [on average]; most characters fastest thing) and 'win' from grabbing, then the game falls apart as risk/reward is skewed horrendously in the favour of the better grab game and the overall safety of shield. If you need to win by other means, then you can't really get away with holding shield (especially against the characters who can win by grabs).

If Diddy gets nerfed, then the next oppressive grab game character will rise (likely Sonic or Ness, both having kill throws, great damage from them and solid means of getting grabs). Rosalina no longer hard counters grab games (Luma no longer acting in rosalina grab stun), see ya unanimously considered #1 in the game. We may eventually see those abusive characters that can rely on grab games [solely] to win while still being very competent cut down and still good (Sheik), and the characters remaining with amazing grab games (Luigi, Palutena, etc) will be strong but their limits elsewhere will keep them in check (hypothetical really, I'm hoping that this game's balance won't be entirely decided on who gets the best **** out of their down throw with everything else thrown to the wayside).

 

[MegaMissingno]

Part of the reason why grabs are the most important thing now is because of how damn good shields are. Nerf shields, and suddenly other moves start to matter again. Let's kill two birds with one stone here.

 

[Tagxy]

From what I see, the true imbalance to all smash games (since melee) is potency from grabs.

Melee is completely centralized by a characters ability to exert true shield pressure, which is limited to 3 characters + frame perfect yoshi. This is also a central point behind 20xx. People call metaknight a melee character in Brawl, Fox is a 64 character in melee.

Also addressing someone else but melee is not balanced at its top, my experience and knowledge from the existing titles hints at Melee being the most unbalanced smash game at top level. Im not gonna call this good or bad here though.

I appreciate your sentiment, but I would say that learning ATs does transend between games. I started with MvC2, and that's probably why i have trouble sympathizing with people who think smash is hard. The game is moving towards skill being defined less by fundementals, and more by memorizing characters and custom moves, which is WAY more time consuming IMO. And since the hitboxes are so unintuitive now you pretty much just have to lose every time you see a new character and hope you learned something. "Oh villiager plants a tree and chops it down to kill you, that's cool. oh i just dies because the tree slowly growing is a kill move and the hitbox is about 4 times bigger than the tree good game."

This is false. AT's are the false converse of fundamentals, mastering the technical mechanics behind ATs such as l-canceling and wave dashing isn't going to help you win in street fighter. Understanding the meta behind things like footsies and zoning will.

Secondly, memorizing characters and customs is a very dismissive way to imply character variety does not greatly add to depth. Understanding how characters function takes minimal effort for the great amount of diverse gameplay they can add, if it didnt we'd wish for single character competitive games.

one side is drastically more knowledgable than the other. most melee players have played brawl extensively, the opposite is not true.

Lets run with this line of logic.

In one of the earliest Brawl tournaments I entered a well known top melee player was also in attendance, likely the most successful Brawl player that moved on to play melee (super cool dude, this is not meant to reflect on his personality). The same tournament I outplaced him by quite a bit, and mind you this was years ago before Brawl underwent its modern revolutions. I could go into greater depth on melee players experience with Brawl, but the reference more or less summarizes the extent of their overall extensive play. In contrast many players familiar with Brawl (myself included) have been playing melee as of late which is at the very least a relevant time period. By the line of logic were using this makes them drastically more knowledgable than their melee counterparts. Not going to say Im outstanding, but I got through first round pools at KoC4, which is the top 1/3rd of players in melee's toughest region, and by such odd standards a better authority on melee then most posting here.

Granted all of this is based on a faulty line of reasoning, and experience or placements do not directly equate to your understanding of a game.

they are mostly balancing for FFA matches.

Dont state unproven assumptions as truth, as it stands the opposite side seems to have more evidence.

@ CodeBlue_ from reading your posts I feel you believe approaching in melee is easier than it truly is and harder than it is in smash 4. Shaya responding to your discussion mostly, but this is just my general assessment

 

[MegaMissingno]

Also addressing someone else but melee is not balanced at its top, my experience and knowledge from the existing titles hints at Melee being the most unbalanced smash game at top level.

Most unbalanced at the top? Fox is good, yes, but I would say the gap between him and the rest is a little bit smaller than 64 Pika's. And Brawl MK, well, come on.

Dont state unproven assumptions as truth, as it stands the opposite side seems to have more evidence.

http://mashable.com/2014/11/25/super-smash-bros-sakurai-interview/

Here's the actual source, he balances around just two match types, For Glory and FFAs (also without items?). And he's only looking at FD/Omegas.

