My original fears of Nintendo balancing Smash are coming true.

[Metalex]

No, not really.

Yes, i think technically demanding usually means that you have to do many technical inputs on your controller and at a fast pace.

Punishing rolls have nothing to do with that since it only has to do with how fast you react, and the reason rolls are so hard to punish in this game is because there is very little startup/lag on alot of characters rolls and the frame window where you can punish is very small.

 

[LancerStaff]

Yes, i think technically demanding usually means that you have to do many technical inputs on your controller and at a fast pace.

Punishing rolls have nothing to do with that since it only has to do with how fast you react, and the reason rolls are so hard to punish in this game is because there is very little startup/lag on alot of characters rolls and the frame window where you can punish is very small.

There's really no difference. They both make the game harder, although how much is arguable.

 

[Prawn]

Being technically demanding is a good thing now? You can't even punish rolls in SSB4.

Yes. You can.

 

[TTTTTsd]

The irritation people have with rolling is, in my mind, no doubt magnified by online input latency.

I guarantee you that they're very punishable, and while still very good, they're definitely exaggerated in certain statements, but really, online latency sucks

 

[LancerStaff]

Yes. You can.

You, as in him. Not you in general. I certainly can punish rolls easily.

 

[Prawn]

The irritation people have with rolling is, in my mind, no doubt magnified by online input latency.

I guarantee you that they're very punishable, and while still very good, they're definitely exaggerated in certain statements, but really, online latency sucks

Yeah. And when people complain on here I see a lot of things that make me skeptical. Like "I did a dsmash and it didn't hit him!", well online there's input lag, and maybe you timed it wrong, and maybe your dsmash sucks.

Not to mention some **** happening to you a few times =\= an accurate representation of how the game works. Put at least 20 solid gameplay hours into a character before you start to make assertions like "he can't punish rolling".

Sometimes people roll and it's tough to punish, very rarely they'll roll and hit you. Just because "you knew they were going to roll" doesn't mean you're entitled to an easy, hard hitting, free punish. If you want to punish hard then learn to execute properly. Learn to bait it out. At least try learning instead of playing for 2 hours and then chalking it up to "rolls are OP omg!!111one!!!"


The same can be said for everyone complaining about their characters, complaining about people playing certain characters. How many of these people have put an actual TWENTY HOURS into playing that matchup? Against good players.


Probably zero percent.

 

[TTTTTsd]

I think pivot tilting/smooth options out of pivot was a direct mechanic implemented to stuff rolling. Really, when you look at it, it certainly seems that way.

 

[LightLV]

The problem with ATs and Nintendo removing them is that Smash4 has no Advanced Techniques that are universal to the entire cast (L-Cancelling, Wavedash), and the ones that people find for specific characters are almost all actual, legit glitches.

People are using characters specifically because of their specific ATs, and not because they can use ATs to enhance their gameplay.


People can complain about Melee's wavedash and L-cancel gimmicks, but the difference is, everyone in melee could Wavedash and L-cancel. In Smash4, landing lag is pre-determined and not necessarily balanced evenly. Most of the ATs that show up are indeed just glitches that probably need to be fixed.

 

[Prawn]

You, as in him. Not you in general. I certainly can punish rolls easily.

Ahhhh I see now hahaha

 

[Raijinken]

They're taking away glitches, and not only glitches, glitches that gave specific characters advantages that other characters couldn't use or take advantage of.

This is fine. The fact that they're balancing the game in addition to removing bugs that differ from the game's intended play is good. Asking to deliberately widen the skill gap by overlooking glitches is poor design, and poor for competition. More players able to compete = bigger scene. Technical barriers are precisely counter to that.

 

[Prawn]

They're taking away glitches, and not only glitches, glitches that gave specific characters advantages that other characters couldn't use or take advantage of.

This is fine. The fact that they're balancing the game in addition to removing bugs that differ from the game's intended play is good. Asking to deliberately widen the skill gap by overlooking glitches is poor design, and poor for competition. More players able to compete = bigger scene. Technical barriers are precisely counter to that.

