Bryonato
Green Hat
Fair enough. IMO most of his "goodness" was matchup inexperience.
-
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!
Project M Social Thread
- Thread starter Project M
- Start date
- Status
Oro?!
Smash Hero
Sideb was better than 2.5 Sonics entire kit. He is dead and gone now so I don't really want to argue.
leelue
Smash Lord
Current grounded down B and 2.1 side B are remarkably similar.
Where is the major difference that would cause you to make such a claim?
Where is the major difference that would cause you to make such a claim?
Oro?!
Smash Hero
The amount of invincibility on Sideb in the way that Rat and Wizzrobe used it. You couldn't just "stick out a hitbox" one of Sonic's weaker points because he just beat you instead.
Basically that invincibility thing, and the speed of recovery from something that was too universal of a precision based tool.^
Side-B was actually broken, in the sense that it was a gimmick and too good for the good of the game. 'Centralizing' as the development team called it.
2.5 Sonic could easily be exactly par with 2.1, the difference is he actually 'seems' to be a good character, as he has functions and works in various ways. Where he used to just be silly, and was increasingly becoming that. People fortunately saw it coming ahead of time enough to tinker with it.
Sonic is awesome now, almost working ideally with this design, but not stupid anymore (as much).
Side-B was actually broken, in the sense that it was a gimmick and too good for the good of the game. 'Centralizing' as the development team called it.
2.5 Sonic could easily be exactly par with 2.1, the difference is he actually 'seems' to be a good character, as he has functions and works in various ways. Where he used to just be silly, and was increasingly becoming that. People fortunately saw it coming ahead of time enough to tinker with it.
Sonic is awesome now, almost working ideally with this design, but not stupid anymore (as much).
I don't understand about Fox and Falco. Some of the Melee high tiers yes, it isn't obvious whether Jiggs is still great or how well Falcon/Ganon should be doing. Fox Falco are still in a dominant position and most of the Brawl newcomers don't impact that. Some of the Melee veteran buffs are nearly irrelevant on fighting spacies: Ness is still at a loss, DK is still a huge guy for Falco, Pikachu didn't get anything meaningful for fighting them besides Bair it seems, etc. Bowser probably had the most revolutionary change in his spacie MU's, but he still has others in the cast to answer to.This game is fun. We enjoy it thoroughly and frequently in my area.
Though I find forums to be a bizarre place, it's still fun to connect with a more public-masses community.
It's bizarre that on the forums, Fox and Falco (and generally the 'top-tier' melee cast) are regarded so highly, even when the dynamics of the game are so obviously untouched and yet other characters are nearly on-par with them in terms of validity in the global competitive scene.
I still think it's bizarre that characters like Luigi, Pikachu, Lucas, Sonic, Wario, DK, and others either so exceptionally diverse or so distinct and gimmicky are considered 'bad' by most. Sonic got a 'nerf' from 2.1, but only now is recognized as good, Wario got a 'buff' and yet is still recognized as bad. I can't wrap my head around why these trends take place over others, or why people gravitate and perceive things this way.
It seems people give too much concern into what the collective community thinks and interprets, and all of this is a result of over-stimulation/over-playing/over-analyzing what people 'understand' rather than simply experiencing what's happening for what it really is.
That's my interpretation of too much interpretation going on... lol
I'm glad to see the stability of things, and when characters like Luigi and Lucas aren't touched in a transition, I have a lot of steady confidence in the development team and community in general.
The transition from Brawl to Project : M is on par with DotA (WC3 engine) to Valve's DotA2, in terms of quality, potential final result, and progress in that direction. When care is put into something, it shows, and a lot of care has been put into Project: M so far.
Good stuff everyone.
Practice awareness, the development of the play will come, with yourselves and others. Never forget to work with your own awareness.
The experiencing of what is, without interpretation, brings freedom from what is.
People are awesome, you guys got this!
PS/Edit: Needs more good stages.
