On the topic of Fox/Falco hate

[trash?]

"Objective Disproval" isn't anecdotal evidence.

You keep running around anything you're not willing to argue. Cut it out.

 

[ELI-mination]

Umm no offense, but lasering people with Fox is not hard.
You just run around and press B in a relatively braindead manner. Against ANY opponent.
If you're having trouble accomplishing this task, perhaps its time to rethink your life decisions regarding education.

 

[Bones0]

Umm no offense, but lasering people with Fox is not hard.
You just run around and press B in a relatively braindead manner. Against ANY opponent.
If you're having trouble accomplishing this task, perhaps its time to rethink your life decisions regarding education.

Do you have a link to any videos with Fox players mindlessly lasering you?

 

[ELI-mination]

Nope, therefore I must be completely wrong

 

[Vigilante]

I'm starting to suffer from a new form of dislexia where all I can read in this thread is "You disagree with me, OMG, I'm insulted and need to respond something witty to prove my family jewels are bigger than yours". I believe the cure is to stop reading this.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

NZA, down boy.

I want to be fair here. I want you to look back and find the exact quote where Bones said Reflex knows NOTHING about how Fox's neutral game works. He's merely saying that since they're playin two different characters (Fox and ... Not Fox), they're going to have different opinions on it and will butt head often. Bones said himself repeatedly he doesn't think Reflex is the bad player, but that he wouldn't take Reflex's advice on a subject like that. How is that wrong?

He's saying more than that; he's saying I have no idea what I'm talking about in relation to dashdancing and wavedashing, which is silly. He also repeatedly uses examples from videos where I straight-up destroy people to "prove" his point when I've said that it's much more apparent when I'm playing people that are a substantial challenge.

Because he plays Wario and comes from barlw, he virtually never DDs or WD...I've had discussions with him in the Squirtle forums that make it quite clear he does not have a very good understanding of how the DD WD spacing game works in Melee, or P:M.

I think there is such a huge gap between Reflex's skill and his understanding of how neutral works in P:M with characters that rely heavily on DD and WDing.

Yes, you've claimed before that WDing as an approach is too predictable, at which point I simply commented that WD approaches are much less predictable when you also include DDing as well.

If you have any understanding of DDing or WDing in neutral, you are definitely not demonstrating it in your tournament sets. Obviously that understanding may still be there, but I have a hard time believing anyone who cannot properly utilize DDWD in neutral can truly understand it. Also keep in mind the only reason I'm questioning your experience with DDing and WDing is because the way you replied to Sveet makes it seem like you are greatly overestimating to what extent Fox is able to simply DD camp every character. I was mostly just trying to point out to Sveet that there may be an inherent disconnect when you have a Melee Fox player and barlw Wario player discussing the neutral game in P:M.

5. If Reflex actually had to use DDing or WDing to beat Hbox, I wouldn't be making judgements about his ability to use them. I can't take a set off Hbox, but I can certainly utilize DDWDing better vs. Hbox than Reflex can (as well as any other mediocre Melee player).

Based on his description, I'm not even sure if he's actually seen this match, or if he understands that you don't have to dash five+ times for dashdancing to be effective--

 

[Juushichi]

Just responding to them. But to bring this back to the topic at hand, why Fox and Falco? There are tons of more problematic characters in Melee like Jiggs and Peach, which are not only amazingly good, but actually elongate match lenghts, use silly hit and run tactics and piss everyone off "except" those who play them. It seems to me that these two characters (Fox/Falco) are the least bothersome of the higher tiers. I may be biased due to maining Roy in Melee (fast faller), but I have nothing but deep affection for spacies.

I can still see that they are not entirely fairly balanced (in Melee) of course.

Hm... Ignoring the layered opinion of methodical playstyles, which both the users of these "problematic characters" use (hell, let's throw Samus in there too!) and the players that are known to play the best against them (PP - known for his methodical and very cerebral advancements for both vs Peach and Jiggs, M2K, hell... HBox and Armada themselves!) what exactly are problematic about these characters?

What identifiable traits are problem areas that opposing characters are not able to deal with? Is it outside forces like "elongating match lengths" or "pissing everyone off"? It may be "silly hit and run tactics", but those sort of things are really prevalent between every character in the game. Are you not using hit and run tactics to set up opposing characters in bad positions to best captialize on them? What about dash-dancing away off of a stray hit or sheild? Is Falcon also "problematic" for this?

EDIT: NOPE VIGILANTE, YOU AIN'T LEAVIN'.

 

[Player-1]

If someone doesn't actively apply DDing and WDing, they aren't going to understand it as well as people who do.

Not true, someone that overuses DDing and WDing and gets punished for it probably doesn't understand it as much as someone that uses them less, but at the right time. Deciding when to not DD/WD is an equally important quality in understanding the two techniques.

 

[trash?]

Still waiting on the anti-spacie tech that everyone tells me exists, by the way. Best examples anyone's given has been CGs, but if grabs were easy to get on a spacie then melee DK should've had a 7-3 MU in DK's favor years ago.

 

[Shadic]

Can I get a reason to keep this thread open please? We've had like 40 posts about if Reflex knows how to dash-dance.

 

[The_NZA]

When you say stuff like Fox can laser for 20-25% and that it's not even difficult, I know for sure that you don't know WTF you are talking about. That kind of lasering has probably never occurred in the history of Smash on any consistent basis, and certainly not at high level. If it has happened, it certainly was not EASY. That is the most absurd claim I've ever heard. If it's so damn easy to run away and laser for 20%+ every stock, why have I never seen anyone do it? Ever? It's hard as ****, and even when the best players are doing it on the best stages for laser camping, it almost never amounts to 20% damage. Don't even get me started on your claim that medium-lightweight characters die at 80-85%. I can objectively disprove all your points just by looking at videos of high level players. No understanding is even required to disprove your claims; that's how far off of reality they are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=qzYDAEvqnHA#t=106s
Mango kills Armada at 82% with an usmash that is DI'd. It was charged a tiny bit but most reasonably good players can't di like armada in response to things of that nature anyways. Again, counterplay exists but it is immensely difficult. Either way, what I am saying is NOT outrageous as you have implied.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kna-fp4AND0

at 1:30, Mango puts 10% on armada with SHL in a matter of 3 seconds. Mango, who is decisively one of the biggest showboaters/anti-camper spammers in the pro scene. This is on battlefield (a stage where it is a less abusable strat) and against pit who actually has a plethora of options against this kind of play.

