Problem with for glory noobs

[Wintermelon43]

I have a problem with for glory noobs. Litertatly, they suck so bad that it screw up my playing, and if I fight one, I lose because they suck THAT bad, that I don't know what to do and I lose. And that makes it impossible for me to play correctly, since once I lose from somebody that bad (Sometimes even if I lose in general), I just can't play more than a noob myself, since litertatly how I did last time affects how I play the next match and so on. Which makes it impossible for me to get any better, which I wanna do. Any Help?

 

[1FC0]

Acknowledge that if someone consistently beats you without cheating then he is better than you. In competitive gaming there is only winning and losing. If you acknowledge that you are worse in the game if you consistently lose then that might help you to get the in the right mindset for learning. Acknowledge that your opponent is the superior player and learn from his playstyle.

 

[MisterDom]

I have a problem with for glory noobs. Litertatly, they suck so bad that it screw up my playing, and if I fight one, I lose because they suck THAT bad, that I don't know what to do and I lose. And that makes it impossible for me to play correctly, since once I lose from somebody that bad (Sometimes even if I lose in general), I just can't play more than a noob myself, since litertatly how I did last time affects how I play the next match and so on. Which makes it impossible for me to get any better, which I wanna do. Any Help?

If you don't like playing with them, than don't play with them, but you should have the mindset and skills to outsmart them, and you'll need those skills and that mindset for tournament! You could be sleeping on them, but it's important to note that no player can be slept on. If you keep losing to them, than you NEED to keep playing them to learn how to beat them.

Though noobs do lack adaptability, stage knowledge, tech knowledge, and a lot of good things in general, they usually have a strategy that works against some characters, so they are a little smart in that sense, and so, they're NOT noobs. They're players with not as much skill, but they will excel in some points. They're good players. They could still beat you, as they do occasionally beat me. Just keep playing them, note what they do great and what they do wrong, and read these notes overtime, since it might be hard to make them up in your head while you play. Note theories or strategies in how to beat them, and eventually you'll beat them!

 

[rjpageuk]

How deluded do you have to be to come up with that list of excuses before coming to the realisation that you must be losing to a player thats playing better than you?

 

[Wintermelon43]

How deluded do you have to be to come up with that list of excuses before coming to the realisation that you must be losing to a player thats playing better than you?

Acknowledge that if someone consistently beats you without cheating then he is better than you. In competitive gaming there is only winning and losing. If you acknowledge that you are worse in the game if you consistently lose then that might help you to get the in the right mindset for learning. Acknowledge that your opponent is the superior player and learn from his playstyle.

Because I've beat better players tons of times.

 

[abx]

Sometimes I wonder if the circle of players who complain about spammers and noobs and the circle of players causing these complains consist of the same people.

 

[Wintermelon43]

Sometimes I wonder if the circle of players who complain about spammers and noobs and the circle of players causing these complains consist of the same people.

I don't spam. I use a variety of moves.

 

[Foxus]

Question: Are For Glory players as bad for the most part as people say they are?

 

[TurboLink]

I have a problem with for glory noobs. Litertatly, they suck so bad that it screw up my playing, and if I fight one, I lose because they suck THAT bad, that I don't know what to do and I lose. And that makes it impossible for me to play correctly, since once I lose from somebody that bad (Sometimes even if I lose in general), I just can't play more than a noob myself, since litertatly how I did last time affects how I play the next match and so on. Which makes it impossible for me to get any better, which I wanna do. Any Help?

https://www.smashladder.com/

Question: Are For Glory players as bad for the most part as people say they are?

Yes, I fought a Falco player yesterday on Smash 3DS who dodge rolled across the stage and did nothing but use neutral special for the most part and occasionally would use an aerial, ground attack, or smash attack. He would then taunt after I was KO'd every time.

 

[abx]

How did you get KO'd`I mean: Spammy Projectile user, ok. But Cpt. Falcon spamming Falcon Punches? Really? And you were playing Link I assume?