-Bamesy
Being distinct or gimmicky is not a great thing for your viability. It doesn't scream solid, it screams "surprise". Loses a lot of value after someone gets lengthy experience at the MU/character. Pikachu does not look like a high tier character, I'm not surprised seeing him in the bottom half of 95% of everyone's tier lists. People are literally only putting Pikachu high due to unproven and basically highly theory monster QAC applications thought up on a kindergarten chalk board that frankly aren't very scary offensively. Toon Link can do some janky things onstage by doing ACT onstage and B reversing projectiles. Doesn't make him good. Lucas might try to B Reverse a DJC Down B as an approach. Doesn't make him good. Etc
Out of that list, the characters doing good are the ones with pretty straight forward and powerful tools. DK is a very simple and very obvious character, who just happens to have an amazing grab game and kill power. Not a whole lot of gimmicks with him. Sonic has some variety, but playing him well is basically abusing his strongest tools instead of thinking of a clever mixup or option. Backing up and dictating the flow of the game is much stronger than whatever trickiness (generally. Sonic has some nasty mixup potential if you ever watch Sethlon play him). In Wario's case, he's the outlier because he's sorta a mix of gimmicky and actual solid traits. Like going for a tech chase may not be the best idea, but he has huge punishment potential out of it. Doing a quick Fthrow or changing bite direction, stuff they need to know specifically where to DI, etc. Vs the powerful and reliable Side B Nair etc. Wario is really solid right now and I think most lists after the buffs have had people place him much higher than near the bottom, which should be accurate because literally 80%+ of the character/moveset got buffed. If he didn't rise by quite a bit then you'd think they buffed him poorly, which isn't the case.
As for perception, I disagree a bit. I think a majority of people right off the bat are inherently poor at analyzing MU's or character tools, and coupled with this they too heavily rely or infer from what's happening "in their circle". A lot of characters go high or low in an extremely outlier way on some of these personal lists, due to people playing with friends and making huge assumptions based on that gameplay. Player skill differences and mistakes in gameplay tend to be glossed over more, with the end result of whoever is winning sticking out. Buddy beating me exclusively with Link? Link must be good. Play Mario do well, guess he's top 5. Etc. It happens A LOT. At this point in the game, I think that is happening more than actual over or under hype based on the global "at large" community. I don't think people overrate DK or underrate Luigi because of tournaments and because of xyz guy on the forum saying so. Eli's word on the viability of x character probably has less of an impact than if you play for 3 months straight and you or your friend is playing the character.
I think people do focus too much on what they "think" they are seeing on a local/personal level, instead of looking at the larger scene. If you did look at the larger scene, there's no ****in way you would miss Strong Bad ****** with DK, Sethlon doing good with Sonic (Wizz too in his lil campy own way), you would miss Reflex showing some Wario goodies, Kage still doing the Ganon stomp, etc. You're much more likely to get an inaccurate view or feeling of a character if you only stick to your guns and what you "feel", than if you look at what other people are doing or saying (that's relevant at least. Hearing about another group of generic people who are doing good with xyz characters does not mean half of what tournament and high quality vids mean. If that's what you mean, then I agree because different groups reach different conclusions, with both sides probably engaging in faulty gameplay or analysis, and if you just take their word for it then you'll be mislead and won't actually learn).
On the Sonic note, people started paying attention more to Wizz and Sethlon. 2.1 Sonic was lame in some regards, and very few people besides the ones who had to play Sethlon on a consistent basis seemed to have anything to say (partly also because his more aggressive playstyle would showcase the lameness of Side B more than Wizz would in the past imo). It wasn't until 2.5 and the publicized changes that people actually payed attention to Sonic (go figure) and so we kinda went from unknown/bad opinions due to not seeing Sonic played, and turned into "holy cow Sonic"
Oro?!
Smash Hero
When's the ZSS for high tier train arriving DMG?
Forums are fun too.
I love essays.
DMG this is almost all for you.
Oro... You don't need the trend, she's already a beast.
Some of the stuff you wrote is quite opinionated, so I won't touch on anything too much. To each their own, but a couple things I'll just briefly point out.
Uncertainty regarding 'melee-transfers' while knowing Fox/Falco are still significantly functional is understandable, and expected. Nothing will really impact this, it would be weird if something did. haha
Developing Dynamics
Saying characters are at a loss against them is reasonable, but short-sighted for the same reasons. The dynamics of 'melee-tiers' against them is deep, there is an utter and complete lack of developed dynamics coming from those characters you mentioned, in almost all ways. The process game around these kinds of match-ups haven't even panned out, let alone been explored well enough to make an accurate assessment of how they 'do' against Fox/Falco. This is the naive, short-sighted perception that you're speaking of, and that you know well. You explained the trap and are being a prime example of it right here. Does this make sense?