I don't get how you can think I am being sensational by saying "this is something fox's can do twice in a stock on a bigger stage against a character with worse options than pit." My problem isn't with the laser though. My problem is fox's gameplay defies the "glass cannon" character identity and instead inspires a style of play in smash which is braindead and "all about the numbers". SHL spam them over the course of the stock to get them down 20%. Get 60% more on them through a combo or two. End in usmash.

If it goes a little longer, just try and uair and you'll be okay. If your behind, a shine gimp will do the job.

Glass cannons are meant to have great stats in exchange for health. The shine safety and gimpability makes sense. Hell, his speed, weight, and comboability make sense. Even his great recovery makes sense. But wIth Fox's current design, he brings down his opponents healthbar so much with his kill options, he really just makes himself and his opponent into glass. That, IMO is not what a glass cannon is about.

 

[MysteryRevengerson]

Can I get a reason to keep this thread open please? We've had like 40 posts about if Reflex knows how to dash-dance.

Can we wait to see more of someone saying Fox has a hard time lasering people?

please end this

 

[Juushichi]

I wanna know what is problematic about Jigglypuff and Peach, Shadic.

 

[JOE!]

20% at once isn't gonna happwn, but 20+ done through different laser bursts sure is.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Can I get a reason to keep this thread open please? We've had like 40 posts about if Reflex knows how to dash-dance.

Yeah, its gone on so far. The original post that I contested was this:

It's not at all complicated. On the ground, since Fox moves significantly faster via dashdancing and has multiple choices to make his choice of option safe (initial dash backward, multiple attack options backed up by Shine/grab, fast jump, reasonably quick Forward-B/Up-B/waveland (with these options being good around platforms), and virtually no time to react to stuff for the opponent in the position where one of the slowest characters would be able to do something like an initial dash into JC grab/shuffle an aerial and the like, say, Zelda, cannot get Fox in a position to do much more than a stray medium-damage F-Air hitbox. In order to get that, you have to assume that Fox is going to jump in your general space, whether it will be fullhop, shorthop, or immediate double-jump, whether he's going to go in close enough to put himself in range, and what option he chooses. The plethora of movement and safe attacks makes it so you have to zero in on one and just hope and pray you picked the right move at the right time. It's obviously not that way for most characters, but it is that way for a significant number of them.

Thing is, with the lasers being so incredibly noncommittal in the matchups I'm describing, there's no reason to need or want to go in because it serves to leave yourself open in a scenario where you only want to do that very sparingly to keep them guessing. Comparing Armada's Melee play to Fox's PM play only goes so far, considering the extreme toolset that Peach has that most characters can't even come close to matching (in terms of what it's best at). Lagless jump-cancel aerials with enormous, long-lasting hitboxes (which give Peach the ability to greatly vary the length of her individual pokes with zero commitment and plays an integral part in her success. Frame 5 Tornado that really does a number on space animals for even thinking about being in her ground space, let alone crouch canceling. An item that fits really well into her incredible poke/spacing game and gives her even greater flexibility for offense and defense. She makes up for her mobility disparity by being a walking floating variable hitbox machine that often requires hard reads to get in on, which is not something that is shared by any other character, really.

The issue is further exacerbated by the fact that Melee has zero a very small handful of good competitive stages, which forces a noticeably smaller average stage on people compared to PM. Strike Yoshi's Story (seriously, why is this even a starter), FoD, and Battlefield (or maybe FD if you're fighting someone you need platforms to fight), and things are looking significantly bleaker based on stage size.

Falco's lasers and Fox's lasers are two incredibly powerful options for two noticeably different reasons (though infinite range is a significant part of their effectiveness). I wasn't here to discuss the merits of how good a move is on a theoretical character.

I made the "awful projectile = not that important" in order to lead into a suggestion where a potential compromise can be made. The least you could do is not be an *** about it, but you seem to be above (below) that, which is a shame.

You can only "just avoid lasers" when you're playing on very specific stages or using very specific characters. It's like you're not even trying to think critically here. I don't have time for that.

I quoted the underlined part and never specifically addressed anything else in the post.

Now reflex, there are definitely some good points you make in here, but there are some very bad ones too. If you would like to reword your stance I would be interested in having a good discussion, as long as we can ignore the trolls (like NZA and Canon)

 

[The_NZA]

20% at once isn't gonna happwn, but 20+ done through different laser bursts sure is.

Thats the thing...i never said 20% at once. I would like anyone to point to when I said such a thing. I've only ever referred to putting 20% to get a quarter of the way there on any given stock (a quarter of the way to an usmash kill). That of course wasn't unreasonable.

And sveet, pretty hilarious calling me a troll when I've been always willing to argue design with facts, evidence, and video.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

I quoted the underlined part and never specifically addressed anything else in the post.

Now reflex, there are definitely some good points you make in here, but there are some very bad ones too. If you would like to reword your stance I would be interested in having a good discussion, as long as we can ignore the trolls (like NZA and Canon)

I'm not really sure which are which, though (which is why I said everything that I did, heh). If you want to break it apart and expound on your arguments against stuff you disagree with, go for it, but if other points have merit, they shouldn't appear to be completely dismissed, either.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Also, the basic point is that a mobility disparity is often really, really, really powerful in Smash because the slower character basically has to make all the commitment while the faster character can reasonably react to things a vast majority of the time with a great deal of safety. Platforms, the speed in which characters can travel both on the ground and in the air, and the sheer amount of options given at any point (primarily due to dashdancing, wavedashing/wavelanding, and the ability to crouch out of a run and do any ground attack instantly) all make for an incredible number of options in movement.

To make it specific to this thread, Fox's lasers exacerbate the issue by being a completely risk-free option if you keep yourself at a distance that a significantly slower character cannot cover without making huge amounts of commitment (and subsequently getting thrashed for it if the space animal player is using even a basic amount of baiting) due to being unclankable, having an autocancel window out of a jump, and having what is effectively unlimited range at the best possible angle (straight forward). Regardless of how it happens, I feel that the game should be changed in a way to make this situation better than basically unplayable for the Zeldas and Ivysaurs of the world. A competitive mod should not have auto-win matchups, and I feel that the combination of the traits listed above create them.

