[TSON]
Hella.
Hitboxes and hurtboxes have definite sizes and they are attached to bones. Reshaping polygons has no effect on them.
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!
Sorry... What? lolWhy are you guys arguing about this hurtbox/hitbox stuff? Seriously, it doesn't matter.
Really...? o.O It might not change the hitboxes or hurtboxes, but if some certain bones change, it will change some weird animation causing it to change hitbox I've heard.Vertex hacks do not change the hurtboxes. Jiggs with a hat is no different than jiggs without a hat. this is the same for vertex hacks. I've used the mewtwo vertex over lucario on wifi with people who didn't and got no desync.
Ehh? You didn't see our latest M2 hacks did ya?Really...? o.O It might not change the hitboxes or hurtboxes, but if some certain bones change, it will change some weird animation causing it to change hitbox I've heard.
Apparently when I used Jigglypuff with a Captain Viewtiful hat, it desynched in Wi-Fi. The problem is, anything that is imported to a character causes it to desynch, because I don't think the opposing player's Brawl data can read the other team's data having Jigglypuff a Captain Falcon hat, so it will think it's some random whatever it is. x.X
Same thing with mariokart64n's Mewtwo model. A lot of his moves changed a bit, like his Force Palm (Side B), when some of the hitbox is hit underneath him instead. His d-air and jab is also weird... like his head is animated in a weird direction for some reason. Also his d-throw and his ExtremeSpeed has a stretched hurtbox-looking thing that looks round when a character gets hit on a wall/ceiling/ground.
I don't want to go off-topic anymore, but that's the end of my rant. o-o
Exactly what I said.The Melee Ganondorf vertex hack is shorter than the Brawl Model. Wouldn't using that model screw things over like you guys are saying? If you're going to say "HURR IT CUD AFECT HITBOX CUES," then Melee Ganondorf has to be out. No exceptions.
To point out my point, I'm not saying we should get rid of that GREAT, FANTASTIC model, I'm saying that you're arguing about something stupid.
And that's my two cents on that.
If the difference is so minor, why bother interfering?Blargh, I really need to find that picture of the vertex hack next to the unmodified Ganondorf. Does anyone know where it is?
I seriously don't think it's that big of a deal though. I already pointed it out that the vertex hack would have to be obviously distorted enough to cause problems.
I'm going to inb4devs because this just isn't going anywhere.
In other words, would you agree that if changes like that are being made, wouldn't that be melee 2.0? A TRUE melee successor?I mean no offense to you guys...
but I hope you aren't selling out.
By that I mean I hope that you are actually aiming for a full melee emulation.
I'm concerned about this because I've read the past few pages and have been reading about how and whether or not you want to add or remove certain aspects of your game in the hopes that you'll add more competitive depth. This is a noble and worthy cause, but it detracts from what I and many other melee players hope to see in this project: perfect melee emulation. Things such as continued ledge occupancy on roll are things that were critical to melee and removing them in the name of depth is all good and well. Though, I hope you realize, the game will no longer be melee.
If your goal is not perfect melee emulation, then that is fine too. However, I humbly ask that if this is the case, that you stop hyping up your project as a melee emulation.
did you not read the first postI mean no offense to you guys...
but I hope you aren't selling out.
By that I mean I hope that you are actually aiming for a full melee emulation.
I'm concerned about this because I've read the past few pages and have been reading about how and whether or not you want to add or remove certain aspects of your game in the hopes that you'll add more competitive depth. This is a noble and worthy cause, but it detracts from what I and many other melee players hope to see in this project: perfect melee emulation. Things such as continued ledge occupancy on roll are things that were critical to melee and removing them in the name of depth is all good and well. Though, I hope you realize, the game will no longer be melee.
If your goal is not perfect melee emulation, then that is fine too. However, I humbly ask that if this is the case, that you stop hyping up your project as a melee emulation.
This may just be me, but I always thought the point of the project was to recreate everything good about melee, and to improve on it where possible. If we wanted to perfectly recreate melee, why not just play it? I always thought that it was never meant to be melee, but rather melee 2.0. It's not supposed to be melee rehashed; otherwise there's no point in going through this much work to recreate a game that's been around for years already.I mean no offense to you guys...
but I hope you aren't selling out.
By that I mean I hope that you are actually aiming for a full melee emulation.
