Project M Social Thread

[ph00tbag]

I have no problem with the Star KO not KOing people instantly, but, I greatly dislike how there's two different lengths of time before the KO registers.

I think that it should either always be the "fly off into the distance" animation or the "bounce off the screen" animation. There's no reason that luck should be a factor there. I've seen games of Smash decided by that before.

If you're KOing someone off the top and you're unable to recover, you should just accept that you're taking a 3/4 risk of losing the match to it.

In other words, no johns. This is the kind of thing you can totally prepare for, and if you lose to it (and I can't stress this enough), it's your own fault. Because it's something you can prepare for, and it doesn't particularly break the game in any way, it's just aesthetic, and it's a neat aesthetic that should absolutely remain in the game.

 

[Citrus]

But it's something that really shouldn't have to be prepared for though, because there is no particular point to it.
Keep the aesthetic if you like, but the stock should be registered as lost the second that someone crosses the upper blastline

 

[DMG]

I'd prefer it bouncing off the screen LOL who cares about stars I wanna see the **** up close

 

[stingers]

you need an avatar zoom in...

 

[hotdogturtle]

If anyone still has it, can you post the Peef Pit texture?

 

[ph00tbag]

But it's something that really shouldn't have to be prepared for though, because there is no particular point to it.
Keep the aesthetic if you like, but the stock should be registered as lost the second that someone crosses the upper blastline

The point is that it's hype. It's a mechanic that brings a high level of risk and gambling to trading and over-aggressive play at high percents, which adds tension to close endgames. It's like guts in SFII, where characters with less life may also take less damage from a potentially killing blow, or position-specific damage output in SC. If you don't know whether a particular option is going to absolutely guarantee a win, that makes the considerations of whether to use the move more interesting in the long run.

 

[Citrus]

I guess I see what you're saying, it can add hype/tension to an endgame.
For me personally though, I'd rather the stock delay be done away with.
But of course that's just me.

 

[GP&B]

My beef is that it shouldn't be random. If it was split the same way that ledge getup attacks were (although with some different %'s in mind), that would be a better system.

 

[Citrus]

They could do it based on the speed the character passes the line.
Though that would hardly solve your randomness beef I suppose haha.
Probably be hard to program too.

 

[CSDragon]

Doesn't star ko-ing go faster the faster they left the screen/higher damage they're at?

 

[Kink-Link5]

It does not.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

The point is that it's hype. It's a mechanic that brings a high level of risk and gambling to trading and over-aggressive play at high percents, which adds tension to close endgames. It's like guts in SFII, where characters with less life may also take less damage from a potentially killing blow, or position-specific damage output in SC. If you don't know whether a particular option is going to absolutely guarantee a win, that makes the considerations of whether to use the move more interesting in the long run.

That and random damage output (because as far as I'm aware, it's just a variable damage output on certain hits and has nothing to do with the amount of health a character has left) in Super Turbo are still TERRIBLE competitive gameplay decisions.

I figure it's not going to change, but, I'm not fond of a competitive game having a "flip a coin" aspect to add hype when there's a clearly better side to be on. Luck that isn't inherent to a character's moveset should be reduced whenever possible, IMO.

 

[MonkUnit]

Does this mean that everyone would prefer Yoshi's Island: Brawl to have the support ghost platforms be on a timer instead of being random?

 

[Juushichi]

I would be very okay with that.

 

[ph00tbag]

That and random damage output (because as far as I'm aware, it's just a variable damage output on certain hits and has nothing to do with the amount of health a character has left) in Super Turbo are still TERRIBLE competitive gameplay decisions.

I figure it's not going to change, but, I'm not fond of a competitive game having a "flip a coin" aspect to add hype when there's a clearly better side to be on. Luck that isn't inherent to a character's moveset should be reduced whenever possible, IMO.

When I look at it, the distinction is pretty damn clear. If you make a decision that causes this kind of situation to arise, within the very small subset of decisions where the situation can arise, you are inherently accepting that you are gambling. In much the same way a Faust player accepts that when he uses Gamble Attack, he's gambling. Frankly, there's no difference whether it applies to one character or the whole cast. If you make certain decisions, you accept any potential consequences of those decisions.