 

[leelue]

To expand upon that, I think making characters have to live up to those kinds if standards, the fox standard, will create more matches where this us the case. My go-to example is always bowser. Since a character like his pretty much has to be "as good as fox" but also with his enormous size, it would seem inevitable that there's going to be a hunk of matchups where you are going to see 90/10 spreads in some direction.

 

[Vashimus]

Can I get a reason to keep this thread open please? We've had like 40 posts about if Reflex knows how to dash-dance.

Are you not entertained?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

I'm not really sure which are which, though (which is why I said everything that I did, heh). If you want to break it apart and expound on your arguments against stuff you disagree with, go for it, but if other points have merit, they shouldn't appear to be completely dismissed, either.

Of course. Despite what the trolls of this thread may say, I am reading all your posts. I did have a hard time making it through the first paragraph (the wording is confusing in places), which is why I kinda wanted you to rephrase your stance. I am not trying to be "right" or "wrong"; the exchange of ideas is much more important. I keep replying because I know you have the capacity to understand what I'm saying but I haven't said the right things to get through to you yet (im sure if we actually could sit down and play we could solve this whole discussion in a matter of minutes).

Also, the basic point is that a mobility disparity is often really, really, really powerful in Smash because the slower character basically has to make all the commitment while the faster character can reasonably react to things a vast majority of the time with a great deal of safety. Platforms, the speed in which characters can travel both on the ground and in the air, and the sheer amount of options given at any point (primarily due to dashdancing, wavedashing/wavelanding, and the ability to crouch out of a run and do any ground attack instantly) all make for an incredible number of options in movement.

Mobility disparity advantage is strong, for sure, but it is kinda like a calculus limit problem: as skill level increases to infinity, the advantage gained from mobility disparity approaches 0. It will always be something but as the players figure out the match-up it becomes less and less. That is part of the reason why I mentioned Armada in the first place, since he is the best player in the world and also fights from the "losing" end but consistently wins. The person with the mobility advantage may have more (but not all) say in when/where the clashes happen, but that doesn't mean he wins the engagement, ya know?

To make it specific to this thread, Fox's lasers exacerbate the issue by being a completely risk-free option if you keep yourself at a distance that a significantly slower character cannot cover without making huge amounts of commitment (and subsequently getting thrashed for it if the space animal player is using even a basic amount of baiting) due to being unclankable, having an autocancel window out of a jump, and having what is effectively unlimited range at the best possible angle (straight forward). Regardless of how it happens, I feel that the game should be changed in a way to make this situation better than basically unplayable for the Zeldas and Ivysaurs of the world. A competitive mod should not have auto-win matchups, and I feel that the combination of the traits listed above create them.

I think the problem is not the gun, but rather the stage list. I know how much it sucks to get laser camped, but the same issue can arise in many other match-ups. I'm certain toon link could time out puff (and maybe others) on half the stages that are currently legal.

Another similar limit problem is the between offense/proactive and defense/reactive. I cannot claim that offensive and defensive styles are even, but it is true that defense requires more match-up knowledge than offense. At knowledge(0), offense destroys defense (unless the game is broken, of course) because the defender has no knowledge of what actions to take to defend properly (at best he gets lucky now and then, but that isn't consistent). For example, suppose two noobs pick up the game, one is marth and just walks around fsmashing. The other is pikachu or something. The pikachu will get hit by the fsmash a hundred times before he learns how long the sword is, how much lag it has, the state marth much be in before he fsmashs, etc. but eventually (hopefully) the pikachu player will learn to beat this tactic. That example is pretty detached from this discussion, but hopefully you see what i mean.

What I'm trying to say is, the match-up between Fox and these slow characters you mentioned need to develop more before we can really say what they are like. Of course fox will win when his proactive tactics are already fleshed out and the other side is still learning what reactive tactics are good.

On fox's gun: Fox lacks true range so he cannot just run at the opponent and attack, he will simply get hit (and possibly combo'd to death if the opponent is competent). Fox is actually very weak against players who are patient and/or refuse to approach because of this. Fox's laser fits his design perfectly: it would be overpowered if he had a stunning projectile, but he needs something to make the opponent move forward. The damage is practically negligible (1 hit is worth 5 or more lasers in damage) but it does add up over time. I don't think the damage is too high as I do not know many people who can actually laser for impactful amounts of percent consistently. Personally, I dont care much, but I do oppose a damage change on principle.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Mobility disparity advantage is strong, for sure, but it is kinda like a calculus limit problem: as skill level increases to infinity, the advantage gained from mobility disparity approaches 0. It will always be something but as the players figure out the match-up it becomes less and less. That is part of the reason why I mentioned Armada in the first place, since he is the best player in the world and also fights from the "losing" end but consistently wins. The person with the mobility advantage may have more (but not all) say in when/where the clashes happen, but that doesn't mean he wins the engagement, ya know?

I think the problem is not the gun, but rather the stage list. I know how much it sucks to get laser camped, but the same issue can arise in many other match-ups. I'm certain toon link could time out puff (and maybe others) on half the stages that are currently legal.

Another similar limit problem is the between offense/proactive and defense/reactive. I cannot claim that offensive and defensive styles are even, but it is true that defense requires more match-up knowledge than offense. At knowledge(0), offense destroys defense (unless the game is broken, of course) because the defender has no knowledge of what actions to take to defend properly (at best he gets lucky now and then, but that isn't consistent). For example, suppose two noobs pick up the game, one is marth and just walks around fsmashing. The other is pikachu or something. The pikachu will get hit by the fsmash a hundred times before he learns how long the sword is, how much lag it has, the state marth much be in before he fsmashs, etc. but eventually (hopefully) the pikachu player will learn to beat this tactic. That example is pretty detached from this discussion, but hopefully you see what i mean.

What I'm trying to say is, the match-up between Fox and these slow characters you mentioned need to develop more before we can really say what they are like. Of course fox will win when his proactive tactics are already fleshed out and the other side is still learning what reactive tactics are good.

On fox's gun: Fox lacks true range so he cannot just run at the opponent and attack, he will simply get hit (and possibly combo'd to death if the opponent is competent). Fox is actually very weak against players who are patient and/or refuse to approach because of this. Fox's laser fits his design perfectly: it would be overpowered if he had a stunning projectile, but he needs something to make the opponent move forward. The damage is practically negligible (1 hit is worth 5 or more lasers in damage) but it does add up over time. I don't think the damage is too high as I do not know many people who can actually laser for impactful amounts of percent consistently. Personally, I dont care much, but I do oppose a damage change on principle.