Yes but the problem is what is Nintendo's idea of "intended play"? Up until this point it has always been "have fun against your little siblings and it's crazy and everyone can win!". Some people are optimistic that it's not the case anymore. Some of us aren't.

Edit: also everyone's talking about "tech skill" like dacus is a ****ing waveshine. I learned that **** in 30 minutes homie. If you can't learn that you're not gonna be in the scene for very long anyway because you're probably entirely ass

 

[LightLV]

They're taking away glitches, and not only glitches, glitches that gave specific characters advantages that other characters couldn't use or take advantage of.

This is fine. The fact that they're balancing the game in addition to removing bugs that differ from the game's intended play is good. Asking to deliberately widen the skill gap by overlooking glitches is poor design, and poor for competition. More players able to compete = bigger scene. Technical barriers are precisely counter to that.

Technical barriers aren't bad. Excessive ones can be problematic because they create such a huge skill gap, but Smash4 is nnnooOOOOOoowhere in danger of having that problem.

The only reason people search for advanced techniques is because it broadens out the character they're using. It's absolutely fine if nintendo removes them, but if they aren't adding anything in their place, they really aren't doing the game at large any favors.


Honestly? A game without technical barriers is just a ****ty scrubfest. Basketball wouldn't be much of a sport if you were allowed to just hold the ball and run. The rules on dribbling are a technical barrier that pretty much defines good players from the bad. Same concept with competitive videogames.

 

[ミスティック Speed]

Some of you guys need to shush up and realize that you can't keep relying on your petty "exploits" to win a match. Play the game right or don't play at all.

 

[Prawn]

Some of you guys need to shush up and realize that you can't keep relying on your petty "exploits" to win a match. Play the game right or don't play at all.

LOL. What exploit did they remove that's gonna make the difference between me winning a match or not?

The infinites? Have a single one of those been executed in any actual tournament match?

This statement is literally idiotic. You sound like a petulant child who needs an excuse for why they're losing. Every player who is good will still be good after having removed these things. I'm not entirely sure you read a single post in this thread based on this reply, and if you did you sure as hell didn't comprehend them.


Edit: you know what you're right. All tournaments are 2 minute times matches with all stages and items.

PLAY THE GAME RIGHT OR DONT PLAY AT ALL NOOB

 

[Phan7om]

To the OP

Thats why you gotta be a selfish ass like me and find ATs and not tell anyone, just use it in tournament and dont tell people how you did it. If they are really looking here to find ATs to take away, this is a good way to avoid this.

 

[Prawn]

To the OP

Thats why you gotta be a selfish *** like me and find ATs and not tell anyone, just use it in tournament and dont tell people how you did it. If they are really looking here to find ATs to take away, this is a good way to avoid this.

Exactly. Which will be a very healthy metagame and will encourage all of the new players to grow the scene!

 

[LightLV]

Some of you guys need to shush up and realize that you can't keep relying on your petty "exploits" to win a match. Play the game right or don't play at all.

I have never played a player in any game ever, in life, anywhere on earth, who had this mentality and didn't suck at whatever he was playing.

 

[LancerStaff]

To the OP

Thats why you gotta be a selfish *** like me and find ATs and not tell anyone, just use it in tournament and dont tell people how you did it. If they are really looking here to find ATs to take away, this is a good way to avoid this.

This is the kinda thing Thinkaman would come in and say Nintendo found the ATs long before we did because SSBU has the update already and was printed more then a month ago.

 

[Prawn]

I have never played a good player in any game ever, in life, anywhere on earth, who had this mentality and didn't suck at whatever he was playing.

"You only won cause you kept doing that move over and over! Scrub! I could beat you if you used a different character and didn't rely on your petty exploits!"

 

[TTTTTsd]

Exploits or not I will exhibit my passion.

God bless Wectoring RIP.

For the record I don't mind funny exploits or if they disappear, they make things fun or silly but I never REQUIRE them but I milk them for all it's worth. Super Wario Galaxy will go down in Smash legends.

 

[Prawn]

This is the kinda thing Thinkaman would come in and say Nintendo found the ATs long before we did because SSBU has the update already and was printed more then a month ago.

True. Also they're prolly paying people to find them. Not to mention there's probably barely anything else game changing left to be discovered.

