On the topic of Fox/Falco hate

[Bones0]

In my opinion, a move that fits these criteria is not good design for a fighting game:

• Comes out frame 1
• Has invincibility
• Cancellable frame 4
• Starts combos
• Prolongs combos
• Combos into itself
• Sets up kill combos
• Provides infinite pressure combos
• Spikes
• 1-frame pressure escape
• 1-frame punish
• Cannot be CCed
• As a bonus, reflects all projectiles

We can talk about how "good" the characters are compared to the rest of the cast, but a move with so much brainless utility does not fit into this game, in my opinion.

That list is hilariously redundant, and shine can definitely be CCed...

If I were going to describe Fox's shine, here's how I would do it:

• Comes out frame 1, but only active for 1 frame (invincibility for 1 frame is also borderline useless)
• 5 frames of cooldown when JCed
• Low set KB
  • Good for combos
  • Good for low % gimps on off stage opponents
  • Doesn't combo at all on airborne opponents
• Fairly large hitbox
• Can reflect projectiles
• Can be used to stall aerial descent

Of course shine is a really good move. But then you also have to consider that the character it's attached to, along with his really good speed, is also ridiculous combo fodder. He has little to no moves capable of zoning (awful priority and range on just about everything), dies at ridiculously low %s (was the 4th lightest character in Melee), and most combos past 3 hits immediately become flimsy and unreliable due to SDI (uair, drill, and shine). It basically means Fox players have to be more precise for their stuff to work, get punished harder when they are not precise enough, and even when they have perfect precision, the opponent may still be able to escape what should be basic combos.

I'm honestly surprised so many people still have problems with Fox. Looking at all of the stuff above, as a player with a fresh, new character designed to be on par with the rest of Melee's cast, I'm inclined to be excited about a character that is so fragile. Even in Melee, Fox players often struggle with random low tier characters that they have minimal matchup experience with even though Fox heavily outclasses all of them. Even Melee low tiers can usually do ridiculous combos and gimps on Fox, so now that all of those characters were buffed and there are even more characters total, I'm at a loss for understanding how Fox can still be considered as good as he was in Melee, or by some people, even better.

It seems parallel to what Umbreon was saying about Marth. In Melee, Marth was able to really abuse his speedy DD and grab game to establish heavy control, but when you speed up literally all of his competition and add mostly larger stages, it's pretty easy to see how he got worse just from the transition. No longer having a borderline monopoly on speed, how is Fox still so potent of a character? So many things have to happen just right for this character, and it often only takes one little thing to go wrong in order for him to get death-touched.

He's your typical all-in, glass cannon character, so it doesn't really surprise me he is overrated when people constantly focus only on his cannon aspects and never how overwhelmingly frail the rest of his design is. People have a tendency to Theory Bros. above human limitations, which is quite logical because human improvement over the years is always heading towards that "ideal" gameplay. The question of course is whether Fox will ever become this TAS-like character with players that play perfectly enough to make him the best (let alone untouchable or broken).

 

[GaretHax]

That list is hilariously redundant, and shine can definitely be CCed...

If I were going to describe Fox's shine, here's how I would do it:

• Comes out frame 1, but only active for 1 frame (invincibility for 1 frame is also borderline useless)
• 5 frames of cooldown when JCed
• Low set KB
  • Good for combos
  • Good for low % gimps on off stage opponents
  • Doesn't combo at all on airborne opponents
• Fairly large hitbox
• Can reflect projectiles
• Can be used to stall aerial descent

Of course shine is a really good move. But then you also have to consider that the character it's attached to, along with his really good speed, is also ridiculous combo fodder. He has little to no moves capable of zoning (awful priority and range on just about everything), dies at ridiculously low %s (was the 4th lightest character in Melee), and most combos past 3 hits immediately become flimsy and unreliable due to SDI (uair, drill, and shine). It basically means Fox players have to be more precise for their stuff to work, get punished harder when they are not precise enough, and even when they have perfect precision, the opponent may still be able to escape what should be basic combos.