 

[Tagxy]

Most unbalanced at the top? Fox is good, yes, but I would say the gap between him and the rest is a little bit smaller than 64 Pika's. And Brawl MK, well, come on.

Shine is broken man. I could talk ages about it, but the evidence of late is clear. 5 fox mains in top 5 at a melee major, know the last time thats happened in Brawl? Never, I never remember that ever happening. MK was pretty lame in the sense that he could succeed easily at lower levels and was prone to causing cinderalla story upsets to anyone performing less then impecably, which for many people ruined their competitive experience. But he also wasnt terribly consistent at winning it all.

Here's the actual source, he balances around just two match types, For Glory and FFAs (also without items?). And he's only looking at FD/Omegas.

In another interview Sakurai discussed little mac and his low success rate vs high complaint rate, and had a very nuanced opinion on his balance. Its pretty clear he considers a wide variety of things in balancing the game.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Shine is broken man. I could talk ages about it, but the evidence of late is clear. 5 fox mains in top 5 at a melee major, know the last time thats happened in Brawl? Never, I never remember that ever happening. MK was pretty lame in the sense that he could succeed easily at lower levels and was prone to causing cinderalla story upsets to anyone performing less then impecably, which for many people ruined their competitive experience. But he also wasnt terribly consistent at winning it all.

In another interview Sakurai discussed little mac and his low success rate vs high complaint rate, and had a very nuanced opinion on his balance. Its pretty clear he considers a wide variety of things in balancing the game.

which major for Fox in melee was this though?

 

[Rhubarbo]

Part of the reason why grabs are the most important thing now is because of how damn good shields are. Nerf shields, and suddenly other moves start to matter again. Let's kill two birds with one stone here.

Managing your shield should be an active concern in Smash Bros. Since shielding covers your character from all angles, from a design perspective, it makes sense for shielding to have clearly defined, glaring weaknesses. Here is how I would nerf shields:

-Shields have a vitality stat that ranges from 1-5.
-Each whole value corresponds with a hue, a healthy 5 being the darkest and diminished 1 being the lightest.
-Vitality determines how much damage a shield can take. The weakest moves in the game do 0 vitality damage, whereas the strongest moves do 4.
-Holding a shield slowly reduces vitality down to the next whole number; letting go of shield will always consume 1 vitality point.
-Every 300 frames of inactivity, a shield regains 1 vitality point, also, for every 10% of damage dealt, a shield regains 1 vitality point.
-Shield size would generally correspond with vitality, but shrinkage from holding it down would be continuous, so values wouldn't always match-up perfectly.
-A shield bubble analogous to a player's shield's vitality would be displayed next to their percent.

I'm sure there are many flaws in my haphazardly sewed together system, but I think it would be a step in the right direction. However, since Sakurai and the PMDT are unwilling to advance Smash Bros. complexity beyond Melee, we'll probably never see a better competitive game with scaling knockback, and ring-out game play.

 

[Tagxy]

which major for Fox in melee was this though?

Do you fox with it. I was there to witness this moment in all its glory, lol.

 

[MegaMissingno]

I would say that has less to do with an empirical measure of how imbalanced they are and more to do with the fact that playing MK is almost taboo in Brawl, and people look down on and bash MK mains a lot, which makes a lot of people not want to use him. Whereas Fox is more celebrated and people are encouraged to go ahead and main him. Peer pressure is a powerful thing. Similar deal with Pika in 64, there's like an unspoken agreement among some of the best players to not use him anymore. Or O. Sagat in Super Turbo. Just because less people are using him doesn't necessarily mean he's less broken.

 

[LightLV]

Melee is completely centralized by a characters ability to exert true shield pressure, which is limited to 3 characters + frame perfect yoshi. This is also a central point behind 20xx. People call metaknight a melee character in Brawl, Fox is a 64 character in melee.

Also addressing someone else but melee is not balanced at its top, my experience and knowledge from the existing titles hints at Melee being the most unbalanced smash game at top level. Im not gonna call this good or bad here though.

Actually, if the standing tier lists are any indication, Melee is actually the most balanced out of all of them, with its tier gaps being pretty broadly filled with characters.

Shine being 1-frame with set knockback, it's pretty broken, but Fox can also be 0% -> KO'd by characters due to his fall speed, along with technical walls to abusing the move pretty much stops it from being an overwhelmingly dominating ability.