But eh. Still seems somewhat valid

 

[Raijinken]

Technical barriers aren't bad. Excessive ones can be problematic because they create such a huge skill gap, but Smash4 is nnnooOOOOOoowhere in danger of having that problem.

The only reason people search for advanced techniques is because it broadens out the character they're using. It's absolutely fine if nintendo removes them, but if they aren't adding anything in their place, they really aren't doing the game at large any favors.


Honestly? A game without technical barriers is just a ****ty scrubfest. Basketball wouldn't be much of a sport if you were allowed to just hold the ball and run. The rules on dribbling are a technical barrier that pretty much defines good players from the bad. Same concept with competitive videogames.

We have a game about holding the ball and running. Football is very popular. Different sport, different skillset required, basically as popular as Basketball (in the US, at least).

But besides that. I'm fine with some advanced techniques. But I want them to feel like techniques, not glitches. Wavedashing looks and feels like a glitch (I slide if I airdodge into the ground? I can attack during this slide, which would otherwise be during my dodge, during which I can't attack normally? The heck?), and as much as I enjoyed DACUSing in Brawl, it also felt like a glitch, compared to dash-smashing (at least, that's what I call a running Upsmash), which does the same thing with significantly less distance, and doesn't feel like a glitch, as all characters slide some when you stop inputting a dash.

What would you add in place of a glitch? A tweak that works LIKE the glitch without feeling like a glitch? What if they made it so that a dash-smash gave reduced friction during the upsmash, making it functionally identical to a DACUS? I'd love that, but I have no doubt some people would complain that it lowered the technical gap, even though the "advanced technique" is still there, just less advanced from a timing standpoint.

I like a low technical gap, it lets more people compete, which grows the scene and makes it easier to get new blood into the system. Plus, this is only the first of what will hopefully be many balance patches. Who knows, they may re-add some techniques in the future, but come up with some for the whole cast to make it a level playing field.

Yes but the problem is what is Nintendo's idea of "intended play"? Up until this point it has always been "have fun against your little siblings and it's crazy and everyone can win!". Some people are optimistic that it's not the case anymore. Some of us aren't.

Edit: also everyone's talking about "tech skill" like dacus is a ****ing waveshine. I learned that **** in 30 minutes homie. If you can't learn that you're not gonna be in the scene for very long anyway because you're probably entirely ***

Dacus is an option that I do slightly regret the removal of, because it was a universal ability that every character could use. Even though it benefitted some more than others, it was an option that everyone had. It was still a glitch, but at least it applied universally.

Endlag canceling with bombs/turnips was not a global ability. It was a glitch that favored a small handful of characters, and judging by tournaments, it didn't make a worthwhile difference in their power/placement anyway. And I don't think many game designers deliberately make an unbalanced game, at least not with competition in mind. Just like everyone should be able to have fun and win when playing around with friends, anyone should be able to stand a valid chance with their character at the highest tier of play, as well.

 

[DarkKiru]

This is the kinda thing Thinkaman would come in and say Nintendo found the ATs long before we did because SSBU has the update already and was printed more then a month ago.

This is something I feel needs to be emphasized, the Wii U version has had this update done for well over a month at the very least.

Nintendo found this stuff on their own by just playtesting more, hiding things from one another won't help the scene in the slightest, infact it will do the exact opposite.

 

[Johnknight1]

Some of you guys need to shush up and realize that you can't keep relying on your petty "exploits" to win a match. Play the game right or don't play at all.

There is no inherently right or wrong way to play the game.

There are winners of matches and losers of matches, and you are definitively and definitely a loser of matches in competitive environment with that mindset. With this mindset you won't last at all because you won't evolve, won't adapt, and won't improve. Instead, you will get bodied by those who have the opposite mindset of you.

 

[Praxis]

Okay, as someone who's been around here a while, I need to express something. It's going to be very easy to dismiss this as arrogant, but this is coming from experience and knowledge.

A ton of the opinions being expressed in this thread are very clearly coming from complete lack of competitive experience and using "it's just my opinion, man" as a shield for it.

If you want a broken game that will never be fixed...