Side notes... They're at a loss against Ness, Falco is just a little toy for DK, they need something against Pikachu since he could already handle them fine. Bowser probably still can't handle a simple Dash Dance, even when he had the most revolutionary changes in his MU's.
See what I did there?
Side notes... They're at a loss against Ness, Falco is just a little toy for DK, they need something against Pikachu since he could already handle them fine. Bowser probably still can't handle a simple Dash Dance, even when he had the most revolutionary changes in his MU's.
See what I did there?
Gimmicks
"Being distinct or gimmicky is not a great thing for your viability. It doesn't scream solid, it screams "surprise".
Very much, and this goes deep too. At the same time, a gimmick can break something too. IC's with CG's vs without CG's. Solidity can still come from silliness, which is what makes it such a difficult balancing act. Sonic to one extreme, Bowser to another. Naturally, a Bowser and Pit on par in a game will see the Bowser win and lose a lot more, while the Pit stays solid throughout. Still of equal 'value' even when the gimmick is understood and applied properly from both ends. In the end, gimmick-nature is actually 100% irrelevant to the value of a character. Oddly.
If QAC, 'janky' AGT projectiles, Wario Side-B tricks, and... whatever you described with Lucas (lol) are what people are relying on, then they're doing it 'wrong' exactly as you described. Doing what loses value, relying on gimmicks and the lack of depth in understanding/applying them to the game from their opponents end. Indeed, more wins/losses have been attributed to this than anything else in Project: M's entire life-span. To this day, it's still taking a greater toll than anything else, at every level of play, whether we understand, accept, believe it, or not.
Basically, as you said, this.
"abusing tools instead of thinking of a clever option."
So it's irrelevant to discuss regarding 'validity of characters' at all.
Very much, and this goes deep too. At the same time, a gimmick can break something too. IC's with CG's vs without CG's. Solidity can still come from silliness, which is what makes it such a difficult balancing act. Sonic to one extreme, Bowser to another. Naturally, a Bowser and Pit on par in a game will see the Bowser win and lose a lot more, while the Pit stays solid throughout. Still of equal 'value' even when the gimmick is understood and applied properly from both ends. In the end, gimmick-nature is actually 100% irrelevant to the value of a character. Oddly.
If QAC, 'janky' AGT projectiles, Wario Side-B tricks, and... whatever you described with Lucas (lol) are what people are relying on, then they're doing it 'wrong' exactly as you described. Doing what loses value, relying on gimmicks and the lack of depth in understanding/applying them to the game from their opponents end. Indeed, more wins/losses have been attributed to this than anything else in Project: M's entire life-span. To this day, it's still taking a greater toll than anything else, at every level of play, whether we understand, accept, believe it, or not.
Basically, as you said, this.
"abusing tools instead of thinking of a clever option."
So it's irrelevant to discuss regarding 'validity of characters' at all.
And this contradicts itself...
"I think people do focus too much on what they "think" they are seeing on a local/personal level, instead of looking at the larger scene. If you did look at the larger scene..."
"It wasn't until 2.5 and the publicized changes that people actually payed attention to Sonic (go figure) and so we kinda went from unknown/bad opinions due to not seeing Sonic played, and turned into "holy cow Sonic"
Hardcore.
People don't focus too much on what they think, as they usually aren't giving that any attention at all.
People almost never have any idea what they're actually focused on at all.
The public mass, collectively, has a more skewed, and therefore more inaccurate, interpretation of reality than an individual who pays attention. If a small group of people have an awareness of this, that interpretation will more accuracy than the entire world's view as a whole. Let alone the individuals within that mass.
This much is obvious, yet it in itself is given very little attention by anyone.
With that, I'll rephrase your whole paragraph for you...