I'm honestly surprised so many people still have problems with Fox. Looking at all of the stuff above, as a player with a fresh, new character designed to be on par with the rest of Melee's cast, I'm inclined to be excited about a character that is so fragile. Even in Melee, Fox players often struggle with random low tier characters that they have minimal matchup experience with even though Fox heavily outclasses all of them. Even Melee low tiers can usually do ridiculous combos and gimps on Fox, so now that all of those characters were buffed and there are even more characters total, I'm at a loss for understanding how Fox can still be considered as good as he was in Melee, or by some people, even better.

It seems parallel to what Umbreon was saying about Marth. In Melee, Marth was able to really abuse his speedy DD and grab game to establish heavy control, but when you speed up literally all of his competition and add mostly larger stages, it's pretty easy to see how he got worse just from the transition. No longer having a borderline monopoly on speed, how is Fox still so potent of a character? So many things have to happen just right for this character, and it often only takes one little thing to go wrong in order for him to get death-touched.

He's your typical all-in, glass cannon character, so it doesn't really surprise me he is overrated when people constantly focus only on his cannon aspects and never how overwhelmingly frail the rest of his design is. People have a tendency to Theory Bros. above human limitations, which is quite logical because human improvement over the years is always heading towards that "ideal" gameplay. The question of course is whether Fox will ever become this TAS-like character with players that play perfectly enough to make him the best (let alone untouchable or broken).

This, but I've said the same thing like 10 times in this thread lol... Honestly I'm amazed this thread is still open. Then again I've said that before as well.

 

[leelue]

Ignore this post, since what I was saying was already said a page ago

 

[The_NZA]

I'm frustrated that no one in this topic is still arguing against the primary reason why usmash is stupid.

All the arguments against nerfing usmash basically amount to:
1. Fox isn't broken
2. Fox can be beaten
3. Fox is a glass cannon
4. your bad

its pretty stupid, and these arguments make it seem like everyone asking to nerf usmash aren't aware of these incredibly obvious points.

It's not that fox is broken. It's not that there aren't enough ways to **** up fox. It is about the move itself being out of place in a game like Project M. The move results in ridiculously brain dead usage requiring such fierce counter play to be okay. Add in that Brawl shield physics have provided it with a buff in safety means it should probably patched to its PAL power levels. Furthermore, there is no reason fox needs a move that can so reliably kill everyone at such low percentages.

It seems like the only people arguing about Usmash are the ones arguing to nerf it. The rest of you have just entered in here to verbally masturbate on how the rest of us are bad.

Also, do take note that when you bring up the fact that fox isn't winning tournaments, do note that while fox may not be getting first, he might be making it extremely hard for some of the lighter cast members from being viable unless they have ridiculously silly things they can exploit.

 

[JOE!]

Fox players often struggle with random low tier characters that they have minimal matchup experience with

Uhm, wouldn't any player of most any character have issues with matchups they lack experience in?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Uhm, wouldn't any player of most any character have issues with matchups they lack experience in?

Most popular character vs random low tier. Who has more experience in the matchup? Think Jman/Lucky/Silent Wolf/etc vs Axe compared to Kage vs Axe where both players have about equal lack of experience.

It's not that fox is broken. It's not that there aren't enough ways to **** up fox. It is about the move itself being out of place in a game like Project M. The move results in ridiculously brain dead usage requiring such fierce counter play to be okay. Add in that Brawl shield physics have provided it with a buff in safety means it should probably patched to its PAL power levels. Furthermore, there is no reason fox needs a move that can so reliably kill everyone at such low percentages.

Why is counter play bad? Counter play is what defines competitive gaming. Here is an excerpt from Sirlin's "Play to Win":

The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they’ll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite subtle and difficult to discover. Knowing the counter tactic prevents the other player from using his tactic, but he can then use a counter to your counter. You are now afraid to use your counter and the opponent can go back to sneaking in the original overpowering tactic. This concept will be covered in much more detail later.

The good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the “cheap stuff” and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it’s unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak.

 

[1MachGO]

Bones0 speaks the truth.

I'm frustrated that no one in this topic is still arguing against the primary reason why usmash is stupid.