I'm glad they are fixing the game to how they (the creators) meant for it to be played.

I see where you are coming from, I just disagree.

I'd much rather play the game it was ment to be played. Players need to have these potentially degenerate options taken away before they'll stop using them. *coughMKDSsnakingcough* Even if they're not that big, how do you think somebody who didn't know about the glitch would feel if he lost because of it? In case you haven't noticed, there's typically a strong aversion to glitches that give players an advantage. Firehopping in MK8 anyone? It barely makes a difference unless you're playing mushrooms only or something, and yet there was a pretty big comotion about it. Nintendo, a largely casual focused company, is interested in keeping the average Joe player happy over a hardcore one.

I really like the chess analogy that someone gave earlier. Some of you - and I suppose this is especially directed at the people who are heavily into Project M and Melee - believe that a ****-ton of technical options make a fighting game fun. That's perfectly fine, it's really a "to each their own" sort of thing. But having gotten into physical competitions, I have a different perspective. Where I first saw a "lack of options," I can now see a series of styles and techniques, all stemming from the basics. With Smash, as with chess, you don't necessarily need a crazy amount of technical stuff. You have some 50+ characters with varying styles of play, some with totally unique mechanics, like a KO meter (Little Mac), management of MP (Robin), Aura (Lucario) and some with simpler differences, like ranged vs rushdown.

You already have a ridiculous amount of options that come from the game being played vanilla. That's not to say that some ATs don't spice things up - they certainly do - but the game is no less deep without them. The issue here seems to stem from the belief that a huge quantity of techniques makes the game deeper. Sometimes quantity correlates with deepness, but it's not necessarily the cause. I've learned how simple things like changing the speed, spacing or timing of a particular action can lead to wildly varying effects. You have a wide variety of stages to take advantage of, too.

What I'm trying to say in this overly long post is that Smash in its most basic form still has a lot of options. It's depth doesn't necessarily come from those options, but when you use them and why. Calling Smash 4 less deep because of a lack of ATs is ridiculous to me. But that's just my opinion.

Some of you guys need to shush up and realize that you can't keep relying on your petty "exploits" to win a match. Play the game right or don't play at all.

Ah, here we are- the flux of new players who have never played any competitive game, expressing their opinions that are coming from a casual background and patting each other on the back.


I don't think most of you understand a few things.

First, "the way the creator intended it to be played" is noncompetitive. Sakurai wants an extremely simple party game.

Second, exploring game mechanics and exploiting them is a major part of game development and perfectly healthy. Literally every fighting game develops this way, with players exchanging knowledge and working together in the lab to figure out how to maximize their punishes or get the most out of their options. Every Street Fighter game, Tekken, Marvel, etc all work like this. Even Starcraft. Developers of these games realize that they only need to patch stuff out if it's gamebreaking. A trick to slightly speed your character up? These are healthy.

Smash 4 already has weak punishes and slow stocks. Taking out options to speed up play or combos is bad for the game and worse- a slap in the face against competitive play.

I know you guys are coming in to this with pre-built assumptions about how games should be played, and think that exploits are bad or cheating or something, and I'm telling you- shed them.

Here's how fighting games normally develop- people push the limits of their characters to find stronger and stronger tactics and punishes. Other players learn how to counter those strong tactics. Players find counters to the counter to make the opponent scared to use the counter, so they can sneak the strong tactic back in. The game develops in this fashion, with people reaching higher and higher peaks of play and levels of complexity and counters within counters. Playing the game "how it was meant to be" means not playing a competitive fighting game anymore. (I'm not saying that's what this update did, but referring to some of the attitudes in this thread.)




David Sirlin, a Street Fighter champion and now Capcom game developer, wrote a book called Playing To Win where he discusses how games develop, how tournament communities work, and the mentalities needed to grow as a player. It's a fantastic book and I highly recommend everyone read it. He has put it online for free. I really, highly recommend you all read it.

If you can't bring yourself to read the whole thing, read the shortened version:
http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win

Full book:
Web version here:
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw
and PDF version:
http://the-confederation.net/_fr/11/playingtowin.pdf

The full book compares and contrasts the Street Fighter, Starcraft, Chess, Poker, and Virtua Fighter communities and I highly recommend you read it if you want to learn how competitive games are actually played.