I disagree. It's really not as simple as "more skill with the tools at hand mean that the matchup becomes more even." To show this point, imagine a hypothetical character who is significantly slower than the slow characters in Melee/PM, both on the ground and in the air. Fox would very obviously be able to run circles around him in a way that would make it impossible for this slow character to stand a chance, no matter how well a player might understand his options. We don't have any characters who are so hopelessly outclassed in speed/mobility, but I would argue that the disparity is big enough to create a similar scenario for characters with the the lowest mobility (like Zelda or Ivysaur).

In the case of those slow-ass characters, their bad jumps, weak neutral game mix-ups, and limited range/weak benefits on moves with substantial range prevent altercations from happening in the first place. There aren't really mix-ups to be had until Fox is super-hard read, which also requires a scenario in which Fox puts himself in range for a hard read to matter in the first place. That said, even if they can manage to force the Fox into an altercation, these characters hardly win any engagement, anyway. Many of their best neutral position options against faster characters tend to be single-hit moves that don't allow for much (if any) follow-up opportunity.

I still feel that Armada's Peach isn't a good example to cite as a character overcoming the mobility disparity for the largely-unique reasons I listed before (I'll edit this post with that quote in a minute). The example of Toon Link vs. Jigglypuff also shows the power of mobility disparity (which is certainly not limited to Fox), but Fox almost certainly creates the most "basically unwinnable" matchups through intelligent camping, and I would argue that Fox can do them on smaller stages (maybe not significantly smaller, but enough for it to allow for more than a couple extra stages compared to Toon Link).

The trouble I find with your loose parallel behind offense/defense understanding is that the characters I'm mentioning really aren't that deep in and of themselves. I think that's safe to say through a reasonable analysis of their moveset, which people have done and are continuing to do in order to find new uses for their character. While no one person can figure out everything a character is capable of, as a playtester, I have access to the guts of the game, so I can see the exact angles, frame counts, and any intentional extra options, ATs, and the like, which gives me substantial confidence in the lack of potential these nuances might hold in terms of improving their neutral game. I understand that more knowledge of characters' options spread between people improves people's ideas of how the matchups go, but, the same can be said for the winning side, who can learn to use a whole slew of new stages, matchups, and mechanics; the fact that Fox has been around for a long time doesn't mean that PM doesn't give him a lot to learn and improve upon. As a character with one of the greatest number of options in the game, Fox seems to have more to potentially "figure out" for the future, even with over a decade of pushing him so far in Melee.

As for the specifics of Fox's lasers, I think that the lowering of damage would just be a bandage that doesn't actually fix the problem (or what I see as a problem, anyway). After all, whether Fox does 1 "normal" hit's worth of damage in two lasers or eight, there's still no risk and very obvious reward when using it in the right position. How many moves can you say that about? That line of reasoning could apply to multiple projectiles, but other projectiles have shortcomings that mitigate this issue a lot; Sheik's Needles are only really threatening when charged and their best effect is used at a more situational angle that requires you to be reasonably close. Many other projectiles just have significant lag, on start-up and/or cooldown, and therefore leave you open when using them. Some don't have much range and therefore can't be used to build damage from across the stage. Falco's lasers don't come at as fast a rate, which makes outright avoiding them more reasonable, and Falco's horizontal mobility isn't nearly as good as Fox's, mitigating the "outright running away with them" issue. With all of these traits, I think they could stand to be toned down in a way that does not so heavily promote outright running away, even if that meant also making Fox better at approaching people.

 

[trash?]

Now reflex, there are definitely some good points you make in here, but there are some very bad ones too. If you would like to reword your stance I would be interested in having a good discussion, as long as we can ignore the trolls (like NZA and Canon)

I'm a troll for thinking the obsessions over someone's knowledge of DDing in a topic about spacies is completely useless at best, and sad at worst.

Yeah, that's about what I expected to hear. I'm out, seeing how this thread became a shameful mess of stating the same arguments over and over again.

Still waiting on that anti-spacie tech, though!

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Reflex, I don't see anything in your post that really suggests that changes should be made to fox. From reading it, it sounds like you want to buff zelda and ivysaur (you say they lack depth, can't do damage, have bad moves, etc). What is your stance?

 

[TheReflexWonder]

It's not that they lack general gameplay depth; they provide two interesting, varied, unique movesets that require a skillset that's rather different from the rest of the cast in terms of the neutral position. When I mentioned depth, I was talking in terms of unforeseeable potential with their neutral game. Their moves serve pretty straightforward uses, with combo trees that are only reliable and powerful on an opponent they can reasonably get in on. Their overall gameplay works well enough against pretty much every other character because they don't possess the same combination of mobility disparity, great deal of safety, and basically unavoidable damage Fox gets on them. As I said, Fox seems to have the most matchups with this scenario, so even though Toon Link vs. Jigglypuff might also be obnoxious, Fox appears to be the biggest offender, and Fox lasers are much more likely to hit than Toon Link projectiles, meaning that Jigglypuff has a reasonable chance of, say, keeping a lead or preventing an opponent's lead from getting too large without much need for them to put themselves at risk.

The trouble with buffing the Zeldas and Ivysaurs of PM is that it affects the balance behind every other character; as far as I've been able to figure, any change that would allow these characters to reasonably keep up with Fox would have a much greater effect on every other matchup of theirs, whereas, say, angling air lasers downward or significantly reducing the range would only reduce Fox's ability to actively try to run away with it.

Another interesting point is that we bring up Fox and Jigglypuff as characters in question (on the winning side and the losing side, respectively), two characters who were in Melee and are basically completely untouched (as much as is currently possible, anyway). Given the polarizing nature they appear to bring to the table, it might do a lot of good to at least think about what kind of unintrusive changes could be made to help them fit in the new environment better, rather than having the rest of the game fit around them. I would say that cutting out a lot of the stages is reasonably intrusive, and I personally can't think of ways to change the slower non-Jigglypuff (because she has a ton of basically-useless options) characters that wouldn't significantly change a lot of their other matchups. I would be happy to hear suggestions for such potential changes, but I am at a loss, myself.