Admittedly, variable damage output is not the perfect way of creating this effect, but I used it to emphasize that in the situations where it has the most profound effect, it forces you to think about the endgame differently, and in a way that usually benefits the intuitive player more than the player that can recite the precise damage outputs of all of their options. Which is what should be happening anyway.

 

[`dazrin]

Does this mean that everyone would prefer Yoshi's Island: Brawl to have the support ghost platforms be on a timer instead of being random?

I'd love that. No idea why this wasn't the case before, tbh.

 

[Strong Badam]

I don't really see why people think that something being on a timer suddenly makes it fine. With variable gameplay, any kind of changing stage aspect becomes effectively random, in that its effects on a match vary from game to game. While Randall will always be at a certain location 17 seconds into a match, there's no guarantee the two players will be.

 

[Kink-Link5]

By that line of thought, stages with consistent, static platform arrangements are also subject to the "random" circumstance of where each person will be on the stage at a given time.

 

[`dazrin]

It just makes everything as consistent as possible. If GHZ's platform or SV's platforms were random, it would make a world of difference as opposed to how they are now.

 

[ph00tbag]

By that line of thought, stages with consistent, static platform arrangements are also subject to the "random" circumstance of where each person will be on the stage at a given time.

There's a huge difference between something that is static and something that is inconstant. Absurdum doesn't apply here.

 

[Strong Badam]

By that line of thought, stages with consistent, static platform arrangements are also subject to the "random" circumstance of where each person will be on the stage at a given time.

That's just pointless semantics; what I said is actually relevant.

 

[iLink]

Does this mean that everyone would prefer Yoshi's Island: Brawl to have the support ghost platforms be on a timer instead of being random?

Yes

I assumed you guys would have changed it to be on a timer but I found out the other day that it actually wasn't.

 

[PGH Carroll]

is there a simple PM stage list yet? lol

for all of the side PM tourneys i run the stage list is

melee starters except FoD is switched with Smashville

CPs are everything "not dumb" + 2 bans

 

[Kink-Link5]

With no community BR for the demo, a definitively supported ruleset can not be created.

I am consistently in favour of an 11 stage pure-striking and ban system with all 11 stages being "starters," but I don't have the luxury of getting a tournament set up.

 

[MonkUnit]

It just makes everything as consistent as possible. If GHZ's platform or SV's platforms were random, it would make a world of difference as opposed to how they are now.

Smashville's platform location at the start of the match is random.

 

[DMG]

When I look at it, the distinction is pretty damn clear. If you make a decision that causes this kind of situation to arise, within the very small subset of decisions where the situation can arise, you are inherently accepting that you are gambling. In much the same way a Faust player accepts that when he uses Gamble Attack, he's gambling. Frankly, there's no difference whether it applies to one character or the whole cast. If you make certain decisions, you accept any potential consequences of those decisions.

Admittedly, variable damage output is not the perfect way of creating this effect, but I used it to emphasize that in the situations where it has the most profound effect, it forces you to think about the endgame differently, and in a way that usually benefits the intuitive player more than the player that can recite the precise damage outputs of all of their options. Which is what should be happening anyway.

How is it intuitive for the game to decide whether you die slower or faster off the top? That's like saying I'm smart for randomly throwing people into the air on Picto, hoping a transformation will do something to them. It's not a big deal whether you change it or not, but I wouldn't actually defend keeping the star/screen split if we had to make a choice.

There's no cool "mindgame", rewarding the smarter player, etc side to it. In fact you're smarter trying to kill someone off the other blast zones specifically so that you don't have to even worry about the vertical death being so delayed regardless. It's literally a coin flip AFTER you fly by, choosing whether you technically lose the stock sooner or later. There's no "hey you can do a new combo on the fly, go for a different kill move, try something new other than SHINE SHINE SHINE BORING OPTIONS WE KNOW ALREADY".