I'm not saying you have to inherently say "Patches are bad!"
Patches can be perfectly fine. Brawl could've used a few.

But this "good for Nintendo, getting rid of ATs, make it how it's meant to be played" shows that you either don't have competitive experience (and mistakenly think the game can be a good competitive game if Nintendo removes any advananced techniques), or don't want the game to be competitive. If you're the former, you're mistaken from inexperience; if you're the latter, why are you in this section of the board? ("Competitive")

I think what we are seeing here is a major dynamic shift from how we view the game. In my opinion, I feel as if Nintendo is trying to shift from an experience that was PLAYER vs GAME, to PLAYER vs PLAYER.

To me the technical depth of Melee and P:M forced the player to think about mastering mechanics more than mastering strategies against your opponents. Of course at higher level play both are important.

Where as in Smash 4, you start to see less ans less technical depth witch means the strategy of how you use your tools in a very "vanilla" state is where the depth lies.

Figuring out play styles, patterns, and options is more important here. Which to me is good. I would rather learn how to read peoples play styles, and adapt than grind technical skill for hours. But that's just me.

Chess is not deep because of mechanics. For the most part it takes a few games to understand what each piece does or how they move. Of course there are a couple underline nuances, but for the most part the depth of chess does not lie in mechanics but the strategy. And this game has stood the test of time with out any need to change these rules.

Nintendo intentionally made the button commands of the characters simple for a reason. everyone has an up, down, side, and standard B attack. Could you imagine if every time you wanted to do Mario's Fire ball you hand to hit down, forward, B? It would be a whole different game.

Dude, have you actually played competitive Chess? It requires tremendous memorization of openings and positions. There are tons of situations where if you open wrong, you're probably going to lose based on the momentum of the first three moves of the game. You have to know every subtlety of the game. It's complex. Can you imagine how bad Chess would be if it was consistently "patched" to remove good setups and positions? It'd probably be easier to get in to, but it'd be shallow at high levels. The complexity, the peak, would be gone. And guess what? That may be what Nintendo wants. Take away options from Chess until it's Checkers.

The last thing Chess is in competition is simple. Simple tools build to complexity. The number of options you have out of any given position is almost limitless, yet people are able to figure out how to respond to a given situation. Appraising a complex position and making the right move fast is prized. This is much more like Melee.* Melee doesn't have super-complex inputs- it's just as simple- but you can make very complicated decisions from them. Smash 4 and Brawl have very limited options out of any given situations.

* And this is coming from someone who has made a Brawl-Chess analogy before (because Brawl has a lot of complexity and abstract spacing). You're doing this analogy wrong.

And even if we ignore your simplification of chess, why is it you want to take any complexity out of the game? Is Basketball a better game if we take out dribbling?



The funny thing is that people made these exact posts at the beginning of Brawl's life. Eventually, they gained experience or left. This is the launch flood.

 

[Prawn]

Okay, as someone who's been around here a while, I need to express something. It's going to be very easy to dismiss this as arrogant, but this is coming from experience and knowledge.

A ton of the opinions being expressed in this thread are very clearly coming from complete lack of competitive experience and using "it's just my opinion, man" as a shield for it.





Ah, here we are- the flux of new players who have never played any competitive game, expressing their opinions that are coming from a casual background and patting each other on the back.


I don't think most of you understand a few things.

First, "the way the creator intended it to be played" is noncompetitive. Sakurai wants an extremely simple party game.

Second, exploring game mechanics and exploiting them is a major part of game development and perfectly healthy. Literally every fighting game develops this way, with players exchanging knowledge and working together in the lab to figure out how to maximize their punishes or get the most out of their options. Every Street Fighter game, Tekken, Marvel, etc all work like this. Even Starcraft. Developers of these games realize that they only need to patch stuff out if it's gamebreaking. A trick to slightly speed your character up? These are healthy.

Smash 4 already has weak punishes and slow stocks. Taking out options to speed up play or combos is bad for the game and worse- a slap in the face against competitive play.