I'm concerned about this because I've read the past few pages and have been reading about how and whether or not you want to add or remove certain aspects of your game in the hopes that you'll add more competitive depth. This is a noble and worthy cause, but it detracts from what I and many other melee players hope to see in this project: perfect melee emulation. Things such as continued ledge occupancy on roll are things that were critical to melee and removing them in the name of depth is all good and well. Though, I hope you realize, the game will no longer be melee.
If your goal is not perfect melee emulation, then that is fine too. However, I humbly ask that if this is the case, that you stop hyping up your project as a melee emulation.
They can't code ledge occupancy :/I mean no offense to you guys...
but I hope you aren't selling out.
By that I mean I hope that you are actually aiming for a full melee emulation.
I'm concerned about this because I've read the past few pages and have been reading about how and whether or not you want to add or remove certain aspects of your game in the hopes that you'll add more competitive depth. This is a noble and worthy cause, but it detracts from what I and many other melee players hope to see in this project: perfect melee emulation. Things such as continued ledge occupancy on roll are things that were critical to melee and removing them in the name of depth is all good and well. Though, I hope you realize, the game will no longer be melee.
If your goal is not perfect melee emulation, then that is fine too. However, I humbly ask that if this is the case, that you stop hyping up your project as a melee emulation.
This post hits it on the nail.This may just be me, but I always thought the point of the project was to recreate everything good about melee, and to improve on it where possible. If we wanted to perfectly recreate melee, why not just play it? I always thought that it was never meant to be melee, but rather melee 2.0. It's not supposed to be melee rehashed; otherwise there's no point in going through this much work to recreate a game that's been around for years already.
Part of the reason this project is so interesting is because, though melee was a great, great game, there are things about it that needed to be fixed, and this is an opportunity to recreate a great game, and to expand and improve on it. it's a great opportunity, and as much as I like melee, I'd rather not see everything get caught up with arguments of "it's not melee."
Kirby's new Nair isn't melee, but it's better. Snake and Snake both aren't melee, but both look like awesome characters with a lot of potential. I'm mostly afraid that the potential of the project is going to be limited because "that's not melee.' This is a great opportunity to make another game that's bigger and better than melee, and I'm excited for it.
Please tell me more. What parameter in the bone mods the size of the hurtbox?Hitboxes and hurtboxes have definite sizes and they are attached to bones. Reshaping polygons has no effect on them.
Yes we can. We just won't.They can't code ledge occupancy :/
Personally, I wouldn't mind if the devs messed around a bit with character balance and what not, but I too hate all these radical ideas being proposed.
It's not part of the bone, it's in the moveset pac somewhere.Please tell me more. What parameter in the bone mods the size of the hurtbox?
Emphasis mine. Also, as someone mentioned earlier, Melee 2.0 not 1.1What is Project M?
Project M is an in development spin off of Brawl+ designed to add rich, technical gameplay to a balanced cast of characters while additionally enhancing the speed of play. Project M employs new codes which seemlessly add in new features to the entire cast to add technical variety to all characters.
What is Project M's mission statement?
Project M aims to achieve rich, technical, and fast gameplay married to the new brawl engine to yield a balanced, competitive, and technical version of Brawl.
In other words, there must be a cautionary tax on the offensive player.Point is, if there were no L cancels and everything canceled automatically, there's nothing stopping players from being all out aggressive, all the time. It makes sure that players actually have some commitment to their attack and they better know what they / their opponent is doing, otherwise they'll get punished.
L-canceling: Basically it's in because you wouldn't be able to drag it away from 90% of Melee players without them kicking and screaming. Personally, I recognize its uselessness (any attempts to justify it come after the fact of its existence... Who would design a competitive game with that mechanic?stuff
L-Cancelling allows characters (particularly Ganondorf) who have higher aerial landing lag to stand a chance against otherwise much faster and, statistically speaking, superior characters. While it can be viewed as a "useless dexterity tax" it widens the skill gap between novice and professional players and obviously provides more competitive depth. Take marth for example; there is so many more advantages with Marth's Shffled fair (which has practically no lag) to Marth's Shffed fair (which has a delay before the next attack).What is the justification for reintroducing L-canceling? I'm a hardcore Melee-only player. I know we all like it. It feels nice. But it's also a useless dexterity tax, which is at least partially apparent in the fact that no other fighter out there uses a similar system. Any time another fighter has a cancel system, it's either based on canceling one move into another with crazy frame precision, or it depletes a super meter, so it's limited. I don't understand why the cancel can't just be automatic.
I've tried to defend L-canceling in the past. I just can't explain why it should be there. I can't come up with a single good reason that isn't "We like it because it was there before."