All the arguments against nerfing usmash basically amount to:
1. Fox isn't broken
2. Fox can be beaten
3. Fox is a glass cannon
4. your bad

its pretty stupid, and these arguments make it seem like everyone asking to nerf usmash aren't aware of these incredibly obvious points.

It's not that fox is broken. It's not that there aren't enough ways to **** up fox. It is about the move itself being out of place in a game like Project M. The move results in ridiculously brain dead usage requiring such fierce counter play to be okay. Add in that Brawl shield physics have provided it with a buff in safety means it should probably patched to its PAL power levels. Furthermore, there is no reason fox needs a move that can so reliably kill everyone at such low percentages.

It seems like the only people arguing about Usmash are the ones arguing to nerf it. The rest of you have just entered in here to verbally masturbate on how the rest of us are bad.

Also, do take note that when you bring up the fact that fox isn't winning tournaments, do note that while fox may not be getting first, he might be making it extremely hard for some of the lighter cast members from being viable unless they have ridiculously silly things they can exploit.

Before you complain about feelings of belittlement I think you should understand how the "nerf fox's umsash" camp sounds like.

Simply put, my 8 year old self would have complained about the KO power of one move. It is an argument which suggests that you have limited insight about competitive smash.

Also, two anti-fox nerf arguments which you completely ommited were 1. Nerfing fox' usmash would not alleviate bad MUs, particularly Falcon/Ganon who are easily the two characters he counters the hardest. and [thus] 2. Buffing other characters would be a better option.

Adjusting the KB of one move to improve the balance of the game is a very one-dimensional approach. Mind you, the same person who nerfed Fox's strongest attacks in PAL also nerfed Ganon's fair and Link's grounded up-b. Such changes add nothing to the game save for inconveniencing some characters.

After this many years of competitive play we should be balancing for high level, not low level smash.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I despise chess comparisons to any game that isn't turn based.

 

[Bones0]

Uhm, wouldn't any player of most any character have issues with matchups they lack experience in?

Of course, but a Fox player has a lot less time to figure the matchup out than a Peach or Puff player because he gets punished significantly harder every time he gets touched. Normally, I would just say oh well, Fox players just need to be more aware of low tier matchups, but my point was that now in P:M, matchup ignorance isn't the only way to lose vs. half the cast. Even if Fox knows all the matchups pretty well, all the characters are so buffed in their movement and combo games that they can legitimately outplay and get hits on Fox without the Fox being completely inept. It's more an inevitability of the way the game works much like how if you watch a high level Fox vs. Peach match in 2013. The Peach is bound to land a few hits if she isn't getting outplayed at every turn, so the balance of the game becomes: Can Fox play "perfect" long enough to get an KO before Peach can get a touch that converts successfully? When people see the Fox play perfectly and go untouched for a full minute getting a bunch of small hits and end with an usmash, they cry broken, but then when Fox's opponent comes back with invincibility and 0-deaths him from a single hit, they are just mirin' the impressive combos that the player did on that overpowered character.

This isn't a Fox-specific thing either. Like I said above, it's a balance, and some balance of the system exists in all characters. Falco can combo better than Fox, but his speed makes it a lot harder for him to get solid first hits. This is why he seems so broken at lower levels where players can't deal with lasers and end up letting him in for free. Falcon combos even harder, is even faster, but he gets comboed almost as hard, his recovery is awful, and his moves are hard to open people up with. You can pick any character and fairly easily look at them in terms of offense output vs. defense output per hit. It's a simple way of looking at a complex game, but it ends up giving you a pretty broad picture of how the game plays out. Think about what the average %s dealt without taking damage or average % taken without dealing a hit are for each character. The MioM podcast talked about compiling statistics like these, and I think just seeing how much percent a character can get/take in a row would show pretty clearly that Fox frequently takes more damage than he gives out, and the only way he can keep up with the rest of the cast is to have tools like shine spiking, uthrow uairs, and usmashes to kill at low %s.

 

[Deleted member]

Honestly I'm amazed this thread is still open. Then again I've said that before as well.