Managing your shield should be an active concern in Smash Bros. Since shielding covers your character from all angles, from a design perspective, it makes sense for shielding to have clearly defined, glaring weaknesses. Here is how I would nerf shields:

-Shields have a vitality stat that ranges from 1-5.
-Each whole value corresponds with a hue, a healthy 5 being the darkest and diminished 1 being the lightest.
-Vitality determines how much damage a shield can take. The weakest moves in the game do 0 vitality damage, whereas the strongest moves do 4.
-Holding a shield slowly reduces vitality down to the next whole number; letting go of shield will always consume 1 vitality point.
-Every 300 frames of inactivity, a shield regains 1 vitality point, also, for every 10% of damage dealt, a shield regains 1 vitality point.
-Shield size would generally correspond with vitality, but shrinkage from holding it down would be continuous, so values wouldn't always match-up perfectly.
-A shield bubble analogous to a player's shield's vitality would be displayed next to their percent.

I'm sure there are many flaws in my haphazardly sewed together system, but I think it would be a step in the right direction. However, since Sakurai and the PMDT are unwilling to advance Smash Bros. complexity beyond Melee, we'll probably never see a better competitive game with scaling knockback, and ring-out game play.

I do agree, Smash Bros would benefit VERY heavily from a deeper shielding mechanic, and possibly even a simple throw break option.

 

[Thinkaman]

I would say that has less to do with an empirical measure of how imbalanced they are and more to do with the fact that playing MK is almost taboo in Brawl, and people look down on and bash MK mains a lot, which makes a lot of people not want to use him. Whereas Fox is more celebrated and people are encouraged to go ahead and main him. Peer pressure is a powerful thing. Similar deal with Pika in 64, there's like an unspoken agreement among some of the best players to not use him anymore. Or O. Sagat in Super Turbo. Just because less people are using him doesn't necessarily mean he's less broken.

This guy has stumbled upon the taboo secret:

Community perceptions of balance are almost entirely social phenomenon.

 

[CodeBlue_]

Melee is completely centralized by a characters ability to exert true shield pressure, which is limited to 3 characters + frame perfect yoshi. This is also a central point behind 20xx. People call metaknight a melee character in Brawl, Fox is a 64 character in melee.

Also addressing someone else but melee is not balanced at its top, my experience and knowledge from the existing titles hints at Melee being the most unbalanced smash game at top level. Im not gonna call this good or bad here though.

This is false. AT's are the false converse of fundamentals, mastering the technical mechanics behind ATs such as l-canceling and wave dashing isn't going to help you win in street fighter. Understanding the meta behind things like footsies and zoning will.

Secondly, memorizing characters and customs is a very dismissive way to imply character variety does not greatly add to depth. Understanding how characters function takes minimal effort for the great amount of diverse gameplay they can add, if it didnt we'd wish for single character competitive games.

Lets run with this line of logic.

In one of the earliest Brawl tournaments I entered a well known top melee player was also in attendance, likely the most successful Brawl player that moved on to play melee (super cool dude, this is not meant to reflect on his personality). The same tournament I outplaced him by quite a bit, and mind you this was years ago before Brawl underwent its modern revolutions. I could go into greater depth on melee players experience with Brawl, but the reference more or less summarizes the extent of their overall extensive play. In contrast many players familiar with Brawl (myself included) have been playing melee as of late which is at the very least a relevant time period. By the line of logic were using this makes them drastically more knowledgable than their melee counterparts. Not going to say Im outstanding, but I got through first round pools at KoC4, which is the top 1/3rd of players in melee's toughest region, and by such odd standards a better authority on melee then most posting here.

Granted all of this is based on a faulty line of reasoning, and experience or placements do not directly equate to your understanding of a game.

Dont state unproven assumptions as truth, as it stands the opposite side seems to have more evidence.

@ CodeBlue_ from reading your posts I feel you believe approaching in melee is easier than it truly is and harder than it is in smash 4. Shaya responding to your discussion mostly, but this is just my general assessment

Evidence? You are running a notion that shield pressure is the most important part of a game without any explanation. Are you telling me jump cancelled grab is the sole reason Melee Fox is broken? That multishining prevents any opponent from doing anything? This game is not centralized on shields. On the contrary, most characters can punish you for shielding. The other defensive mechanics (dash dancing, wavedashing, projectiles etc.) prevent you from being forced into a shield.
Is the shield stun from Fox's shine so severe that he can simply grab an opponent shielding?