I know you guys are coming in to this with pre-built assumptions about how games should be played, and I'm telling you- shed them.

Here's how fighting games normally develop- people push the limits of their characters to find stronger and stronger tactics and punishes. Other players learn how to counter those strong tactics. Players find counters to the counter to make the opponent scared to use the counter, so they can sneak the strong tactic back in. The game develops in this fashion, with people reaching higher and higher peaks of play and levels of complexity and counters within counters. Playing the game "how it was meant to be" means not playing a competitive fighting game anymore. (I'm not saying that's what this update did, but referring to some of the attitudes in this thread.)




David Sirlin, a Street Fighter champion and now Capcom game developer, wrote a book called Playing To Win where he discusses how games develop, how tournament communities work, and the mentalities needed to grow as a player. It's a fantastic book and I highly recommend everyone read it. He has put it online for free. I really, highly recommend you all read it.

Web version here:
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw
and PDF version:
http://the-confederation.net/_fr/11/playingtowin.pdf

I'm not saying you have to inherently say "Patches are bad!"
Patches can be perfectly fine. Brawl could've used a few.

But this "good for Nintendo, getting rid of ATs, make it how it's meant to be played" shows that you either don't have competitive experience (and mistakenly think the game can be a good competitive game if Nintendo removes any advananced techniques), or don't want the game to be competitive. If you're the former, you're mistaken from inexperience; if you're the latter, why are you in this section of the board? ("Competitive")





Dude, have you actually played competitive Chess? It requires tremendous memorization of openings and positions. There are tons of situations where if you open wrong, you're probably going to lose based on the first three moves of the game. You have to know every subtlety of the game. It's complex. Can you imagine how bad Chess would be if it was consistently "patched" to remove good setups and positions? It'd probably be easier to get in to, but it'd be shallow at high levels. The complexity, the peak, would be gone. And guess what? That may be what Nintendo wants. The board game Chess.

The last thing Chess is in competition is simple. Simple tools build to complexity. The number of options you have out of any given position is almost limitless, yet people are able to figure out how to respond to a given situation. Appraising a complex position and making the right move fast is prized. This is much more like Melee.* Smash 4 and Brawl have very limited options out of any given situations.

* And this is coming from someone who has made a Brawl-Chess analogy before (because Brawl has a lot of complexity and abstract spacing).

And even if we ignore your simplification of chess, why is it you want to take any complexity out of the game? Is Basketball a better game if we take out dribbling?



The funny thing is that people made these exact posts at the beginning of Brawl's life. Eventually, they gained experience or left. This is the launch flood.

U don't know me but ily praxis

Glad to see there's still a few tried and true players posting on this board and not strictly theorycrafting extraordinaires

 

[TTTTTsd]

Look I'm just gonna chime in and say that I think a lot of stuff like DACUS should either be universal or not there. I like it, I like the idea, I just wish every character could squeeze something useful of it. Wavedashing was an option that benefitted literally everyone in at least ONE instance. I think every character deserves to have a DACUS, in some way shape or form....

I don't think stuff like that should be...inclusive.

Going to step into my favorite position, the middle, and say that we do have the removal of vertical vectoring which improves the followup game significantly from anything that launched vertically.

 

[Johnknight1]

Technical barriers aren't bad. Excessive ones can be problematic because they create such a huge skill gap, but Smash4 is nnnooOOOOOoowhere in danger of having that problem.

This to a certain extent. As long as everything isn't 8 input, 2 frame length, we are technically fine. Aside from a few exceptions, Melee really isn't that technically demanding compared to other fighting games like Guilty Gear or King of Fighters.

The only reason people search for advanced techniques is because it broadens out the character they're using.

This. Smash is a platformer in terms of design with the mechanics of a fighting game, and platformers and fighting games BOTH thrive on options. We like options. By combining the two, Smash has more movement options than most fighting games, although it has less attacks than most (although generally speaking attack effects [ie: when you land a move, a tipper vs. a non-tipper] and how you use a move even it out more).

This is a fairly simple design, and adding options to it gives you fairly simple new options. Your offense is about having as much options to take away your opponents defensive options (ie: your fAir takes away defensive options 1, 2, and 3, but options 4, 5, and 6 are even with it and option 7, 8, and 9 counter it), and your defensive options do the inverse.