 

[BTmoney]

It's not that they lack general gameplay depth; they provide two interesting, varied, unique movesets that require a skillset that's rather different from the rest of the cast in terms of the neutral position. When I mentioned depth, I was talking in terms of unforeseeable potential with their neutral game. Their moves serve pretty straightforward uses, with combo trees that are only reliable and powerful on an opponent they can reasonably get in on. Their overall gameplay works well enough against pretty much every other character because they don't possess the same combination of mobility disparity, great deal of safety, and basically unavoidable damage Fox gets on them. As I said, Fox seems to have the most matchups with this scenario, so even though Toon Link vs. Jigglypuff might also be obnoxious, Fox appears to be the biggest offender, and Fox lasers are much more likely to hit than Toon Link projectiles, meaning that Jigglypuff has a reasonable chance of, say, keeping a lead or preventing an opponent's lead from getting too large without much need for them to put themselves at risk.

The trouble with buffing the Zeldas and Ivysaurs of PM is that it affects the balance behind every other character; as far as I've been able to figure, any change that would allow these characters to reasonably keep up with Fox would have a much greater effect on every other matchup of theirs, whereas, say, angling air lasers downward or significantly reducing the range would only reduce Fox's ability to actively try to run away with it.

Another interesting point is that we bring up Fox and Jigglypuff as characters in question (on the winning side and the losing side, respectively), two characters who were in Melee and are basically completely untouched (as much as is currently possible, anyway). Given the polarizing nature they appear to bring to the table, it might do a lot of good to at least think about what kind of unintrusive changes could be made to help them fit in the new environment better, rather than having the rest of the game fit around them. I would say that cutting out a lot of the stages is reasonably intrusive, and I personally can't think of ways to change the slower characters that wouldn't significantly change a lot of their other matchups. I would be happy to hear suggestions for such potential changes, but I am at a loss, myself.

Food for thought, are there any agreeably bad highly mobile characters?

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Food for thought, are there any agreeably bad highly mobile characters?

Some might say Zero Suit Samus, though people tend to be under the impression that she has a polarized matchup list (good against many, bad against many), and her results have been pretty good so far, I believe.

Some might say Squirtle, but his useful mobility options are few and far between (his dashdance blows and his shorthop is high), so I'd definitely hesitate to call him "highly mobile" in practice. Also, he has a whole lot of other fundamental problems on top of that.

Otherwise, I don't think any other characters would fit that description.

 

[JOE!]

Replacing Jiggs with Mewtwo is a start...

But seriously, you pretty much summed up what I've been arguing a lot with those last two paragraphs, Reflex. As for changing them, I think giving them an aspect of Fox's laser here and there could help: they can't really approach well, so give options that force them slightly better.

@tachi:

Don't think so, unless you count Squirtle from consensus. High mobility is always an upside.

 

[BTmoney]

Otherwise, I don't think any other characters would fit that description.

@tachi:

Don't think so, unless you count Squirtle from consensus. High mobility is always an upside.

And that is more or less what I think it comes down to. Most of the bad or milding characters lack mobility.
I think it is fairly simple objectively, poor or average mobility with a poor or average move set makes for a poor or average character. You can however be mobile with a poor moveset and still be a huge threat.

Giving underwhelming characters gimmicks like G&W's upB buff to give him a really good OOS option (which seems spacie induced) didn't make the MU much better for him vs Fox and Falco.

Movesets and mobility need to be revamped imo. Right now I don't feel like going too far into detail because I have a headache but yeah.

 

[Sanity's_Theif]

Many of the small buffs were "makes sense" buffs. The most salient example is that captain falcon's forward b should have always grabbed the ledge so now it does. Peach's toad probably shouldn't have been as not-good as it was in the first place. Ganondorf's choke is awesome. Etc.

I'm hostile because I don't think anyone should have a right to just pick up and play a brand new game, throw rounds on purpose, and expect to win anyway.

I don't want to play a game where a character has every attack pretty much automatically lead into a grab. I don't care if the character is broken, that aspect of the character (your shield button doesn't exist) is objectively stupid.

Of course all the buffs should make sense, but doesn't it also make sense that the characters who were far worse than the high tiers would need larger/more significant/maybe seen as somewhat ridiculous buffs, to compete with the better characters?

I still don't understand the hostility because weren't Fox and Falco designed to match their melee selves completely? In which case shouldn't melee pros be able to play them right away? And then, what's wrong with that? I thought that was one of the goals of this project?

I haven't encountered the grabbing phenomenon you described, CCing is so powerful in this game it's almost as if some characters can attack right through another.

And another thing, if Fox and Falco aren't seen as broken in melee to the point where they're banned, then why are they such a more significant problem in a game where everyone else is a lot better and has a better chance of dealing with them?

Despite the known fact that Link has a bad matchup against spacies, I still managed to beat Matt's Falco(at least once) and I did good enough against other Falco players(who were just as good as Matt or maybe better) where I would get them down to 1 stock consistently

I'm not claiming to know as much about this as anyone else here, in fact my opinion may pretty much be damn meaningless, but my responses are aimed to better understand this whole situation for the most part and that's my reason for being here.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Honestly, I don't think zelda should have that much of an issue with fox. I only know the match-up from melee perspective, but from what I can tell all her useful tools against him have remained the same or gotten buffed. Shieldgrab is actually viable which forces fox to shine the shield, which then allows zelda to abuse her other amazing shield options (bair/fair, usmash, roll). She also has a chaingrab on him and a guaranteed throw->kick regardless of DI. Fox's uthrow uair doesn't combo at all (unless thats changed in P:M for some reason) though waveshine usmash does . Sure fox can run away laser, but he must move toward zelda at some point if he wants to take the stock (he can't actually run away forever). Oh yeah, and zelda has a muchmuchmuch better projectile in P:M. Here is an example of what cosmo did to beat fox with the limited tools zelda had in melee: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03o80QVZ0Tc

as an off topic note, i want to say that i hate zelda's sideb "buff"; the idea is cute/cool but i really don't like the "traps" and the fact that they are preventing zelda from being the better version of her melee self she deserves to be.

Im not sure how ivy would get laser camped by fox, her run speed is pretty decent (~75% fox's) as well as her jump speed and wavedash length. Also, from what I can tell, Ivy's nair out prioritizes fox's ever so slightly. She has chaingrabs and pretty good grab combos on fox. The real issue I see is with her aerials not protecting her very well and not really having much knockback/easily CC'd. I don't think that problem is unique for the fox match-up, it was a complaint I've had since the first time I played her. Ivy is pretty high on the list to buff/redesign in my opinion. If I were to be motivated to stick to the character and really try and figure out how to beat fox, my first step would be in perfecting my punishes and finding a non-throw move to start a tech chase/combo. I think ivy would be a great tech chaser if she had a move to get fox on the ground, her dsmash and fsmash both cover a lot of space and setup early edgeguards. Ivy's grab is a little slow so I'm not sure how viable it is to tech chase with, but if it can be done then she should be fine.