 

[ChaikaBestGirl]

I mean, you should never expect someone to play how you want them to, you have to adapt to your opponents play styles, you can't just stick to one and just decide to only use that forever

 

[Foxus]

I mean, you should never expect someone to play how you want them to, you have to adapt to your opponents play styles, you can't just stick to one and just decide to only use that forever

Continuously adapting to your opponents I find is one of the hardest barriers to break through in Smash. Until you gain experience with each character, I believe its really a game of luck whether you adapt correctly or not.

 

[ChaikaBestGirl]

Continuously adapting to your opponents I find is one of the hardest barriers to break through in Smash. Until you gain experience with each character, I believe its really a game of luck whether you adapt correctly or not.

Generally I find that most FG players can be broken into 5 groups:

1. The Aggros
   The people that go in with a strategy, and their strategy is to mess you up,get in your face and never let you even touch the ground. If you are standing on the stage they made a mistake. Usually Sheik, ZSS and Falcon players
   you can usually beat these people by just using your shield and grabbing, if you are going to try and gimp them be careful because they could spike you in the process
2. The Patient Ones
   people whose plan is to try and slowly get damage onto you and try to avoid your attacks, and play pretty passive. They can pull off some crazy combos but will usually only do it if it is safe. Usually Pit, Fox and Mario players
   the best way to beat these people is whenever they use a projectile you have to try and immediately punish it, although they won't spam them they will occasionally use it to rack up some damage
3. The Heavy Hitters/Hard Readers
   people that try and just charge their smash attacks and pray you roll into it and kill you, they don't try any insane combos and rely mostly on tilts and smash attacks. Usually Ike, Ganondorf and Dedede players
   go in with the mix ups, if they see a pattern in how you play they are going to punish it
4. The actually good players
   people that play for fun usually, you can recognize them if they go up to you, like right in your face without doing anything to you and start crouching and do a taunt. These are the people that I find the most fun to play with because after the taunts we get into an actually fun fight where either person can be the victor. Don't go for insane combos all the time but go for what they can get and can sometimes destroy you. They can play anyone.
   there isn't a specific way to beat these people other than just doing what you know
5. Campers
   the worst kinds of people. Will play a projectile heavy character and make no attempt at getting close to you and just spam. They are no fun to play against at all. They seem to think rolling means invincibility and will do it from one side of the stage to the other. Anyone that plays Toon Link, Samus or Mega Man belongs in this category.
   to beat them just punish there rolls and whenever they try to use a projectile (which is almost all the time) punish that too. Generally they are easy to fight but it just gets really tiring

 

[Foxus]

Generally I find that most FG players can be broken into 5 groups:

1. The Aggros

I might try mustering up some strength tonight or tomorrow venturing in FG if the skills are this bad.

What are the Aggros?

 

[ChaikaBestGirl]

I might try mustering up some strength tonight or tomorrow venturing in FG if the skills are this bad.

What are the Aggros?

i accidentally posted it without finishing it, should also mention these are the just the kinds of players I usually see, everyone else has their own types of people they would classify, it's really all about learning what to do against them

 

[Foxus]

The times I've dared to venture in FG its been Captain Falcons forward smashing and Ganondorfs back kicking.

 

[1FC0]

Because I've beat better players tons of times.

That would probably be the exception.

A nice thing about competitive gaming is that we need no arguing about who is the best. We can just play. The winner is the best, and the loser is not.

For example, if you use insanely difficult ATs but you lose to a Pikachu doing almost nothing but Thunder then the Pikachu is better at this game. You may or may not be then better at doing ATs, but you are worse at the game.

So if something like that were to happen then the winners mentality is to think "How can I beat this Thunder spam in order to become better than this guy?" and the scrub mentality is to think "Yeah I lost but he was cheap so I am still the best".

In the former case you will practice actually winning. You let the game decide what works and what not. As a result you will get better at winning. This requires facing the truth that the winner is the better player no matter how cheap he was.

In the latter case you are actually playing a different game where the purpose is not being "cheap". You may become very good at not being what you consider to be cheap when playing with this mentality, but you will be less good at the game since the game does not care about what you consider cheap and often neither will your opponent.

So my advice is to let the game decide who is the better player and trying to learn from people who beat you instead of telling yourself that you are better even though they beat you. That is the way to improvement.

 

[ChaikaBestGirl]

That would probably be the exception.

A nice thing about competitive gaming is that we need no arguing about who is the best. We can just play. The winner is the best, and the loser is not.