"If you didn't look at the larger scene, or your own little group, there's no ****in way you would miss DK being able to ****, Sonic being able to do good, Wario showing some goodies, Ganon still doing the stomp, etc. You'd get an inaccurate view or feeling of a character if you only stick to your perception, statistics, and what's "tangible", than if you look at what is possible or do-able. (Hearing about ALL other groups of generic people who are doing good with xyz characters does not mean half of what tournament and high quality vids mean. Different groups reach different conclusions, so it makes sense that there's a lot of faulty gameplay or analysis from all sides, and if you just take their word for it then you'll be mislead and won't actually learn).
Ta-dah?
And with this quote...
In other words, people didn't pay attention worth **** to anything of value, and instead relied on the redundant eventual play to emerge before looking at it at all. Just like the immeasurable quantities of other OBVIOUS BEYOND REASON things that everyone is missing, and 'trying' (hehe) to discourage me from having faith in the awesomeness of people!
Awareness people!
It's easy. Really.
Edit: TL;DR for cannedbread...
"A lot of stuff I've posted before that I'm sure/hope you've read"
Things like give attention to questions like 'what is the reason I'm thinking/feeling this way about this thing?' and take ACTUAL effort to be aware of what you're doing/what's going on, Meaning, take intentional steps back and see if you can look at things differently, try and find a way to perceive what you've experienced in a different way.
Normal stuff.
The dynamics (meaning comfortable 'natural' depth you have when picking up a character you're familiar with) of ANYTHING in Project: M are so underdeveloped that there's literally not a single voice worth hearing beyond 'we don't know anything, but we have stuff to look at, so what can we make of it?' and anything else is for entertainment only.
More normal stuff.
Otherwise...
Nobody should ever be surprised by anything, ever. The only reason an unexpected turn of events/thoughts happens, is a lack of awareness.
This doesn't mean a new piece of knowledge can't change your outlook on something.
It means you should KNOW that there are new pieces of 'knowledge' that WILL change your outlook on things, and these are evident if you are willing to LOOK.
Hope that made a little sense. lol
standardtoaster
Tubacabra
nooo it's bamesy the essay man :[
cannedbread
Smash Lord
bamesy you need some tl;drs in there i can't be arsed to read all that の‿のﾞ
Vashimus
Smash Master
aka Mr. Condescending.
Guys I don't like the new brawl tier list, it implies that ZSS was good at one point
It's only condescending if it's not true and you're not comfortable with the ideas.
Is it true?
If so, then it's simply something you're aware of that you can work on. Whether you're uncomfortable with that, or accept it and working with it, is your choice.
If it's not true, help me out.
Offend comes from the latin word for bear-trap, meaning if you're ever offended, you're simply walking into a trap or 'taking bait' in a way. Even if no bait is intentionally put there to begin with, you can take anything that way, technically.
It's impossible to offend someone (be condescending), it's only possible to be offended. Negativity is like drinking poison and expecting someone else to die, receiving something negatively is that same thing, just internal and not expressed by you.
This isn't meant to be condescending, just a funny tid-bit.
My post was entirely meant to be helpful, and hopefully that's generally clear. That's all I care about.
Work with awareness, all else follows.
The community, in large mass and individually, tends to forget that.
Science and math! lol
Vashimus
Smash Master
This guy...
D
Deleted member
Guest
I think I speak for everybody when I say "Oy vey."
cannedbread
Smash Lord
candle hant this bamesy swag
I suddenly have more self-confidence in my old middle school essays, where did that come from
leelue
Smash Lord
The invincibility
Ok
We just aren't going to see eye to eye on this.
EDIT
Lemme guess? Bamesey said something about people not being aware of themselves when they play? In Sixteen-thousand words? Yeah I don't read them anymore.
The invincibility that existed in the first six frames of aerial side b? That's the extent of your claim for why 2.1 sonic was better than 2.5 sonic?
Ok
We just aren't going to see eye to eye on this.
EDIT
Lemme guess? Bamesey said something about people not being aware of themselves when they play? In Sixteen-thousand words? Yeah I don't read them anymore.
zman804
Smash Ace
I always like Bamesys posts. Are we getting anymore DAT threads?