I think you are being purely theoretical, as only Mango has achieved significant wins at a National level with him. Fox has only won nationals in recent days under Mango, one of the best Smash players in the world. We can say he is using Fox's potential to the maximum level, but can we also say he outplays the players he beats? Can you show me a set where Fox's shine pressure is perceived to be dominant?

On your second point, the defensive mechanics in Melee are used to avoid the committal for approaching. If you are saying approaching is more complicated in Melee, then I agree, but the ATs allow better spacing to alleviate the risk from approaching, thus making approaching more optimal. I think the ATs are used to discourage a hit-and-run playstyle to an extent. However, it is possible approaching is encouraged in Melee due to the punish game it has. It forces an immediate reaction by the defending player instead of in Smash 4 where you wait for an opening (a frame hole, shall we say).

Pretty much, approaching is more complicated in Melee but is a lot safer with more options as you aren't trapped into a relatively limited dash each time you wish to approach.

Can we at least agree l-canceling makes aerial approaches safer due to the reduced landing lag?

Edit: Wavedashing is essential in spacing and footsies, I don't understand what you mean by it diverting from basic fundamentals.

 

[wmo_]

Can someone explain to me how balance changes are going to somehow make Smash less appealing or less competitive overall? The fact that people are upset that there are gameplay patches is mind boggling, as someone coming from a PC side. We have our games updated constantly, there's been exceptions where games stopped getting updates (CS 1.6, Quake, etc) but overall the idea of patching doesn't affect the quality of gameplay or the competition. I understand why you guys feel that way, no Smash game and most fighting games don't get patches. Unfortunately that's a different era, it's going to be almost unavoidable now. Patches help, without them it can lead to huge game mechanic imbalances. I'm just blown away to see such hated for patching a Smash game. Someone mention SF4 had patches and it killed that game. I have a hard time believing gameplay patches killed a game in e-sports. There are much bigger variables to consider when determining popularity of a game in e-sports, patching has nothing to do with it (except WoW when they messed up Arenas for a while)

Can we just say that anyone who suggests patching will hurt smash is just wrong?

 

[MegaMissingno]

Well the issue is that they aren't only patching balance, they're making drastic changes to mechanics too. And some of us consider these changes to be for the worse, as well as worrying about what else they might do to any more advanced techniques people discover.

I'm not opposed to patches in general. I just don't like 1.0.4.

 

[Frostav]

Every fighting game gets patched. Every single one. The world is not falling down.

God, no wonder the rest of the FGC calls us scrubs, we're losing our goddamn minds over something everyone else deals with regularly.

 

[wmo_]

Well the issue is that they aren't only patching balance, they're making drastic changes to mechanics too. And some of us consider these changes to be for the worse, as well as worrying about what else they might do to any more advanced techniques people discover.

I'm not opposed to patches in general. I just don't like 1.0.4.

It does suck to have ATs removed with patches, but in 2014 it's almost unavoidable now. Most ATs are essentially a bug right? Not working as intended. Fixing the bug from the developers side is completely understandable. For competitive players it would suck but you still can play. As much as people want Melee, it's not going to happen. If Melee came out 15 years later, it would have been patched and god only knows what would of been removed.

 

[Ephemiel]

Honestly, you want Melee so much? GO PLAY IT!! Saying "Melee was better, Melee was faster, Melee was this or that" won't change ANYTHING, the game won't be changed into Melee 2.0 simply because people can't adapt or flat-out refuse to adapt.

 

[The Slayer]

Honestly, you want Melee so much? GO PLAY IT!! Saying "Melee was better, Melee was faster, Melee was this or that" won't change ANYTHING, the game won't be changed into Melee 2.0 simply because people can't adapt or flat-out refuse to adapt.

Nice sweeping generalization to people that are more than likely playing both games anyways. Seriously, that's not really a good argument.

 

[Dexident]

I think it's funny that some people are claiming melee to be the most balanced game competitively. So if Fox's shine is not broken (not withstanding discussion on almost all of his other moves), and the reason it is not broken is because he can be 0 - KO'd by other characters because of his fall speed, I wonder how on earth does that make the game balanced?