You can keep it the way it is, because it's honestly not a big deal if it stays that way. But defending it? Preferring it? I wouldn't even dare lol.

 

[DMG]

I don't really see why people think that something being on a timer suddenly makes it fine. With variable gameplay, any kind of changing stage aspect becomes effectively random, in that its effects on a match vary from game to game. While Randall will always be at a certain location 17 seconds into a match, there's no guarantee the two players will be.

Not if the stage changes are not random. If Randall always starts on the left side and alternates to each side every x seconds, that's fine. Now if he starts off on a random side, and the next side he picks is random, that would fit what you're talking about kinda. Time related, but random location aspects are a bit iffy.

Edit: Whoops I thought I was editing my other post, MY BAD some mod condense the two posts

 

[ph00tbag]

How is it intuitive for the game to decide whether you die slower or faster off the top? That's like saying I'm smart for randomly throwing people into the air on Picto, hoping a transformation will do something to them. It's not a big deal whether you change it or not, but I wouldn't actually defend keeping the star/screen split if we had to make a choice.

It has to do with the decision making behind playing with that kind of mechanic. A strictly mechanics based player who only does what's "smart" will limit their own options on the idea that they don't want to gamble. An intuiting player will sometimes go for the gamble if they think it factors into their overall gameplan favorably, especially if they get a sense that their opponent will ignore that option entirely because it's such a gamble.

I will actually defend any random element that can be adequately and realistically prepared for or adapted to in a way that doesn't drastically limit gameplay, and at the same time brings a unique flavor to the gameplay. Because honestly, the way people deal with randomness, or chaotic results is far more interesting than how they deal with strictly defined logic.

 

[iLink]

I'm all for hype. I play competitive games almost strictly for the hype, but when something as random as a star KO and the screen KO can decide the outcome of who actually wins, that is very poor competitive design. The winner should not be determined by blind luck.

In terms of stage randomness, some are a big deal and others aren't. YI:Brawl isn't that big of a deal honestly because of how little of a role it actually plays a majority of the time. I would like it to be on a consistent timer so players can actually take advantage of it on purpose as opposed to just getting lucky/unlucky it comes out at certain times. If you are trying to make a competitive game, this is honestly the only logical thing to do.

If we wanted to deal with randomness and chaos, we'd be playing with items on.

 

[Gust14]

*Lurk mode:off*

IMO these are 2 very diferent situations, they both have a random factor, and they both can "decide" games:

1. Random posittion of platforms: they can save someone from falling to death, they can screw combos, they can offer bonus movement options, etc... In each of those cases the player's skill IS involved somehow, and they CAN adapt to this "fluctuating randomness" to prevail.

2. Random star KO/bounce KO : these aren't anything like random platforms. If some dies in a star/bounce KO and that determines the winner of a match, your skill ISN'T involved and you CAN'T change it. This is "f*** you-randomness" and is pretty anoying.

The solution I propose is to promediate the durantion of star KO and bounce KO, that should do it.

 

[FRENUM]

What is this star ko and screen ko I keep hearing about?

 

[Spoon~]

Ive never heard anyone cry about it in Melee, whats the big deal now?

 

[RaphaelRobo]

Ganon's Utilt should always result in a Star KO.

Ganon's Warlock Punch should always result in a Screen KO, regardless of which edge of the screen they get knocked off of.

 

[Perfect Chaos]

Does this mean that everyone would prefer Yoshi's Island: Brawl to have the support ghost platforms be on a timer instead of being random?

Does anyone even prefer it to be random over a timer? If there are, it's probably a great minority.

I don't really see why people think that something being on a timer suddenly makes it fine. With variable gameplay, any kind of changing stage aspect becomes effectively random, in that its effects on a match vary from game to game. While Randall will always be at a certain location 17 seconds into a match, there's no guarantee the two players will be.