For example, if you use insanely difficult ATs but you lose to a Pikachu doing almost nothing but Thunder then the Pikachu is better at this game. You may or may not be then better at doing ATs, but you are worse at the game.

So if something like that were to happen then the winners mentality is to think "How can I beat this Thunder spam in order to become better than this guy?" and the scrub mentality is to think "Yeah I lost but he was cheap so I am still the best".

In the former case you will practice actually winning. You let the game decide what works and what not. As a result you will get better at winning. This requires facing the truth that the winner is the better player no matter how cheap he was.

In the latter case you are actually playing a different game where the purpose is not being "cheap". You may become very good at not being what you consider to be cheap when playing with this mentality, but you will be less good at the game since the game does not care about what you consider cheap and often neither will your opponent.

So my advice is to let the game decide who is the better player and trying to learn from people who beat you instead of telling yourself that you are better even though they beat you. That is the way to improvement.

but no one's ego will admit that they are worse than a spammer

 

[outfoxd]

but no one's ego will admit that they are worse than a spammer

If i get beat by someone spamming, then they were better than me at that moment. And I'm a DH player.

Additionally, there should be some distinction between a spammer and a zoner. Some characters were built to fight with a bevy of ranged weapons, and it seems like a whole group of players can be inadvertently painted with a very negative brush.

 

[Wintermelon43]

That would probably be the exception.

A nice thing about competitive gaming is that we need no arguing about who is the best. We can just play. The winner is the best, and the loser is not.

For example, if you use insanely difficult ATs but you lose to a Pikachu doing almost nothing but Thunder then the Pikachu is better at this game. You may or may not be then better at doing ATs, but you are worse at the game.

So if something like that were to happen then the winners mentality is to think "How can I beat this Thunder spam in order to become better than this guy?" and the scrub mentality is to think "Yeah I lost but he was cheap so I am still the best".

In the former case you will practice actually winning. You let the game decide what works and what not. As a result you will get better at winning. This requires facing the truth that the winner is the better player no matter how cheap he was.

In the latter case you are actually playing a different game where the purpose is not being "cheap". You may become very good at not being what you consider to be cheap when playing with this mentality, but you will be less good at the game since the game does not care about what you consider cheap and often neither will your opponent.

So my advice is to let the game decide who is the better player and trying to learn from people who beat you instead of telling yourself that you are better even though they beat you. That is the way to improvement.

Yeah, but this is simply impossible. Because, let's pretend that person 1 is a normal player, person 2 is a spammer, and player 3 is also a normal player. Person 1 faces player 3, and wins, then faces player 2 and loses. This means that player 2 is the best player, followed by player 1, and then player 3. But, what if player 2 faces player 3, and loses? Than what is it? That old version can't work, since player 3 is better than player 2, but player 3 is worse than player 1, who is worse than player 2. It's impossible to sort them by who beats each other, since better players lose to worse, and vice versa. And it doesn't help that matchups, character statistics, luck (on for fun, not on for glory), and, if they disconnect, and the computer beats you, that doesn't automatictially make the PLAYER better than you (But I havn't lost to a computer yet).

 

[Reila]

If they are noobs, then you can outplay them and win the matches. Or maybe you are the one who is a noob?

Question: Are For Glory players as bad for the most part as people say they are?

Not at all. There are plenty of great players on For Glory. It is just that, obviously, less skilled players are more common than the great ones.

This is true for pretty much any online fighting game.

 

[abx]

That would probably be the exception.

A nice thing about competitive gaming is that we need no arguing about who is the best. We can just play. The winner is the best, and the loser is not.

For example, if you use insanely difficult ATs but you lose to a Pikachu doing almost nothing but Thunder then the Pikachu is better at this game. You may or may not be then better at doing ATs, but you are worse at the game.

How does this logic apply to the following case:
A beats B consistently but looses to C on a regular basis.
B beats C consistently.