It's absolutely fine if nintendo removes them, but if they aren't adding anything in their place, they really aren't doing the game at large any favors.

Generally speaking they should realistically only remove glitches (the Mega Man Rush cancelling glitch, Yoshi's super jump) and advance techniques that are broken (like if Z-cancelling was in Brawl but only for Mario). If something advanced technique is a bit OP, I'd rather they just nerf it a bit, but that's just me.

Honestly? A game without technical barriers is just a ****ty scrubfest. Basketball wouldn't be much of a sport if you were allowed to just hold the ball and run. The rules on dribbling are a technical barrier that pretty much defines good players from the bad. Same concept with competitive videogames.

Pretty much this. There needs to be heightened technical (as well as strategic and execution) barriers the higher up the ladder you climb. 64, Melee, and yes, even Brawl (before anyone insult Brawl in this regard, some of those chain grab timings are absolutely insane with how much precision they require, and you have to respect people for putting in the work to find and use these hard to land things!) have quite a good level of technical barriers from mid level to top level play.

These technical barriers are in a sense no different from the strategic barriers as well as the ability to read opponents and predict their actions. Now we don't need to have them be frame perfection, but we do need them to a certain extent. Give Smash 4's feel (like a less hard version of Brawl with weakened camping and stalling strategies), that likely isn't going to be an issue for those who actually wanna be the very best.

 

[Prawn]

Look I'm just gonna chime in and say that I think a lot of stuff like DACUS should either be universal or not there. I like it, I like the idea, I just wish every character could squeeze something useful of it. Wavedashing was an option that benefitted literally everyone in at least ONE instance. I think every character deserves to have a DACUS, in some way shape or form....

I don't think stuff like that should be...inclusive.

Going to step into my favorite position, the middle, and say that we do have the removal of vertical vectoring which improves the followup game significantly from anything that launched vertically.

Why? Why does every character "need" a DACUS? why doesn't every character have a projectile then? Or a throw to follow up into combos? Or multiple jumps? Or a good roll?

Because it's a "glitch"?


Edit: also no....zelda ain't wavedashing in melee. Lots of characters don't really benefit from it in any meaningful way.

 

[TTTTTsd]

Why? Why does every character "need" a DACUS? why doesn't every character have a projectile then? Or a throw to follow up into combos? Or multiple jumps? Or a good roll?

Because it's a "glitch"?

No because it could potentially benefit a lot of characters, regardless of if it's a "glitch" or not. It's not like it's going to massively change or skew the balance, but it would be an interesting roster-wide tool. For the record character specific tech can obviously still exist, I'm strictly talking DACUS, which is literally just movement during a USmash.
Please don't blatantly homogenize a statement.

 

[Prawn]

No because it could potentially benefit a lot of characters, regardless of if it's a "glitch" or not. It's not like it's going to massively change or skew the balance, but it would be an interesting roster-wide tool. For the record character specific tech can obviously still exist, I'm strictly talking DACUS, which is literally just movement during a USmash.
Please don't blatantly homogenize a statement.

So because something benefits a lot of characters it can't be in the game?

You're homogenizing your own statement. No one should have a tether grab then, because all the characters with fast grabs are benefitted from it?

 

[ミスティック Speed]

xP I like how there are people here who automatically assume I suck because of my opinion. People who have actually played me should be the ones to speak on that behalf, not some hot-headed "know-it-all". I play the game to win, but I still would prefer these things to be patched to make for a more stable ground in terms of balance. Let me guess, you're going to pan me for this too?

 

[TTTTTsd]

I'm simply saying DACUS would be a lot better if it DID benefit more characters because as it stands it's incredibly situational for those it DOES benefit, and I'd LIKE to see it implemented on a more cast-wide basis. As it stands I feel it could be slapped on a ton more characters and made into a legitimate thing while still remaining good.