While it's true that circumstances will change match by match, that fact is unavoidable; every match is going to be different, even on a static stage. Things that are on a timer still makes it better than being random, even if it doesn't completely make it perfect. Like, for Randall's case, a knowledgeable player may choose an alternate method of recovery if he knows that Randall is about to appear based on the timer, in the cases where that's applicable. If Randall was completely random like how the current ghost platforms are, then the option of an alternate recovery method is non-existent, unless you are risking all your fate on it randomly appearing.
It's better to give options to the knowledgeable players sometimes by having a timer than to never have the foreseeable option and having to resort to pure luck.

Ive never heard anyone cry about it in Melee, whats the big deal now?

In Melee, people were just playing a game as it is, so even if people complained, there's nothing that could be done about it, anyway, so people don't complain. Or they do, and get ignored.
Now that the game in question is a very editable game, people would naturally point out all of the things that can be improved upon.

 

[DMG]

It has to do with the decision making behind playing with that kind of mechanic. A strictly mechanics based player who only does what's "smart" will limit their own options on the idea that they don't want to gamble. An intuiting player will sometimes go for the gamble if they think it factors into their overall gameplan favorably, especially if they get a sense that their opponent will ignore that option entirely because it's such a gamble.

I will actually defend any random element that can be adequately and realistically prepared for or adapted to in a way that doesn't drastically limit gameplay, and at the same time brings a unique flavor to the gameplay. Because honestly, the way people deal with randomness, or chaotic results is far more interesting than how they deal with strictly defined logic.

That's the thing. This doesn't limit or enhance gameplay. It has no real value to the game. It's one thing if dying off the top is delayed compared to other blast zones: people are probably ok with death not being instant there. But there's nothing to gain from having 2 different death animations especially when it's determined randomly.

If there were different death animations based on % or how fast you were flying, or xyz aspect, sure it's fine. If something happens and you lose because of it, THEN you can use the intuitive "should have planned for it" card, like well you could have tried to kill him vertically sooner or if he passed the damage threshold you should have been aware and tried a horizontal KO. But being randomized does it no favors at all. There is no adapt, no "use it to your advantage" since it's random, and it doesn't add anything unique to gameplay since this all takes part after technically dying anyways. You're already hit, already sent past the blast zone, already dead, now flip a coin and see whether you lose the stock sooner or later??

 

[PGH Carroll]

Remember that the star KO gives the player who dealt it inbeween stocks time to reset, charge, tech skill whatever. Taking out that time for a very situational problem is lame.

 

[iLink]

They don't have to remove it, they can just make the screen bounce take just as long (or remove that one)

 

[Gimpel]

I would just lenghten the bounce-off-the-screen-animation to last as long as the regular star KO animation and keep it random. That pretty much solves all problems imo.
And I'd be also for setting YI:B's platforms on a timer because there's no reason it shouldn't be on a timer that I am aware of.

Umm I don't know if that's the right time to post this because we already have two things to discuss at the moment, maybe I'll bring it up later again if it gets overlooked but I wanted to ask what you guys are thinking about having to mash for Mario's downb ? I always thought that mashing harder to get a bigger effect was kinda bad design but I don't really know what else to do with the move :S
I'm fine if it stays like it is because melee and because it's only one move on ... two characters but luigi doesn't count but I wanted to ask what you guys think about that.
I think you could just give Mario his spin attack from Mario Galaxy or make it so you only have to hold the b button instead of mashing but the best thing would probably be that you make it so you only have to press b a few times to get the max hight out of the move, that way it works still as usual for melee vets but you don't feel like you're breaking your controller every time you try to recover.
What do you think ?

 

[GP&B]

I've been wanting to ask, myself. It's not really a tech skill type of thing, but I don't have a lot against it really. It just seems out of place.

 

[DMG]

Remember that the star KO gives the player who dealt it inbeween stocks time to reset, charge, tech skill whatever. Taking out that time for a very situational problem is lame.

Yeah and I didn't suggest making it instant (although making it instant is also fine obviously). Just don't have random + different death animations. So have the star KO or the bounce or both, but make them the same length since there's no point in making 1 longer than the other.