 

[FrankTheStud]

Refer to the sig

Edit: On a more serious note, I know your struggle. A lot of the time on For Glory you get heavily defensive and campy players who want to really slow things down. The key is to stay patient and pay close attention to rolls, as many FG players love to abuse rolls. Also keep in mind that FG should not discourage you too much, as competetive play has more options than FG, especially in stage selection, which is very important.
Johns aside, Final Destination isn't balanced for all characters. Sure, better players will often win, and the only way to assue you beat them is to git gud, but you also have to remember that many character's flaws become less apparent on stages with platforms, while other's problems increase--Mario's approach options increase with platforms, while Little Mac's do not. So by that logic, Final Destination as a stage favors Mac over Mario because it denies Mario approach options (and combo potential), and lessens Little Mac's chances of dealing with his aerial issues in the metagame.

tl;dr - Stage selection has more to do with this game than most people think, and For Flory suffers competetively because of that. Gittin Gud, however, is the answer to all problems.

 

[1FC0]

but no one's ego will admit that they are worse than a spammer

How does this logic apply to the following case:
A beats B consistently but looses to C on a regular basis.
B beats C consistently.

They are equally good since they can all beat 1 guy and lose to 1 guy.
I simplified it a bit but yeah the best player is the player who can beat the most other players and that is dependant on the metagame. That is why the best way to measure skill IMO is by laddering. Even if you lose due to a bad matchup if you have a higher ladder score then you are probably still better in the general metagame. Laddering also helps reducing the influence of luck, since one lost battle by luck now and then is not going to significantly lower your score since it will be cancelled out by the battles won by luck and vice versa.

But such RPS like situations are pretty rare, I think that if you take 3 players at random then you will have a big chance that one can beat the other two and one of them loses to the other two. So in general if you lose it is safe to assume that you are the worse player and even if you had a very difficult match up then you should still acknowledge what you did wrong and what the opponent did right in order to improve.

 

[Wintermelon43]

They are equally good since they can all beat 1 guy and lose to 1 guy.
I simplified it a bit but yeah the best player is the player who can beat the most other players and that is dependant on the metagame. That is why the best way to measure skill IMO is by laddering. Even if you lose due to a bad matchup if you have a higher ladder score then you are probably still better in the general metagame. Laddering also helps reducing the influence of luck, since one lost battle by luck now and then is not going to significantly lower your score since it will be cancelled out by the battles won by luck and vice versa.

But such RPS like situations are pretty rare, I think that if you take 3 players at random then you will have a big chance that one can beat the other two and one of them loses to the other two. So in general if you lose it is safe to assume that you are the worse player and even if you had a very difficult match up then you should still acknowledge what you did wrong and what the opponent did right in order to improve.

What did you mean by laddering? is that a game term or are you referring to anther's ladder?

 

[2smooth]

My biggest issue with playing online is I get put against people that play Mewtwo and Lucas and I end up dodging projectiles the whole time. I understand that this could be considered a legitimate technique, but God damn does it ruin it for me. I put you people who play like that in the same category as people who camp on COD or any other FPS.

 

[1FC0]

What did you mean by laddering? is that a game term or are you referring to anther's ladder?

I meant using a ladder. I am not referring to Anther's ladder specifically.

 

[Wintermelon43]

I meant using a ladder. I am not referring to Anther's ladder specifically.

I don't know what you mean by ladder then

 

[1FC0]

I don't know what you mean by ladder then

A ladder is a system where people can play against each other and that ranks people according to their skill. Often you will get points by winning and lose points by losing, though how many will depend on how high your and your opponents rating is. Many games have ladders. For example if you play Pokemon then you can ladder on Pokemon Showdown or Pokemon Online. And allisbrawl.com used to have a SSBB ladder.

Another's Ladder is an example of a ladder.

 

[Foxus]

My experience playing For Flory:

Played two matches,
Didn't win either time
Became a nervous wreck for nothing
Yep, now you see why I don't pay For Glory.


They are not noobs.

 

[KirbCider]

Ya know, I've noticed that you tend to post up a lot of threads like this, mainly complaining about For Glory and losing. I can understand we all get frustrated from time to time and feel the need to vent about our frustrations; however most of the time you aren't only venting but also making excuses as to why you lose or can't get better. For instance...

I have a problem with for glory noobs. Litertatly, they suck so bad that it screw up my playing, and if I fight one, I lose because they suck THAT bad, that I don't know what to do and I lose.