In general, playing a smart neutral game is a definite requirement. If ivy can't jump around with dair and bair in the match-up and must wavedash oos or stay grounded, I think thats fine. I don't see a problem with a character needing to play different match-ups with different styles.


Ugh i havent even really responded to your post, i feel bad, but I am pretty burnt on this discussion right now. Feel free to hit me back with your thoughts or whatever. Also, I would be super interested in balancing stages, is that even realistically possible?

 

[Shadic]

as an off topic note, i want to say that i hate zelda's sideb "buff"; the idea is cute/cool but i really don't like the "traps" and the fact that they are preventing zelda from being the better version of her melee self she deserves to be.

Could you please elaborate on this?

Ugh i havent even really responded to your post, i feel bad, but I am pretty burnt on this discussion right now. Feel free to hit me back with your thoughts or whatever. Also, I would be super interested in balancing stages, is that even realistically possible?

We can change boundaries, edit hitboxes, change shape, size, etc. There's a few stages that aren't really that salvageable without taking away what everybody likes (Saffron City, Hyrule Temple, etc) but yeah.

 

[Mr.Pickle]

I'm actually very interested in hearing your opinion on zelda's side b actually sveet, and what you mean by the the better version of her melee self.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Honestly, I don't think zelda should have that much of an issue with fox. I only know the match-up from melee perspective, but from what I can tell all her useful tools against him have remained the same or gotten buffed. Shieldgrab is actually viable which forces fox to shine the shield, which then allows zelda to abuse her other amazing shield options (bair/fair, usmash, roll). She also has a chaingrab on him and a guaranteed throw->kick regardless of DI. Fox's uthrow uair doesn't combo at all (unless thats changed in P:M for some reason) though waveshine usmash does . Sure fox can run away laser, but he must move toward zelda at some point if he wants to take the stock (he can't actually run away forever). Oh yeah, and zelda has a muchmuchmuch better projectile in P:M. Here is an example of what cosmo did to beat fox with the limited tools zelda had in melee: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03o80QVZ0Tc

as an off topic note, i want to say that i hate zelda's sideb "buff"; the idea is cute/cool but i really don't like the "traps" and the fact that they are preventing zelda from being the better version of her melee self she deserves to be.

Im not sure how ivy would get laser camped by fox, her run speed is pretty decent (~75% fox's) as well as her jump speed and wavedash length. Also, from what I can tell, Ivy's nair out prioritizes fox's ever so slightly. She has chaingrabs and pretty good grab combos on fox. The real issue I see is with her aerials not protecting her very well and not really having much knockback/easily CC'd. I don't think that problem is unique for the fox match-up, it was a complaint I've had since the first time I played her. Ivy is pretty high on the list to buff/redesign in my opinion. If I were to be motivated to stick to the character and really try and figure out how to beat fox, my first step would be in perfecting my punishes and finding a non-throw move to start a tech chase/combo. I think ivy would be a great tech chaser if she had a move to get fox on the ground, her dsmash and fsmash both cover a lot of space and setup early edgeguards. Ivy's grab is a little slow so I'm not sure how viable it is to tech chase with, but if it can be done then she should be fine.

In general, playing a smart neutral game is a definite requirement. If ivy can't jump around with dair and bair in the match-up and must wavedash oos or stay grounded, I think thats fine. I don't see a problem with a character needing to play different match-ups with different styles.

Ugh i havent even really responded to your post, i feel bad, but I am pretty burnt on this discussion right now. Feel free to hit me back with your thoughts or whatever. Also, I would be super interested in balancing stages, is that even realistically possible?

In the video you posted, it looks like Kels just made a lot of unreasonable mistakes. Why does he try to use U-Smash as a spacing poke, even when Zelda isn't even close to KO percents? It gets him punished hard multiple times. There were also dozens of N-Airs and B-Airs from Fox, and only one was punished by Zelda (at around 2:26, and that's because Kels tried to go into U-Tilt or something afterward instead of going back to neutral position like for all the other ones). When Cosmo's entire gameplan appeared to be "hope that Dash Attack hits safely and get big punishes on obviously-bad decisions," it's hard to judge the positive as very helpful when there appear to be multiple holes there.

In the case of PM buffs, her grab speed is still below average, and N-Air/B-Air still appear to be unpunishable for her on a cross-up, which doesn't look that difficult to manage. That makes the matchup look pretty bleak to me. I don't think Zelda Forward-B helps her in the matchup at all, despite the buff.

Ivysaur's grab is very slow (Frame 13) and REALLY low to the ground, which means that if someone is off the ground at all, an opponent is not going to get grabbed by it, and Fox's speed would allow him to capitalize easily. Fox B-Air looks to have comparable range to the front of Ivysaur's N-Air, and Ivysaur's N-Air isn't difficult to SDI out of (sad face). She has ways to mitigate crouch canceling, but they require excellent spacing on specific grounded moves, which isn't really happening against Fox. She doesn't threaten shields or CC-ing against him well enough to put up much of a fight against his options as a whole, which is only also the case for, like, Falco and Sheik (two other characters who are able to threaten well with a projectile and keep themselves rather light on commitment overall). She has to make all the decisions while swinging blindly and hoping they hit. F-Air is a good combo move when it's not being CC'd, but its startup isn't great and it get punished reasonably strongly after a CC.

As an aside, Ivysaur shouldn't really be using D-Air much in the neutral position; it's reasonably punishable and requires a very close hitbox to manage much. This is especially so against a character that moves much faster than her.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Zelda: Honestly she is alright, obviously strictly better than her melee counterpart. I think the buff to her sideb speed was necessary (it was practically useless in melee), but I don't like the traps. The two main ways I've seen them used are in edgeguarding and in neutral to zone. I don't think they are a necessary buff to her edgeguard, she already had enough tools with dsmash, dtilt and ledgehop kicks. In the neutral... I find them to be gimmicky at best. I've seen some people use them to start a combo in some combo vids, but I haven't had it work in person (not to say i've tried extensively or anything). But yeah, gimmicky is the term I would use for it. Plus it almost forces her to play strictly campy-defensive (as opposed to zoning-defensive) when she is using them. I heard one PMBR member (who I wont name) mention something along the lines that zelda couldn't receive certain buffs because she is already pretty good and they would break her (a point I can see).