Of course a lot of it is opinionated. I can back up quite a bit of it with tournament results though: Fox and Falco did not fall off the face of the Earth, and Pikachu probably would have crappy placements if examined closely. If you want to make the argument that the overall metagame is being experienced through a tinted lens, and that we really don't know much yet, I would not fully agree but you're free to make that point if you want. The game is young and certainly there will be progress and shifts made, but these posits you put forth sound like very vague and very "anti-establishment" statements. Because we are human, that we're bound to get it wrong and be narrow minded and aimlessly explore characters or blindly follow the herd. I do agree that plenty of times competitively, people will copy strategies and ideas that seem solid and the masses pour time into those things, without looking at the big picture and taking the risk of exploring other options to find counters or viable alternatives in characters and strategies. Not just in Smash, but in other games as well. Everyone here is tired of Pokemon, but to use that as an example, everyone and their grandma will run Rain Offense "just cause".
Forums are fun too.
I love essays.
DMG this is almost all for you.
Oro... You don't need the trend, she's already a beast.
Some of the stuff you wrote is quite opinionated, so I won't touch on anything too much. To each their own, but a couple things I'll just briefly point out.
Uncertainty regarding 'melee-transfers' while knowing Fox/Falco are still significantly functional is understandable, and expected. Nothing will really impact this, it would be weird if something did. haha
Developing Dynamics
Saying characters are at a loss against them is reasonable, but short-sighted for the same reasons. The dynamics of 'melee-tiers' against them is deep, there is an utter and complete lack of developed dynamics coming from those characters you mentioned, in almost all ways. The process game around these kinds of match-ups haven't even panned out, let alone been explored well enough to make an accurate assessment of how they 'do' against Fox/Falco. This is the naive, short-sighted perception that you're speaking of, and that you know well. You explained the trap and are being a prime example of it right here. Does this make sense?
Side notes... They're at a loss against Ness, Falco is just a little toy for DK, they need something against Pikachu since he could already handle them fine. Bowser probably still can't handle a simple Dash Dance, even when he had the most revolutionary changes in his MU's.
See what I did there?
Spacies have well established punishes and combos on them from the Melee days, and it's true that people are not consistently CGing and 0-deathing with their respective character when against them. On the same token however, plenty of these characters are also not getting abused and punished to the fullest. I'm pretty sure Fox could come up with a lame shine edge guard setup on Lucas Wario TL Sonic Ike etc that people just don't do or have not figured out/gotten down. Falco players (for whatever reason) may not realize how much shield pressure they can actually enact on Wario for example. The pendulum swings both ways, and frankly it may be more scary for the new characters because they have not been shine gimped and Falco lamed for the past 10+ years, where as everyone has a "general" idea of what lame stuff to do on Spacies. Sure, people may not have a Lucas 0-death on Fox down, but at the same time it's probably more likely that Lucas knows how to get an easy 50% from a vertical juggle where as the Fox/Falco player has to relearn a new character fall/weight status and recovery option and xyz facet. That's why I'm skeptical, because sometimes it really doesn't matter what you can do to Spacies if they do better or lamer things from neutral before you can. Like Wario can do ridiculously nasty things to Falco, but absolutely crumbles up close and has a hard time with lasers. Being able to Uthrow CG into Waft might make it look 50/50 or better, but then what if Falco camps better or is more aware of his options/my characters limits? I already have a general idea, deeply rooted and instilled from the Melee days, to try and Uthrow CG or quick edge guard the Spacie, where as my buddy may not know exactly what the **** Wario is really gonna be able to do or what his BnB combos are on my character.
As for your side notes, those would make sense IF the MU's from Melee were in those characters favor. I specifically related how Spacies did against those characters in Melee, and although it was not an in depth MU discussion for each character I briefly stated that the buffs or changes those characters got probably aren't enough to shift the MU. Ness lost to them in Melee, so what sense would your statement make? They can't be at a loss vs Ness unless he was buffed hugely or unless he was winning in Melee. Neither was the case. This isn't an example of me crafting false MU's or stating what I want to hear, to reinforce it to myself. If a character lost to them in Melee, then obviously you look to see if they got buffed to a point that things have changed. Which is easy, because the Spacie side has not changed (much), so you only have 1 character to analyze from the buff side. If I'm underrating the buffs or not fully understanding them at this time, then that is what you should call into question, instead of whether I'm just crafting things up to support my side with little regard to what the actual MU may be. I COULD go in depth about Ness or Pika or Luigi's options and explain in many words why I feel that way, but it would be a bit disheartening if the response would be "Well you don't know for sure, meta isn't fleshed out. Who knows, QAC is like the son of Jesus amazing things are in the future etc." I don't have a crystal ball, but the purpose of making progress and trying to understand the game does get hampered if you strongly adhere to a philosophy of basically "The only thing I am certain of, is that I know nothing".