How can someone be so terrible at a game that they actually make you lose in the process? Unless it's 2V2 I don't see how that will be possible. I've met my fair share of players who were either extremely new to the game or just not that great at it on For glory yet had no trouble beating them no matter what they did. Counter picks, spamming, switching characters, being dodgy...

Point is, if you are an experienced player then someone who is inexperienced shouldn't be a problem for you.

And that makes it impossible for me to play correctly, since once I lose from somebody that bad (Sometimes even if I lose in general), I just can't play more than a noob myself, since litertatly how I did last time affects how I play the next match and so on.

You are responsible for how you play. Do not pin the blame onto someone else just because they may not be the best. Everyone is responsible for their own mistakes as well as their own bad habits. If you don't learn from them then it is your own fault.

You have to be willing to adapt to others no matter their skill level or what they do. For instance I'm heavily air focused because of the characters I tend to play as. Because of this I rely on air attacks a lot and don't stay on the ground for too long; however there's tons of people who know how to punish that with ease. It is my job to adapt and find a way to make them goof up.

If they've grown wise to my air game and know how to punish it then it's my own fault for even continuing to try it.

Everybody has their strengths as well as weaknesses. It's finding them and exploiting them that will lead you to victory. If you refuse to adapt and try new things then do not expect to win. If it works it works, but if it doesn't then try something else. I wasn't trying to sound mean with this post so I apologize if I ended up sounding that way, but sometimes things need to be said.

Don't make excuses for your loss. Accept it and learn from it. Practice and learn new things. Nobody becomes a Pro over night.

 

[Foxus]

Ya know, I've noticed that you tend to post up a lot of threads like this, mainly complaining about For Glory and losing. I can understand we all get frustrated from time to time and feel the need to vent about our frustrations; however most of the time you aren't only venting but also making excuses as to why you lose or can't get better. For instance...


How can someone be so terrible at a game that they actually make you lose in the process? Unless it's 2V2 I don't see how that will be possible. I've met my fair share of players who were either extremely new to the game or just not that great at it on For glory yet had no trouble beating them no matter what they did. Counter picks, spamming, switching characters, being dodgy...

Point is, if you are an experienced player then someone who is inexperienced shouldn't be a problem for you.


You are responsible for how you play. Do not pin the blame onto someone else just because they may not be the best. Everyone is responsible for their own mistakes as well as their own bad habits. If you don't learn from them then it is your own fault.

You have to be willing to adapt to others no matter their skill level or what they do. For instance I'm heavily air focused because of the characters I tend to play as. Because of this I rely on air attacks a lot and don't stay on the ground for too long; however there's tons of people who know how to punish that with ease. It is my job to adapt and find a way to make them goof up.

If they've grown wise to my air game and know how to punish it then it's my own fault for even continuing to try it.

Everybody has their strengths as well as weaknesses. It's finding them and exploiting them that will lead you to victory. If you refuse to adapt and try new things then do not expect to win. If it works it works, but if it doesn't then try something else. I wasn't trying to sound mean with this post so I apologize if I ended up sounding that way, but sometimes things need to be said.

Don't make excuses for your loss. Accept it and learn from it. Practice and learn new things. Nobody becomes a Pro over night.

I was working on this before the server went down.

To give you a general idea of my playing, over the 6-7 years I played Brawl, I only got a handful at best of characters passed on Intense, and even less on All Star, but until I picked up Smash 4 I hadn't heard of the segments "Competitive" and "Casual". I did pass Subspace on Intense though, so that's something I guess I oughta be grateful for.

The fact is I have a hard time reading moves, and adapting to them. I'm known for being upfront and not necessarily sugarcoating things, so anything I'm saying in this post is absolute truth and not excuses. Getting that out of the way, A good chunk of the time, I will resort to panic mode and become confrontational, for the most part playing it too offensive and not defensive enough. I start hitting buttons like crazy, and I don't even know what I'm hitting.

Adapting, as I'm sure most will agree, is one of the hardest things in Smash to get a grip on. Once you got that skill, it makes a world of difference. Until you gain the experience to attain that skill is a different story. Everyone has their bad days and their good days, today;s just been a bad day. I'm glad you bring this to my attention rather than just letting it boil and morph into something horrible. Honestly, finding and exploiting the weaknesses I'll need other people to help me out with, because I have a hard time identifying them myself.