I really hate it when people say that, as if creating a designated place for discussion about something clearly controversial in the game is somehow a bad thing. The topic will still get brought up if this thread didn't exist, it would just take place elsewhere and potentially derail other threads. If the discussion bothers you, you don't have to take part in it.

Simply put, my 8 year old self would have complained about the KO power of one move. It is an argument which suggests that you have limited insight about competitive smash

And there's the belittlement.

 

[Ace55]

I agree with SmashFromThePast. I might not like this topic but at least there is a place to discuss it now. Before a bunch of other threads had this same discussion anyway.

Censorship is no solution.

 

[1MachGO]

And there's the belittlement.

I'm pretty sure I was justifying the belittlement, not trying to suggest it didn't exist.

 

[0RLY]

Wasn't G&W also designed to be like a glass cannon? He still seems more like a wet paper slingshot compared to Fox/Falco.

Fox/Falco's weaknesses to chain throws and juggles hardly even exist anymore since there's always going to be a platform to DI to. FD is only one stage. Even with more FD-like stages, we can still ban them.

 

[Scythe]

juggles continue on platforms

 

[EpixAura]

I haven't read the full thread, so forgive me if I say something stupid, but I'm a fan of the idea of tailoring a character or two specifically for the spacie matchup. Of course, I don't mean making them a walking chaingrab machine. However, maybe we could incorporate someone with a move somewhat like Fox's shine, but with a different trajectory, allowing it to hit Fox/Falco back without knocking them down like Fox's shine. The end result would be similar to Fox waveshining Falcon across the stage, but Fox would be on the receiving end for once. I don't know how the move would work on non-fast-falling characters, though.
Ideally, it wouldn't be the end-all-be-all spacie counter with 100% win rate or something crazy like that, but I feel that it's pretty reasonable for them to have at least one disadvantageous matchup.

It feels like a bit of a shame to change Fox/Falco when everyone is so accustomed to them, especially since for a lot of Melee players switching to P:M, having the unchanged spacies is pretty important.

Another option is to buff Captain Falcon to be the indisputable #1 character and spacie counter. No one will complain. It's Falcon.

 

[Bryonato]

I would be totally ok with S tier Falcon.

 

[CyberZixx]

S tier falcon sound obnoxious. What would you do to buff him that high?

 

[SpiderMad]

You port King over him and make him run like a cougar

or give him Sonic's up-b

 

[JOE!]

How to make falcon top tier? Give him the anime Falcon Punch.

 

[The_NZA]

@Sveet,

Why not try and understand what I was saying before you prepare an answer for it. When I said
"It's not that fox is broken. It's not that there aren't enough ways to **** up fox. It is about the move itself being out of place in a game like Project M. The move results in ridiculously brain dead usage requiring such fierce counter play to be okay. "

I am not saying counterplay is bad. I am suggesting that the counter play options are minimal––that you have to be fiercely on your game to "counter it". In games, there is the concept of risk/reward and skill oriented play/counterplay. The concept here is that the amount of skill it takes to set up an usmash and the reward that results humorously outweighs the amount of work the opponent has to do to a. avoid it, b. punish it, and c. try and survive it.

Against a horizontal move with equal killing power, I can choose to make you engage me from bad positions, I can stay slightly above you, and I can punish your start up time. If I get knocked horizontally, I can DI properly, smash di to the ground and tech, I can do many things. Against Fox's usmash, you have to do so much more to survive.

Bones0 speaks the truth.



Before you complain about feelings of belittlement I think you should understand how the "nerf fox's umsash" camp sounds like.

Simply put, my 8 year old self would have complained about the KO power of one move. It is an argument which suggests that you have limited insight about competitive smash.

Also, two anti-fox nerf arguments which you completely ommited were 1. Nerfing fox' usmash would not alleviate bad MUs, particularly Falcon/Ganon who are easily the two characters he counters the hardest. and [thus] 2. Buffing other characters would be a better option.

