Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
The thing is, the ledge grab method is still retardedly effective even with Melee's high occupancy. My point was that people who have complained about this refuse to learn how to edgehog this way to realize how effective it is. If done correctly, you can maintain invulnerability without being attackable through ledge regrabs. It's really not that complicated after you play it that way for a while. I see no sense in giving more advantage when this powerful mechanic exists in the game and fills the gap ledge occupancy left behind.The crux of my arguement was that edgehogging in Melee was an entirely no risk and straightforward action: but you only get the option to do it when you have a positional advantage and properly read your oponent's recovery options (so it could actually work).
What good reason is there for it to be more complicated than grabbing the edge and pressing L? The other method arbitrarily makes the action more compicated and riskier.
As with some others here, I'd much rather see the rolling ledge occupancy window reduced slightly from Melee as more reasonable method of adding necessary skill. That way you're still given all the same advantages as in Melee (a good thing), only with somewhat stricter timing, and still with none of the downsides/complications of the ledge grab method.
I don't see any logic in going further than that just for 'skill'-sake.
...Jackpot, silentdoom is a member of the PMBR and had permission from shanus to use it.
So like if an attack would have killed DK in Melee but it doesn't in PM because his Up-B is improved, does that make the game worse?When in a position where pressing R would kill him in Melee it won't kill him in Project Melee. That is enough to not only increase the length of games but it also can potentially change overall outcomes.
What's wrong with having both? If it's more effective to do that than to try for a rolling edgehog with slightly reduced LO (from Melee), that would be the best of both worlds.The thing is, the ledge grab method is still retardedly effective even with Melee's high occupancy. My point was that people who have complained about this refuse to learn how to edgehog this way to realize how effective it is. If done correctly, you can maintain invulnerability without being attackable through ledge regrabs. It's really not that complicated after you play it that way for a while. I see no sense in giving more advantage when this powerful mechanic exists in the game and fills the gap ledge occupancy left behind.
If someone has the skill to pull off the grabbing ledge-hog consistently enough to fill "the gap ledge occupancy left behind," it would still essentially be a free, easy kill for them.To even out the playing out the playing field between the characters, I find it a better option to reduce the effectiveness of free, easy edgehogs than it is to give the ease of doing this to everyone as that would just make games silly. Not all characters have the moves and flow to force enemies to the edge and off the edge so easily, as seen in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpbCBT1TGdg
Currently, nothing. Which is why I don't think touching ledge occupancy is a good idea at all as the first go-to option.... Also, pardon any ignorance here, but couldn't ledge re-grabbing be used to stall? I know vBrawl has those issues - just want an explanation as to what makes P:M different in that.
Meaning you can't maintain invulerability, right? That would imply ledge re-grabbing is invulnerability with spurts of vulnerability. Or is it that someone has to grab your ledge from you to stop your shenanigans?Project M doesn't give you 5 hours of invincibility when you touch the ledge.
I do agree that you wouldn't want to change ledge occupancy to address stalling. But rolling/attacking ledge occupacy really has no relevance to that.Currently, nothing. Which is why I don't think touching ledge occupancy is a good idea at all as the first go-to option.
I mentioned that because the easier "planking" in PM right now thanks to ledge grab ranges compounded with Melee's occupancy would actually make the edge game even sillier than it was in Melee. There are multiple factors in how the edgehog game as a whole works, and ledge occupancy is far from the single most definitive factor but is always the first to be blamed.I do agree that you wouldn't want to change ledge occupancy to address stalling. But rolling/attacking ledge occupacy really has no relevance to that.
Spam Arrows, ledge occupancy, by itself, is not the single most defining factor in the edgehogging game right now, or difficulty thereof. Not even in the demo which you have access to, thus this should be something you are able to notice.
Let me think off the top of my head what is different from Melee and PM that might hold any significance...
Meteors uncancelable until frame 16 (most meteor canceling is irrelevant now)
Directional FSmash input after charge frame instead of initial input (better than Melee imo)
Powershield gives no shield push (all characters can reliably counter out of a PS instead of just a few)
RAR aerials
Near instant dash attacks with C-stick <3
Reverse edge grabs out of special fall (fine concept but range is too large)
No phantom hits (don't care either way since phantom hits happened for a reason)
A much expanded, rebalanced roster compared to Melee. Do not underestimate what kind of effect learning all these new matchups can have on people who are already comfortably winning money in Melee.
I care not for what we receive as long as the result is playable and everything has merit. This might seem revolutionary to some, but low ledge occupancy has merit when you look at the big picture as for how edgehogging works. The "nothing has to change" mindset never would have borne PM in the first place.
Haha, no. It's already nearly broken as is.If you are going to shorten the LO timing then the invincible timing should be increase for every frame of LO is decreased.
Or if you get hit, then I would go with that ideaBy the way, insofar as ledge camping shenanigans go, I'd personally like to see invincibility staling; that is, with each successive ledge grab, your invincibility frames diminish, until you touch the ground once more.
what he said^Haha, no. It's already nearly broken as is.
It's already a foregone conclusion that the end result will be somewhere between Brawl and Melee. Most everyone agrees that Melee was too much, Brawl was too little. The question here is how much reduction should there be.
I don't like claims like this. Several of the members think Melee ledge occupancy is just fine in Project: M.Haha, no. It's already nearly broken as is.
It's already a foregone conclusion that the end result will be somewhere between Brawl and Melee. Most everyone agrees that Melee was too much, Brawl was too little. The question here is how much reduction should there be.
Recoveries should be inherently limited on a case by case basis.Why should some characters be allowed to grab backwards at apex of special fall, but not others?
2. I have a harder time agreeing with this argument, as I would rather a skill intensive exciting game of melee than worry about how fast it is done. What people really like about melee's game length is the large swings in momentum that getting fast kills can lead to. I feel that more skill intensive ledgeguarding can lead to these large swings regardless and that they might even be more entertaining in the end and more demoralizing for your opponent. If it is from time constraints, play with 3 stocks only. Nothing says you have to stick with 4 stocks Bo3 if you don’t want to.I think you are excluding some important but sutble arguments for Melee LO:
1: Keeping it allows us to edgehog the same way we did in Melee, instead of having to edgehog like we are playing Brawl. <<<This is important.
2: More likely to attract Melee players by principle.
3: The project can claim faithful adherence to core accepted Melee mechanics.
Hey toaster! How have you been? How has your coding been? Getting better and better I suspect? :DDan! <3 How's your art doing?
You should also watch some of the char demo vids on the projectmelee channel.
I think those all go under "it is what we are used to". But these are good validations of that point.I think you are excluding some important but sutble arguments for Melee LO:
1: Keeping it allows us to edgehog the same way we did in Melee, instead of having to edgehog like we are playing Brawl. <<<This is important.
2: More likely to attract Melee players by principle.
3: The project can claim faithful adherence to core accepted Melee mechanics.
Playing the demo and going back to Melee is nothing like playing the current developer build and going back to Melee.So has anyone here besides PMBR members went back to melee after playing the demo for so long? Melee feels so wierd to me now i guess because PM seems more smooth idk :/
my only problem with this is my ivysaur can use fly? Does ivysaur, in the pokemon games, have any moves that look like this?For anyone that's still wondering what Ivy's helicopter recovery looks like in Brawl-, here's a vid of it in action.
She could also move around on the ground, too.
I don't think that either animation should be as long as it is if seriously considered for PM, but that's just one man's opinion.