The thing about gimmicks though is that people are using them (and possible future applications) as a backbone for actual viability. Pikachu's QAC AS a solid offensive option does not seem likely and people are not proving it to be anything more than a gimmick. Yet, there are lists out there that specifically say "I think Pika is/can be this high because we haven't explored his QAC fully". Being unexplored and not fully fleshed out, is not a free card to viability lol. Sometimes, having variety does not help a character, and there have been some ridiculous "future theory's" based on those gimmicks or variable tools. All the cool stuff Lucas can do, half of it maybe not even that great. "But but! Options! Variety! Surprise!" etc.Gimmicks don't affect actual viability, but they usually tend to artificially inflate a character a bit. Kinda like false hope. Not just in analysis, but in results too. Especially early on, it would not be a surprise for a gimmick/character to get wins or for counters/holes to not be as developed. And with that said, that's another reason why I have more faith that Fox Falco are still at the top, because the line between Bowser actually being top 5 (results certainly prove that), and Bowser being carried through this part of the metagame due to a lack of knowledge or experience on how to counter him, that line is not very clear right now. For the established Melee characters, I think it's harder to argue that they will solidly be toppled than it is to argue any of the new/buffed characters to suddenly lose their luster.
Then you have non gimmicks or situations where people just get caught off guard or lacking in experience, and those moments go on to be used as the basis for viability and MU spreads. I would *like* to hope that the majority of incidents are MU inexperience and non gimmicks prevailing instead of some janky cheese mode that has flaws people aren't abusing yet. And on the note of lesser characters, I think that honestly what will happen is that people will truly explore the solid options, that those will fail to be truly good enough, and that further gimmicks will be explored at that point to try and get an edge on the player at least. I don't think TL or Luigi players for example are actually trying to BS their way against Marth and Sheik and Spacies at this point. But as time goes on and things don't improve, I definitely can imagine the "janky" stuff coming into play as the last possible shot.
Who would be someone paying attention though? Like what would you define that as? Again, when I say the community at large, I did not mean anyone with a voice. I primarily mean quality tournament players. Now fine, say that literally the entire mass public is dumb and we are playing the game in such a wrong way that even the pros and top players are getting wrong. Meanwhile the gang of 5 in xyz city is getting it right. We have opportunities for people to go to tournaments and prove themselves/what they think. If they can't go or can't support it themselves in tournament, you would expect to see some indication of what they are talking about from other competent people in tournament. The odds of a master DK player in the most remote area of North Dakota, doing it completely right, and Strong Bad + friends have it totally wrong, is extraordinarily low.
With all of that said, let's say that guy in North Dakota goes and proves himself. With your logic, I could argue that he is part of the mass that is getting it wrong, and that there's actually a group of people in South Brazil that are masters of the game and that we should worship their knowledge. You can literally shift the focus from any person doing well currently, who is contributing to the game/meta, and say "Who knows, stuff may be different in the future and anyone with a controller can shape it!". Like, it's inspirational to the random guy, but it also defeats the idea of trying to analyze anything in the present.
So TL:DR
You can make the argument or point that we are currently ignorant of the actual meta and actual viability, and that we will see our errors in the future. That's perfectly fine to make and it's an argument I respect. But, in the same paragraph, you cannot also say "Btw, Luigi should be higher guys, you are silly and doing it wrong and nobody knows the future BUT ME!". You can't offer serious opinions of characters and viability, if the crux of your argument or message is so strongly entrenched in the idea that "We know nothing". We don't know the future or how to play very effectively, but yet you know why we're wrong on Pika and Luigi and xyz? It's a bit hypocritical and undermines your original message imo. You can be the guy that inspires people to explore the game and to challenge the herd. But don't toss in opinions after that. Explore + opinion is fine, "Everyone sucks" + opinion is a no no.