I'm not having though, as much of a negative experience with Fox as I did with Yoshi, so i guess Ishould be grateful for that as well.

 

[FrankTheStud]

I was working on this before the server went down.

To give you a general idea of my playing, over the 6-7 years I played Brawl, I only got a handful at best of characters passed on Intense, and even less on All Star, but until I picked up Smash 4 I hadn't heard of the segments "Competitive" and "Casual". I did pass Subspace on Intense though, so that's something I guess I oughta be grateful for.

The fact is I have a hard time reading moves, and adapting to them. I'm known for being upfront and not necessarily sugarcoating things, so anything I'm saying in this post is absolute truth and not excuses. Getting that out of the way, A good chunk of the time, I will resort to panic mode and become confrontational, for the most part playing it too offensive and not defensive enough. I start hitting buttons like crazy, and I don't even know what I'm hitting.

Adapting, as I'm sure most will agree, is one of the hardest things in Smash to get a grip on. Once you got that skill, it makes a world of difference. Until you gain the experience to attain that skill is a different story. Everyone has their bad days and their good days, today;s just been a bad day. I'm glad you bring this to my attention rather than just letting it boil and morph into something horrible. Honestly, finding and exploiting the weaknesses I'll need other people to help me out with, because I have a hard time identifying them myself.

I'm not having though, as much of a negative experience with Fox as I did with Yoshi, so i guess Ishould be grateful for that as well.

I would recommend playing through Classic and All Star with every character to learn some fundamentals of each character, and in turn learn their weaknesses and strengths. I got every challenge completed on 3DS and Wii U, every trophy, and every custom move so I can get a good grasp on fundamentals. If you know how characters play, you can adapt better to expose their weaknesses, and even read some predictable strategies.

 

[KirbCider]

I was working on this before the server went down.

To give you a general idea of my playing, over the 6-7 years I played Brawl, I only got a handful at best of characters passed on Intense, and even less on All Star, but until I picked up Smash 4 I hadn't heard of the segments "Competitive" and "Casual". I did pass Subspace on Intense though, so that's something I guess I oughta be grateful for.

The fact is I have a hard time reading moves, and adapting to them. I'm known for being upfront and not necessarily sugarcoating things, so anything I'm saying in this post is absolute truth and not excuses. Getting that out of the way, A good chunk of the time, I will resort to panic mode and become confrontational, for the most part playing it too offensive and not defensive enough. I start hitting buttons like crazy, and I don't even know what I'm hitting.

Adapting, as I'm sure most will agree, is one of the hardest things in Smash to get a grip on. Once you got that skill, it makes a world of difference. Until you gain the experience to attain that skill is a different story. Everyone has their bad days and their good days, today;s just been a bad day. I'm glad you bring this to my attention rather than just letting it boil and morph into something horrible. Honestly, finding and exploiting the weaknesses I'll need other people to help me out with, because I have a hard time identifying them myself.

I'm not having though, as much of a negative experience with Fox as I did with Yoshi, so i guess Ishould be grateful for that as well.

Well, my post was actually directed at the creator (or OP) of this thread actually rather than anyone else here. o.o;;;

 

[Arrei]

There is no one singular part of being "better" at the game. Being good involves a multitude of skills - good fundamentals, good mindgames, good reads, good adaptation, etc. If you lose to "scrub" tactics, then you're not as strong in the specific skills that allow you to beat scrub tactics. Even if your opponent is doing something stupid, you need the ability to recognize they're doing something stupid and know the best ways to defeat them. Who knows, someone who normally uses "pro" tactics may even pull out scrub tactics on purpose to throw you off your game then go right back to comboing you to kingdom come after you adjust to them. For example, despite knowing that rolling a lot can get me punished, sometimes I might roll past an opponent, then roll right past them again and get a punish because they just didn't expect me to do that. Or maybe they might do something dumb on purpose to make you think they'll react one way, then do something different at the crucial moment that allows them to close the stock.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

"Yo what happened that last match?!"
"IDK man, he was so bad, I couldn't do anything to beat him!"
"You mean he was so good, right?"
"Nah, he was horrible, so bad it was impossible to beat him."
"..."