You should never be able to be 0 - KO'd by any character when playing any character in any game, that in itself is the epitome of broken. In competitive play, surely it is important to minimize all mistakes that are made, but when it comes to "don't make any mistakes at all or else your stock is gone", that's not very competitive at all. I think of Ice Climber's infinite chain grab. That is the only reason that they made it in the top tier. That's not a good reason at all. What you have is people succeeding in tournaments against other players who have spent countless hours maining, training and practicing on characters who do not have inherently flawed exploitable gimmicks losing to players who can accurately execute one gimmick with their gimmicky character FTW.

I'm glad Nintendo is patching these AT's. If you can't adapt and you start losing more often because they took one of your AT's away then you aren't playing the game correctly. If it's just a matter of enjoyment because they took away your "deep metagame tactics" why don't you go play some of the other fighting games that are entirely dependent on derivative mechanical button/combo inputs, because there are PLENTY of those. There is only one smash bros series though.

 

[Tagxy]

Poorly worded post.

On your second point, the defensive mechanics in Melee are used to avoid the committal for approaching. If you are saying approaching is more complicated in Melee, then I agree, but the ATs allow better spacing to alleviate the risk from approaching, thus making approaching more optimal. I think the ATs are used to discourage a hit-and-run playstyle to an extent. However, it is possible approaching is encouraged in Melee due to the punish game it has. It forces an immediate reaction by the defending player instead of in Smash 4 where you wait for an opening (a frame hole, shall we say).

Pretty much, approaching is more complicated in Melee but is a lot safer with more options as you aren't trapped into a relatively limited dash each time you wish to approach.

Can we at least agree l-canceling makes aerial approaches safer due to the reduced landing lag?

Edit: Wavedashing is essential in spacing and footsies, I don't understand what you mean by it diverting from basic fundamentals.

Approaching in melee is more complex in the sense that you have a lot more shiz to practice and memorize, but I wouldnt say that's more interesting in and of itself. I know some people really enjoy that aspect and that's cool.

I think approaching in melee is less interesting on a mental level because of how dominant particular approaches are. The other part of melee's neutral is defensive baiting which can be interesting for certain characters.

Lastly its a misconception that a stronger punish game leads to more approaching. Take a look at smash 64 to see a great example of why this isnt the case (more could be said on that but the example should get the point across).

Also if you noticed I stated wavedashing and l-cancelling are false converses to fundamentals. One implies the other but the reverse is not true.

Evidence? You are running a notion that shield pressure is the most important part of a game without any explanation. Are you telling me jump cancelled grab is the sole reason Melee Fox is broken? That multishining prevents any opponent from doing anything? This game is not centralized on shields. On the contrary, most characters can punish you for shielding. The other defensive mechanics (dash dancing, wavedashing, projectiles etc.) prevent you from being forced into a shield.
Is the shield stun from Fox's shine so severe that he can simply grab an opponent shielding?

I think you are being purely theoretical, as only Mango has achieved significant wins at a National level with him. Fox has only won nationals in recent days under Mango, one of the best Smash players in the world. We can say he is using Fox's potential to the maximum level, but can we also say he outplays the players he beats? Can you show me a set where Fox's shine pressure is perceived to be dominant?

Dont want to get too deep into this. If you asked me a year ago I wouldve been against the notion that fox is too good.
http://smashboards.com/threads/dont-approach-melees-flaw-dissected.312501/
In the last year my experience, understanding, as well as arguments such as this thread have changed my previous perception. Shields are still a good option against everyone with notable exceptions...

Tangential but its an interesting point about those other mechanics as replacements for shield though (dash dancing, wave dashing, projectiles) because among viable characters fox has the best or at least top 3 in all of those as categories as well, never even thought of that before.

Anyways I still like melee a lot so I dont want peeps to think I dont think its fun, but attempts at comparisons need to be honest.

 

[-LzR-]

I'm glad Nintendo is patching these AT's. If you can't adapt and you start losing more often because they took one of your AT's away then you aren't playing the game correctly. If it's just a matter of enjoyment because they took away your "deep metagame tactics" why don't you go play some of the other fighting games that are entirely dependent on derivative mechanical button/combo inputs, because there are PLENTY of those. There is only one smash bros series though.

I'm sorry but this is such a salty and scrubby post. I almost got cancer from it.