What I would rather have instead of sideb traps:
Kick difference- this may be an optical illusion (partially due to the dress difference) but melee zelda's kicks appear to extend farther from her body. Im looking at a freeze frame of P:M fair on my TV and a melee fair on my PC and i definitely see the difference. P:M Zelda fair is more tall and compact. Similar story with P:M bair, especially that the kick is a bit lower than melee's. Essentially, these have less range than what I think they should and also leave zelda's head more exposed.

Nair difference- In melee it wasn't as easy to sdi (for whatever reason; lightning?) and because it didnt knock down it worked as an aerial reset that worked in zeldas favor (sometimes leading to a kick). Not a big deal, im not really sure what the intent for the P:M nair was.

Sideb- somewhere between melee and vbrawl sideb. I don't think she needs a projectile for onstage fighting since she has neutral b, but something to assist in edgeguards or unique long range battles would work. Actually, I would be interested in seeing the move changed from a projectile into something else entirely (maybe she raises fire from the ground in front of her, similar to the fire that covers some chests in ocarina of time)

Basically, I feel the P:M Zelda emphasizes the sideb camping too much (which was something I didn't like about vbrawl zelda) and would rather see her change back into the wisdom kicker from melee.


Stages: Dude thats awesome. I am going to pitch you some stage ideas sometime soon!

 

[B.W.]

I find Zelda in Melee SD Remix to be more fun than P:M Zelda. I agree, traps are super lame and dumb and don't even work all that great for various reasons.

But enough about Zelda.

Can we go back to telling Reflex he doesn't know how to DD/WD talking about the topic at hand?

I notice there are a lot of issues having to do with Fox, and none with Falco. Do people even have problems with Falco aside from "his d-air is dumb?"

 

[leelue]

I actually agree with sveet's position on the traps. It's really obtrusive, but it was a very cool idea at first.

Also, Idk I just kill falco for free by pressing B. It's hard to hate a character when you consistently beat him without a problem.
Yeah I don't like him and I think every character should have noticeable changes from melee, but... homing attack....

Of course all the buffs should make sense, but doesn't it also make sense that the characters who were far worse than the high tiers would need larger/more significant/maybe seen as somewhat ridiculous buffs, to compete with the better characters?
I don't think you understand me. I meant "makes sense" as in it should just "make sense" that a move works a certain way. Falcon's side B should have always grabbed the ledge. Now it does. Something logical at face value.

I still don't understand the hostility because weren't Fox and Falco designed to match their melee selves completely? In which case shouldn't melee pros be able to play them right away? And then, what's wrong with that? I thought that was one of the goals of this project?
I don't like the position of keeping fox and falco the same in the first place. It would go to follow that I don't like the fallout.

I haven't encountered the grabbing phenomenon you described, CCing is so powerful in this game it's almost as if some characters can attack right through another.
I am pretty sure I was clear in that I was talking about 2.1 Lucario.

And another thing, if Fox and Falco aren't seen as broken in melee to the point where they're banned, then why are they such a more significant problem in a game where everyone else is a lot better and has a better chance of dealing with them?
They aren't a bigger problem, but they are editable. That's the point.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

In the video you posted, it looks like Kels just made a lot of unreasonable mistakes. Why does he try to use U-Smash as a spacing poke, even when Zelda isn't even close to KO percents? It gets him punished hard multiple times. There were also dozens of N-Airs and B-Airs from Fox, and only one was punished by Zelda (at around 2:26, and that's because Kels tried to go into U-Tilt or something afterward instead of going back to neutral position like for all the other ones). When Cosmo's entire gameplan appeared to be "hope that Dash Attack hits safely and get big punishes on obviously-bad decisions," it's hard to judge the positive as very helpful when there appear to be multiple holes there.

Yeah a lot of it was fishing from cosmo. It looks really nooby at first, but its actually relatively safe. Especially fsmash, that has deceptively low cooldown. I just picked the first video that came up on youtube so you could see some general gameplay, i wasn't trying to say this is how the match-up is every time or anything.

In the case of PM buffs, her grab speed is still below average, and N-Air/B-Air still appear to be unpunishable for her on a cross-up, which doesn't look that difficult to manage. That makes the matchup look pretty bleak to me. I don't think Zelda Forward-B helps her in the matchup at all, despite the buff.

Yeah I dont think sideb is useful here either. What is her grab frame? Even if its slower, its still fast enough that a) fox can't waveshine on her shield indefinitely (he could in melee, she couldn't grab it) and b) fox has to respect her grab enough to space it or shine it, which gives her more leverage on the shield game.

The crossup thing doesnt bother me. Most crossups hit high as bait ("hey i hit your shield high, try to grab me! PSYCH im behind you") and rely on the orientation for safety more than actual frame advantage. Even if they did a late aerial, zelda could simply roll and take the empty space while fox did whatever. Just ends up a position exchange.

Ivysaur's grab is very slow (Frame 13) and REALLY low to the ground, which means that if someone is off the ground at all, an opponent is not going to get grabbed by it, and Fox's speed would allow him to capitalize easily. Fox B-Air looks to have comparable range to the front of Ivysaur's N-Air, and Ivysaur's N-Air isn't difficult to SDI out of (sad face). She has ways to mitigate crouch canceling, but they require excellent spacing on specific grounded moves, which isn't really happening against Fox. She doesn't threaten shields or CC-ing against him well enough to put up much of a fight against his options as a whole, which is only also the case for, like, Falco and Sheik (two other characters who are able to threaten well with a projectile and keep themselves rather light on commitment overall). She has to make all the decisions while swinging blindly and hoping they hit. F-Air is a good combo move when it's not being CC'd, but its startup isn't great and it get punished reasonably strongly after a CC.

As an aside, Ivysaur shouldn't really be using D-Air much in the neutral position; it's reasonably punishable and requires a very close hitbox to manage much. This is especially so against a character that moves much faster than her.

Ouch ivy has some strong weaknesses... i knew the grab was slow but the animation looks like its much higher!

I wouldn't doubt fox's bair out prioritizes the nair; fox's bair beats everything in my mind haha. I seriously think something will have to be changed if/when people start actually approaching with spaced RAR bairs and stuff. Thats too OP.