SpiderMad
Smash Master
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 4,968
I'm still doing Dota 1, and most ppl never had Dotakeys+Warkeys: where I have 3 items trigger off of mouse wheel up, mouse wheel down, and space. And Auto spells like Fire arrows I can turn off and on by pressing Alt. And I need to be able to use control groups where I have Hero on 2 Courier on 1 and Fortify on 3. Can Dota 2 do all of that?
standardtoaster
Tubacabra
Yung Mei
Where all da hot anime moms at
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,341
does anyone know if NCR is gonna have a stream for melee? i just realized that NCR is this weekend, and im iffy on streaming with shadic if its happening, im betting we probably wont have as many viewers as usual (10-20) if thats happening. im more then likely gonna stream, then if we dont get enough viewers, just shut it down
Juushichi
sugoi ~ sugoi ~
Pools are not being streamed (apparently), Top-8 is being streamed by iplaywinner.
We don't even get the sp00ky treatment. ****.
I'm not sure about mouse wheel rotations as items, so you might have complications there.
Otherwise, you can do Toggles with Alt (that's what it's auto-set to actually) and those control groups will work perfectly fine, as well as items with Space.
Never heard of mouse-wheel up/down as keys, that's kind of cool. I might test that in curiosity and get back to you.
Also, would you like a beta-key? There are many to give.
Good stuff, you basically reconfirmed a lot of what I posted using other words and examples. Good to see.
I'll comment on some stuff, but you put most of it well and is accurately in line with what I stated, so thanks there.
This is the stuff I don't understand. Examined closely, Pikachu would be... worse than Melee? Better, but overall the rest of the Melee cast improve 'more' than Pika?
If you're doing the whole 'take what we have' into consideration, wouldn't that be 'what he was capable of in Melee' and 'to-date PM results?'
I don't see how this could make Pika 'fall' when you take into account those 'play-charts' have fewer Pika-players than anything else, and he was already behind in terms of development and possible expression of how good/bad he might be, and it's not like he was horrible 'to begin with' in Melee.
This is that short-sighted stuff. If you actually believe Pika is bad, with the given results, then the data isn't skewed, but the interpretation of it is. Because the conclusion doesn't make sense when you match it up with the same 'criteria' as the other characters.
Hope that made sense of it.
It for sure can sound anti-establishment if you interpret it that way. Don't, though, as it really isn't. You just said the exact same thing in a blanket statement too.
I think this might be where you seem to think this is negative. There is NOTHING WRONG with this. As you say (as we all know), we're human and are blind to a lot of what we do. There's is nothing wrong with this at all, it's natural, it's what we have to work with. Not just in Smash, in all aspects of life.
Simple, and you get it, so I won't go into more detail.
Just, don't take it as a negative thing... I actually don't know where that came from. This is GOOD. lol
I like that your arguing from the spacies perspective. People know that Falco can lame them out/Fox can spike them, and they've learned how to get around it. People still know how to lame people out as Falco/shine them as Fox.
It's likely that Lucas can do that, but that's simply that gimmick-abuse. If it's something that 'shouldn't' work, then the Lucas is just harming himself long-term. If it's something that 'should' work, then the meta-game is properly developing. Each are natural and necessary steps, and shouldn't be condemned. The same goes for Falco on Lucas, he can get that easy 50% too, but the depth and dynamics have to develop still.
Both ways. Though, note, I never argued against the spacies, and won't. The side you're not arguing for is the side of the pendulum that is missed when people argue the spacies dominate still. No consideration for the other side. lol
50/50 due to a CG into Waft?
You mentioned the neutral game (kind of) and that's where all 'match-up ratios' should really be considered. He can't CG > Waft if he can't even get a grab.
This kind of character-specific analysis I'm leaving out, as that is the stuff that truly is too complex and (accurately) lacking to bother discussing in text. Though the process of 0-deathing spacies is a big part of the match-ups (as it is in any 1v1 match-up), the neutral game comes first. The process Marth goes through to get a grab, with the tools in that position, mean a lot more than the kill itself. This goes for everyone from Wario to whoever, even against spacies.
But no need to discuss that, you get it I'm sure.
Good, depth in MU discussion is pointless unless purposefully doing it for a reason.