Adjusting the KB of one move to improve the balance of the game is a very one-dimensional approach. Mind you, the same person who nerfed Fox's strongest attacks in PAL also nerfed Ganon's fair and Link's grounded up-b. Such changes add nothing to the game save for inconveniencing some characters.

After this many years of competitive play we should be balancing for high level, not low level smash.

So you present 2 arguments here that I've bolded. On 1, it is clear that Fox's advantages in MU are so entrenched in his design, that you can't alleviate those matchups without changing fox in the core way he is accepted today. And what we've largely established in this thread, with few dissenters is that no one really wants to nerf him in a way that takes away from his "higher skill = infinite possibilities" gameplay style. However, logic suggests that if you require a Fox to dance with an opponent for 20% more time, that you are opening up 20% more opportunities for them to get punished, hurt, knocked out. Every character's matchups would be improved, if only mildly because some stocks would have to be worked for harder.

As for 2. You can buff characters to have better options, and this has been done in PM. Fox largely ****s on everyone in Melee because of his mobility, and there has been a lot of work done to improve the mobility of other characters. However, this is about a move that doesn't fit in in the smash brothers universe to me, and not about overall character balance. Hell, this topic could have been about Ike's sweetspot mechanics in 2.1. Arguably, many of Ike's moves had Fox usmash like power in 2.1, effectively as you say "buffing other characters" to challenge Fox's silliness. But, If you look up Ike v. Fox 2.1 matches, you see that those matches look ****ing dumb. Its not fun to see fox get forward tilted/fmsashed at 50-60% by ike and killed...it makes the game overcentralized on individual moves, much like Brawl.

I don't know why no one can name a move like Fox's usmash (vertical killer) on as strong a character, and why it's deserving on fox outside of a reason of "well, cause its been there for like 12 years".

Also, bringing up other PAL nerfs is bad logic. No one here is arguing the PAL balancers are the new testament, just like none of us are arguing that the melee balancers knew at all what the hell they were doing when they came up with Fox's moveset. It's just, since the fox defenders are so set in their ways of needing a structural precedent for them to change their beloved character, we point to the PAL nerfs to show that there is an official precedent out there that can be turned to rather uncontroversially.

 

[BTmoney]

S tier falcon sound obnoxious. What would you do to buff him that high?

Who would actually be upset if falcon was the best character in the game? No one. Well no one with any level of testosterone, women included.

I've been away from this thread for a few days so I'm just gonna say:

ad hoc

yeah.

And do nothing to fox/falco.

yeah.

/thread

 

[Deleted member]

Who would actually be upset if falcon was the best character in the game? No one. Well no one with any level of testosterone, women included.

I've been away from this thread for a few days so I'm just gonna say:

ad hoc

yeah.

And do nothing to fox/falco.

yeah.

/thread

in a game where falcon is the best character, it means that the rest of the cast is unable to overcome speed, hard dashdance camping, and autocombos. this suggests that the game is even more polarized toward mobility, and falcon would have to be even more of an outlier than he already is in terms of movement speed. both of those sound very unappealing. that's before the brainless dolts that jerk off to simple combos and internet idiocy populate the tournament scene. as a whole, that sounds straight awful and revolting as a game.

 

[The_NZA]

Right when we are all wishing on pigs with wings, we can always count on Umbreon to come in and snip them back to the ground.

 

[Kink-Link5]

But Falcon is so kawaii don't you just love the time when he did a D-throw and then forward air? That was so hype my nipples exploded.

 

[Jolteon]

Plenty of people hate Falcon in his current form, he would be really obnoxious as the best character in the game.

 

[1MachGO]

As for 2. You can buff characters to have better options, and this has been done in PM. Fox largely ****s on everyone in Melee because of his mobility, and there has been a lot of work done to improve the mobility of other characters. However, this is about a move that doesn't fit in in the smash brothers universe to me, and not about overall character balance.

Upon reading this, it would appear that we were essentially having two different conversations.