The CC problem happens with a lot of characters. I think pretty much any character that has good burst movement. Marth can CC fsmash a lot of ivy's stuff. Peach can CC -> dash attack. Ganon might even be able to CC downb (guessing). I went through ivy's moves and I couldn't find any ground or air move that knocked down at 0%, besides usmash and grab. Fsmash and dsmash didn't start knocking down until around 30%. I think that is a serious design flaw; if her grab is too slow to be a viable counter to CC, she needs some move that can beat CC. Downb doesn't count lol

My strat with the dairs isn't to hit with them, but instead use them as a floating tool. I like to bait with them a bit, for example conditioning the bair and then mixing in dair, bair or fh bair, dair, bair. Like I said, I'm pretty awful with ivy lol. I have more experience playing vs her than as her.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Yeah a lot of it was fishing from cosmo. It looks really nooby at first, but its actually relatively safe. Especially fsmash, that has deceptively low cooldown. I just picked the first video that came up on youtube so you could see some general gameplay, i wasn't trying to say this is how the match-up is every time or anything.

Yeah I dont think sideb is useful here either. What is her grab frame? Even if its slower, its still fast enough that a) fox can't waveshine on her shield indefinitely (he could in melee, she couldn't grab it) and b) fox has to respect her grab enough to space it or shine it, which gives her more leverage on the shield game.

The crossup thing doesnt bother me. Most crossups hit high as bait ("hey i hit your shield high, try to grab me! PSYCH im behind you") and rely on the orientation for safety more than actual frame advantage. Even if they did a late aerial, zelda could simply roll and take the empty space while fox did whatever. Just ends up a position exchange.

Ouch ivy has some strong weaknesses... i knew the grab was slow but the animation looks like its much higher!

I wouldn't doubt fox's bair out prioritizes the nair; fox's bair beats everything in my mind haha. I seriously think something will have to be changed if/when people start actually approaching with spaced RAR bairs and stuff. Thats too OP.

The CC problem happens with a lot of characters. I think pretty much any character that has good burst movement. Marth can CC fsmash a lot of ivy's stuff. Peach can CC -> dash attack. Ganon might even be able to CC downb (guessing). I went through ivy's moves and I couldn't find any ground or air move that knocked down at 0%, besides usmash and grab. Fsmash and dsmash didn't start knocking down until around 30%. I think that is a serious design flaw; if her grab is too slow to be a viable counter to CC, she needs some move that can beat CC. Downb doesn't count lol

My strat with the dairs isn't to hit with them, but instead use them as a floating tool. I like to bait with them a bit, for example conditioning the bair and then mixing in dair, bair or fh bair, dair, bair. Like I said, I'm pretty awful with ivy lol. I have more experience playing vs her than as her.

As far as the gameplay of the video, the onus is still on Zelda to approach, because lasers are slowly racking up damage and Fox has no real reason to put himself at risk outside of to disrupt Zelda's options sometimes. The video suggests that the only reasonably reliable options Zelda has for doing that are Dash Attacks and Lightning Kicks to the wind, hoping Fox will be moving forward at that time, which is less about actual spacing and more about making hard reads to capitalize on, which is unreasonable to expect the neutral position to play out as, I feel. While Fox does have to go in to land a KO, well-spaced B-Air and N-Air still do an excellent job of being rather safe, and in a KO position, you only need to land one, so the risk of it is relatively negligible there.

Zelda grab was upgraded from Frame 12 to Frame 9, which is pretty substantial, but I think you might be underestimating the effect of other mix-up options, like Fox's Jab (Jab1 works, while the fastest speed of Jab2 cannot be shieldgrabbed, either) and spotdodge (which would give him frame advantage against a shieldgrab attempt). Can Fox not Shine and then wavedash away safely? I think the most important thing about the matchup is that Fox should basically force Zelda into throwing out attacks that can be punished. I know her Smashes have low cooldown, but her Smashes won't be what bails her out against a campy Fox, from what I can tell. Having to default to "roll away" after shielding a well-spaced aerial encourages Neutral-B camping from Fox, too. Ivysaur can safely shuffle F-Air/B-Air, like, 99% of the time, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good ice breaker against a significantly faster character (though it totally works against everyone else just fine/as intended). Ivysaur D-Tilt can break CC at around the percents that D-Smash does, but only when you hit the tip with both hits. That said, it suffers a similar issue as grab--It's easily runjump'd over and you can't at all reliably space it when the opponent is that much faster than you. Also, Ivysaur has basically the same options as Zelda in shield pressure, but with a longer, slower grab. N-Air drags people, she has a good roll, etc. Ivysaur also has an extremely long (in distance, not in animation) tech roll, like Zelda. Also, while the point has already been made, Fox B-Air is soooooo good.

I think lasers are still the primary issue in the matchup, but it wouldn't even really matter if lasers were angled downward in the air, or if they could be clanked. They're far and away the hardest projectile to outright avoid in the game (assuming we're not just counting lasers' hit/miss ratio, which would be silly given their rate of fire), and basically every aspect of them discourages offensive play from Fox (autocancels on landing, unlimited range, unclankable, best possible angle), which would probably seem more okay if he weren't already so extremely adept at running around/away. Look at Sonic--A big part of why people think he needs to be changed is because he absolutely forces a good chunk of the cast to come to him without a need for him to make any commitment himself. While I definitely acknowledge camping and running away as a legitimate (if boring) strategy, the extreme aspects of both Sonic and Fox both lend themselves to being able to use this very effectively, especially as a long-standing bait-and-punish (being able to do this from any range is pretty obnoxious, after all).

While I feel a little bad in putting it in such terms, I just think we should be looking into having an overall moveset that encourages people to "actually play the game," and while some traits of the current Fox lasers aid players in doing that, other uses do the opposite, and some traits do both. I can't think of any other projectile that is so well-tuned to it (maybe Falco lasers, but he's slower in general movement, and the rate of fire isn't nearly as high, which means a lot), and I think it would probably be the least intrusive change to Fox we could possibly do while only affecting his ability to run away so that he can't force everyone to fight him from any range. I understand that lasers are integral to his ability of establishing himself as a threat in the neutral position, but surely he could do that even if (only) certain aspects of it were toned down.

 

[SwordsRbroken]

guys fox and falco aren't even that good

if you lose to a fox or falco at high level you shouldn't be playing this game