 

[Dexident]

Well, it's the scrubs that Sakurai is catering to. I'm happy to be catered to by a game's designers. You "heroes" are going to have to adapt. :D

 

[wmo_]

I'm sorry but this is such a salty and scrubby post. I almost got cancer from it.

both sides have ridiculous childish arguments. I see both sides but it's 2014. We can't control patches. We get what we get. I think tons of people miss the mark on this discussion, I see the same comments when Nintendo does something the community doesn't like. Suddenly everyone here is a business major talking about profits and marketing strategies. There's no way these people come close to having any idea on how a successful business is run. The whine here is hilarious and sad.

 

[Ephemiel]

Nice sweeping generalization to people that are more than likely playing both games anyways. Seriously, that's not really a good argument.

For some reason you think that me somehow magically guessing that they "more than likely play both" is a better one.

 

[otter]

This guy has stumbled upon the taboo secret:

Community perceptions of balance are almost entirely social phenomenon.

1. wait until the community becomes mostly scrubs.

2. perfect a more sophisticated way to say "tires don exits"

3. profit.

 

[LightLV]

I think you are being purely theoretical, as only Mango has achieved significant wins at a National level with him. Fox has only won nationals in recent days under Mango, one of the best Smash players in the world. We can say he is using Fox's potential to the maximum level, but can we also say he outplays the players he beats? Can you show me a set where Fox's shine pressure is perceived to be dominant?

Edit: Wavedashing is essential in spacing and footsies, I don't understand what you mean by it diverting from basic fundamentals.

I'm starting to understand that when it comes to competitive talk around here (ESPECIALLY in regards to melee, even when it isn't even the topic) theorycrafting is the bread and butter to everyone's arguments. Right before they turn around and cry about how unfair wavedashing was.

 

[CodeBlue_]

Poorly worded post.

Approaching in melee is more complex in the sense that you have a lot more shiz to practice and memorize, but I wouldnt say that's more interesting in and of itself. I know some people really enjoy that aspect and that's cool.

I think approaching in melee is less interesting on a mental level because of how dominant particular approaches are. The other part of melee's neutral is defensive baiting which can be interesting for certain characters.

Lastly its a misconception that a stronger punish game leads to more approaching. Take a look at smash 64 to see a great example of why this isnt the case (more could be said on that but the example should get the point across).

Dont want to get too deep into this. If you asked me a year ago I wouldve been against the notion that fox is too good.
http://smashboards.com/threads/dont-approach-melees-flaw-dissected.312501/
In the last year my experience, understanding, as well as arguments such as this thread have changed my previous perception. Shields are still a good option against everyone with notable exceptions...

Tangential but its an interesting point about those other mechanics as replacements for shield though (dash dancing, wave dashing, projectiles) because among viable characters fox has the best or at least top 3 in all of those as categories as well, never even thought of that before.

Anyways I still like melee a lot so I dont want peeps to think I dont think its fun, but attempts at comparisons need to be honest.

Ok I see your PoV. And yes, 64's punish game doesn't encourage approaching, but Smash 4 limited punish game doesn't either. I just don't understand why Smash 4 would encourage approaching over Melee. Projectiles are still potent and there is little reward for correctly approaching at all. We don't need 64 level punishes in the game, as that discourages players from approaching.

If your problem with Melee is primarily Fox (which is probably the reason Hax made that post back in 2011, although Falcon has trouble approaching in general) then I think that is for a separate discussion. Fox does have a skewed punish game but he has a similar risk to approaching as most characters since he is a fast faller (this allows him to be 0 deathed in many cases). If only he didn't have that ridiculous projectile. Kinda kills the point of approaching doesn't it? (p.s. I firmly believe lasers should lose their transcendent priority and should be beaten out by projectiles dealing >7%)

Also this is funny:
"Melee:
even if you L-cancel an aerial in Melee, only half of its lag frames are trimmed. during the remaining landing lag, a character cannot take any actions and is entirely punishable. as a result, it is deadly to miss an aerial while DI'ing forward (approaching) in Melee. doing so puts you in lag and extremely close to your opponent, who isn't in hitstun/is free to punish you. if you whiff an aerial while DI'ing backwards (defending), however, you are almost always too far for them to punish you." -Hax
I wonder how much landing lag is in autocanceled aerials in Smash 4...

Also if you noticed I stated wavedashing and l-cancelling are false converses to fundamentals. One implies the other but the reverse is not true.

Ah I misread the question, sorry. I think these mechanics are personal preferences and aren't strictly essential to the game. If dashing wasn't so risky (you could do pretty much anything out of it like SF's walking) I wouldn't mind dash dancing getting the axe. But landing lag (as you see in Hax's post above) discourages approaching. A auto-cancel on all parts of an attack would be sufficient as an alternative, but I don't think you have addressed any problems to it.