So in your eyes, the point of changing Fox's usmash would be to satisfy a subjective belief of what makes the game fun?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

@Sveet,

Why not try and understand what I was saying before you prepare an answer for it. When I said
"It's not that fox is broken. It's not that there aren't enough ways to **** up fox. It is about the move itself being out of place in a game like Project M. The move results in ridiculously brain dead usage requiring such fierce counter play to be okay. "

I am not saying counterplay is bad. I am suggesting that the counter play options are minimal––that you have to be fiercely on your game to "counter it". In games, there is the concept of risk/reward and skill oriented play/counterplay. The concept here is that the amount of skill it takes to set up an usmash and the reward that results humorously outweighs the amount of work the opponent has to do to a. avoid it, b. punish it, and c. try and survive it.

Against a horizontal move with equal killing power, I can choose to make you engage me from bad positions, I can stay slightly above you, and I can punish your start up time. If I get knocked horizontally, I can DI properly, smash di to the ground and tech, I can do many things. Against Fox's usmash, you have to do so much more to survive.

So its fine to learn to avoid and DI horizontal KO moves but when it comes to this one particular vertical KO move, suddenly it is game breaking? Get the **** outa here.

I'm not sure if you have no experience with competitive games, but some things will be arbitrarily easier than others, but that doesn't make them objectively broken or even overpowered. A great example is peach's downsmash from melee. A peach player could rack up 60%+ from a crouch cancel. But in reality, once the game was figured out more, people realized they can space better so it must be used in a trap of some sort to hit and also that if they DI up they can escape multiple hits. Does it take more "work" to avoid this? Sure, I suppose so. Is that bad? Definitely not. That is called depth.

I suggest you read Sirlin's "Play to Win" book to learn more about what is good in a competitive environment.

 

[Bryonato]

But Falcon is so kawaii don't you just love the time when he did a D-throw and then forward air? That was so hype my nipples exploded.

Whatever dawg the knee is hype always. I despise, respect and admire CF.

EDIT: In that order.

 

[t3chn0g0at]

Just give Falcon 5 jumps and change nothing else. Boom.

 

[BTmoney]

in a game where falcon is the best character, it means that the rest of the cast is unable to overcome speed, hard dashdance camping, and autocombos. this suggests that the game is even more polarized toward mobility, and falcon would have to be even more of an outlier than he already is in terms of movement speed. both of those sound very unappealing. that's before the brainless dolts that jerk off to simple combos and internet idiocy populate the tournament scene. as a whole, that sounds straight awful and revolting as a game.

Hate the players not the game

I bet you get hype for sheik's d-throw-fair. I'll squeeze my genitalia to that.

But people having a problem with Falcon currently is pretty funny imo.

 

[Bryonato]

Yeah I love how this went from a joke to salt over CF.

 

[1MachGO]

Yeah man, I freaking hate Falcon combos...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=r5a2qAKPYr0#t=990s
HYPEEEEE!

 

[Vashimus]

Well, you could always just release Samus for the spacies instead of buff Falcon.

 

[JOE!]

Right, let us just make a totally anti-spacey character that DDD -DK's them. This will help both parties: a character was buffed and spacies stayed the same

 

[Kink-Link5]

Yeah man, I freaking hate Falcon combos...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=r5a2qAKPYr0#t=990s
HYPEEEEE!

Hyper than anything Falcon manages at least.

 

[1MachGO]

Hyper than anything Falcon manages at least.

lol are you being serious?

I would respect your dislike towards simplicity if it applied to all simplicity. Players of significantly less skill than M2K or Hax could replicate the events of that edge guard segment. A smaller portion of players would be able to replicate a Falcon combo.

So does disliking Falcon combos give you some sort of feeling of sophistication/self empowerment or is it just the cool thing to hate?

 

[Scythe]

this thread blows

 

[V-K]

What if Falcon's Falcon Kick came out on frame 1? Would be funny as hell and he would be able to break out of massive pressure.

 

[GMaster171]

FALCON COMBO BREAKER

All I have to say here.

 

[JOE!]

Seems like the thread is startin to derail...

Anywho, nerfing Fox's rewards on some moves will not alter MUs significantly but will give more room for opponents to play, thus more pressure on the fox to perform up to par.

And again: what are people's gripes with Falco?