If my statement needs any more clarifying, do let me know. But as it is, it was incredibly situational and I wish it had benefitted more to make its inclusion a bit more valid. I don't agree nor disagree about it being patched out (not like I could use it on the ****ing 3DS anyways), but if they were to have kept it, it would obviously be preferrable to be a more central mechanic if it's that important.

 

[Prawn]

xP I like how there are people here who automatically assume I suck because of my opinion. People who have actually played me should be the ones to speak on that behalf, not some hot-headed "know-it-all". I play the game to win, but I still would prefer these things to be patched to make for a more stable ground in terms of balance. Let me guess, you're going to pan me for this too?

Your "opinion" is a sentiment shared by a lot of bad players in a lot of competitions that is irrational and silly. And the addition of "play the game how it's meant to be played" is so stupid it's making my brain hurt

 

[Praxis]

xP I like how there are people here who automatically assume I suck because of my opinion. People who have actually played me should be the ones to speak on that behalf, not some hot-headed "know-it-all". I play the game to win, but I still would prefer these things to be patched to make for a more stable ground in terms of balance. Let me guess, you're going to pan me for this too?

I said nothing against your skill level. You are simply espousing opinions that indicate you've never played a competitive game at a high level before.

In the same way that if I said the world was flat, you'd know I wasn't a physics major.

 

[ミスティック Speed]

Your "opinion" is a sentiment shared by a lot of bad players in a lot of competitions that is irrational and silly. And the addition of "play the game how it's meant to be played" is so stupid it's making my brain hurt

Obviously your blind to anything except what you think is right in terms of competition then. That is, if your brain can't even comprehend it.

I said nothing against your skill level. You are simply espousing opinions that indicate you've never played a competitive game at a high level before.

In the same way that if I said the world was flat, you'd know I wasn't a physics major.

I was only referring to the ones who went out of their way to say something negative regarding my stance.

 

[Prawn]

Obviously your blind to anything except what you think is right in terms of competition then. That is, if your brain can't even comprehend it.

So when Dr. J started dunking in the ABA youd go "NOT FAIR U ONLY WIN CAUSE OF THAT SILLY EXPLOIT" and then never allow it ever again?

Seems really competitive. Guess my tiny brain can't comprehend your infallible logic


So, holy grail of competitive knowledge, what is the "intended way" to play smash? What am I allowed to beat you with that doesn't make me cheap?

 

[Praxis]

Obviously your blind to anything except what you think is right in terms of competition then. That is, if your brain can't even comprehend it.

Please read my post and the article I linked to in my post please, rather than dismissing it offhand because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions.

The shortened version:
http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win

Full book:
Web version here:
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw
and PDF version:
http://the-confederation.net/_fr/11/playingtowin.pdf

 

[TTTTTsd]

I'm going to solidify my opinion with this. I think DACUS could've easily been left in and given to a bunch more characters who could've gotten more or equal use out of it to make it have stronger staying power and make the game more consistent in feel, but the fact that it's gone I am neutral towards. Characters with strong UpSmashes like Greninja got good mileage out of it, why not give it to more characters with UpSmashes that mesh naturally with it?

Now, the character specific ATs like ledge cancel turnip (AKA the non harmful ATs, unlike Wario vectoring or the various hitstun cancels) I don't like seeing them disappear, but I class them under a different thing than DACUS.

If this point was unclear before, I apologize. It's just how I think, it's not a facetious statement about giving everybody a fireball, it would just be nice to see something like DACUS become universal and fairly usable among a larger pool of characters.

 

[Prawn]

I'm going to solidify my opinion with this. I think DACUS could've easily been left in and given to a bunch more characters who could've gotten more or equal use out of it to make it have stronger staying power and make the game more consistent in feel, but the fact that it's gone I am neutral towards.

Now, the character specific ATs like ledge cancel turnip (AKA the non harmful ATs, unlike Wario vectoring or the various hitstun cancels) I don't like seeing them disappear, but I class them under a different thing than DACUS.

If this point was unclear before, I apologize. It's just how I think, it's not a facetious statement about giving everybody a fireball, it would just be nice to see something like DACUS become universal and fairly usable among a larger pool of characters.

I agree DACUS would be cool if it were universal but I don't agree that because it's not it should be removed. Which is what(I think) you're also saying.