I'm starting to understand that when it comes to competitive talk around here (ESPECIALLY in regards to melee, even when it isn't even the topic) theorycrafting is the bread and butter to everyone's arguments. Right before they turn around and cry about how unfair wavedashing was.

What exactly do you suggest we discuss in regards to Smash 4? This thread is about what ATs should be in or not. Melee is the epitome of ATs, so it is natural for member to argue for or against it in order to express a viewpoint on Advanced Techniques as a whole.

Theorycrafting is simply attempting to discuss what could happen to Smash 4 if certain ATs were in. I wish we were discussing that, but that's not how Smashboards works. Game debates are inevitable in the Smash community.

Also is this comment supposed to be directed towards me? If so, I apologize.

 

[LightLV]

Holy ****, we're complaining about approach game in MELEE now?

L-cancelling removed, 0 blockstun on any moves, 0 blockpush on any moves, instant shield dropping, rolls with like, 0.05 frames of vulnerability, set landing lag and we're complaining about MELEE'S approach game what is going on in here i dont ev--

Actually, no. I think the approach in Melee was silly. I prefer fadeaway aerials while floating back and forth during 10 minute 3 stock matches and stale moves, that's the golden sweetspot of approach.

 

[Shaya]

Have this thread reached the point where it can only be petty melee-themed replies? (i.e. Smashboard's version of Godwin's Law)

 

[Doctor Saius]

I believe patching is required for most games these day and is an important part of any competitive scene. I understand the want and need for AT's since it can give the game a complexity to make it arguably more interesting but i don't believe these AT's should be something that only a few characters can do and only because it's a bug/glitch.

Also, patches are something that need to be accepted as a regular thing and the game to be re-balanced or else we most likely won't get any DLC characters after Mewtwo. With all the designs for new characters on this forum alone it would be sad to see this game not grow.

Just because it isn't Melee doesn't mean it's not worth playing competitively.

 

[BobVance_]

The people complaining about being 0 KO'd and calling it a broken mechanic of Melee have definitely never played Marvel vs Capcom 3....or many other fighting games for that matter.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

The people complaining about being 0 KO'd and calling it a broken mechanic of Melee have definitely never played Marvel vs Capcom 3....or many other fighting games for that matter.

I have.

I hate it in each one and bores the hell out of me.

 

[Shuriblur]

I will say that after reading this thread it seems like the community is not sure which direction they want this game to go. It must be terribly difficult to patch this game when part of the community will praise you, while another part will say that the changes will ruin the game.

I can't say much about how this affects me, since I'm still breaking into competitive Smash. I don't know a lot of ATs. I know I was able to pull off Greninja's Shadow Sneak cancel by just watching a friend do it in a match, but I can also say that I'm not upset to see it go. Maybe it's bad to just go with the flow, but I want to see how these changes affect the meta before claiming that they were for better or for worse. Hopefully we don't get too many patches (outside of things that break the game), so we can start forming a solid meta.

 

[-LzR-]

The people complaining about being 0 KO'd and calling it a broken mechanic of Melee have definitely never played Marvel vs Capcom 3....or many other fighting games for that matter.

MvC3 is the most broken game I know and it is a joke competitively.

 

[BobVance_]

To the two guys above me who said it's "boring" and a "joke"

Yeah, okay, but slow floaty physics and 8 minute matches that consist of a lot of air dodging, safe play, boring rolls, and projectile spam are totally exciting. I'm not even going to take either of you seriously.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

To the two guys above me who said it's "boring" and a "joke"

Yeah, okay, but slow floaty physics and 8 minute matches that consist of a lot of air dodging, safe play, boring rolls, and projectile spam are totally exciting. I'm not even going to take either of you seriously.

I hate MvC3 because while flashy is just watching a combo test after a hit conform most of the time, when I have played with other people.

Can't take me seriously? I could care less, i personally have hated MvC ever since 2 hit and it just never felt fun at all unless I tier whored myself out to the top 4. And I never care to do that.

watching someone combo me for ten seconds while I literally do nothing and stand there is boring as ****. As least Street Fighter makes it faster and not 1 hit = you die lel.

I've tried to like the vs series in game play, but I can't. I hate what it turned into and can't support it as a result.