Dude, this has to be the dumbest john I have ever heard in all of Smash Bros. I don't mean to disrespect you, but how exactly do you lose to someone bad? Seriously, the only answer I can think of is the one that states that you're the worse player. In no universe does the worse player consistently win. I hate to break it to you, but your problem isn't the noobs on FG...because you ARE the noob on FG.

 

[Wintermelon43]

"Yo what happened that last match?!"
"IDK man, he was so bad, I couldn't do anything to beat him!"
"You mean he was so good, right?"
"Nah, he was horrible, so bad it was impossible to beat him."
"..."

Dude, this has to be the dumbest john I have ever heard in all of Smash Bros. I don't mean to disrespect you, but how exactly do you lose to someone bad? Seriously, the only answer I can think of is the one that states that you're the worse player. In no universe does the worse player consistently win. I hate to break it to you, but your problem isn't the noobs on FG...because you ARE the noob on FG.

The thing is, I've beat better players before. It's a problem of that they're SO bad that I'm not sure WHAT to do. Pretty much, I try to play too good, which generally means I take things too far, and that means I'm not adapting to the other person and thus I lose

 

[Foxus]

There is no one singular part of being "better" at the game. Being good involves a multitude of skills - good fundamentals, good mindgames, good reads, good adaptation, etc. If you lose to "scrub" tactics, then you're not as strong in the specific skills that allow you to beat scrub tactics. Even if your opponent is doing something stupid, you need the ability to recognize they're doing something stupid and know the best ways to defeat them. Who knows, someone who normally uses "pro" tactics may even pull out scrub tactics on purpose to throw you off your game then go right back to comboing you to kingdom come after you adjust to them. For example, despite knowing that rolling a lot can get me punished, sometimes I might roll past an opponent, then roll right past them again and get a punish because they just didn't expect me to do that. Or maybe they might do something dumb on purpose to make you think they'll react one way, then do something different at the crucial moment that allows them to close the stock.

True, Smash is a very abstract game to grasp, and that I cannot stress enough.

Unfortunately, I think For Glory and For Fun have turned the community against one another more than they have brought the community together. With that comes the ugly terminology like "Scrub," "Git Gud," and "Salty." They might have not originated in Smash Bros, but they have become demeaning terms that divide people over bring them together, which I think was ultimately Sakurai's goal whether or not Smash was a success.

Lastly, I cannot stress enough that there is no "one" strategy or easy fix to winning in Smash, which really correlates with Arrei's post. The recipe to developing any strategy requires everything Arrei listed just for starters.

 

[Purin a.k.a. José]

"This guy sucks... oh no, I will lose!"
If they are that bad, just beat them I used to have this same problem, and then I've noticed that if I'm that good, I can beat them pretty easily. If you keep having that mentality and not trying to win because they're supposedly "bad" you will be the bad player. Kirby is easy to learn, but you have to work a lot if you want to win (lack of safe KO options and one of the lightest characters). That "horrible player" spamming full-charged Smash Attacks may win if I just approach mindlessly thinking "Aaah, this guy sucks. I will beat him within a blink of a eye!".
Sorry, but once you won't stop being beat by noobs, you become the noob here. Hasta la vista. I don't want to sound rude, but normally the better player wins; if you're losing to them, either you must adapt, either you're not that good.

 

[Foxus]

"This guy sucks... oh no, I will lose!"
If they are that bad, just beat them I used to have this same problem, and then I've noticed that if I'm that good, I can beat them pretty easily. If you keep having that mentality and not trying to win because they're supposedly "bad" you will be the bad player. Kirby is easy to learn, but you have to work a lot if you want to win (lack of safe KO options and one of the lightest characters). That "horrible player" spamming full-charged Smash Attacks may win if I just approach mindlessly thinking "Aaah, this guy sucks. I will beat him within a blink of a eye!".
Sorry, but once you won't stop being beat by noobs, you become the noob here. Hasta la vista. I don't want to sound rude, but normally the better player wins; if you're losing to them, either you must adapt, either you're not that good.

I don't have the problem with people who are so "bad," in that case I 'd win. Its those who are too dominant, that wish to have blood on their hands.