Although, to say he didn't get any improving changes... I know what you mean, I'm sure, but to say that so bluntly is leaning in that short-sighted direction, so be careful there! hehe
Exactly, you understood my post. :D
Maybe you didn't understand all of it, haha. If you read the post, you should understand what the response would be, and realize your post is nearly 100% confirming the points and in line with it. Good stuff.
Exactly. You got/get it.
It's not complicated, but nice to see someone else articulate it too.
Melee characters will not likely crash into the abyss, and they won't... but... what happened to that Pika from the first point? lol
Exactly. I think it was late summer/early fall that I read multiple times, players commenting that they knew they won due to this 'newness' nature. Hylian (a Link player) said it was a big factor in why he beat a solid Peach player, for example. It popped up on the forums about a dozen times in the course of a few months.
Everyone knows what's up, to some extent, and we're getting it.
I love people. <3
I'm going to erase the part of the quote where you call people 'dumb' and 'wrong' because I don't like that. HMPF lol
Nobody is doing it wrong, and nobody is paying no attention at all. All I advocate (and the way I define it, I suppose) is that giving attention to certain things over others is more beneficial when developing with the game.
Here's a way of putting it, that might make it clearer.
When you do something, what is it that influenced you to do it? Did you do it because you've done it a lot and conditioned yourself to do it? Did you do it because you because you understand it and it makes sense, so seems like the right thing to do? Did you do it consciously because you felt it was proper? Did you do it and notice you did it, but don't think it was the best thing to do?
Don't look at what you're doing, look at WHY you're doing it.
If you paused the game, mid SH-Fair, or whatever, could you actually confirm with yourself, and tell yourself... "Yes, this is what I wanted to do and want I want to be doing!"?
Very rarely is that given any attention, and that's where all the 'dumb and wrong' as you put it, comes into play. People blindly following/falling into something, abusing things that will inevitably be un-abusable, etc.
Awareness is different than focus, so how would you define a focused person? In 1v1, focus takes place a lot more. Single target sharp-mindedness. In 2v2, awareness takes place a lot more. The focus on a combo or interaction and technical precision is replaced with awareness of a greater stream of happenings and predicting of flow, rather than single in the moment flow, it's where flow is going in this moment.
Hopefully that makes sense in writing. haha
Wrong and Worship in the same sentence, as interpreted from one of my posts about growth and learning from more sources than the immediately tangible... ew man. LOL
Trying to analyze things in the present is good, but doing it in a proper way involves a lot more than statistics. Results, long-passing events, and the understandings developed through that, is a very small piece of the puzzle.
Just the fact that people come to different conclusions from that stuff is a sign that there's a piece/method/ideal form of analysis missing. What may that be?
Good, it's not really something that can be disagreed with anyway.
I only said that was interesting, and it is, so it seems you've misinterpreted my point wherever you got that.
It's interesting as well, that in the same paragraph of 'we can't offer serious opinions about viability if xyz' is following a post about 'we can offer serious opinions about xyz'
Your point is clear, but the hypocritical analysis is littered and obvious how conclusions are come to, when comparing the way Fox/Pika are analyzed individually.
There's stigma there, and it's essentially unavoidable, but it's not at a loss. Awareness put given to the right place will absolve this.
With that, to say Fox is top because of this, and Pika is bottom because of this, are both ignorant, if your argument is what you've just argued. Both sides of the coin, that's all I'm advocating for.
If this needs more clarity, let me know, but you've had enough comprehension to make sense of things so you should be good. Hopefully others get it too.
Give attention to different things. Change where the attention is given, and your play itself will change.
It's not complicated, not hard to understand, not foreign, and that's literally all there is to it. No need to analyze it further.
Here's a tid-bit too.
To improve means to become different towards what is better.
To become different means to change.
Therefore, changing is literally the only way anything gets better, in any way, ever.
If someone is looking to improve the meta-game/individually, what would the benefit from changing (improving) the most?
Where their awareness is. That is all.
Hopefully that's clear by now, as leelue said, it's the same message as always in WAY too much writing.
lol
Vashimus
Smash Master
As helpful as you can be Bamsey, the patronizing tone you convey in a lot of your posts really has to stop, and I know I'm not the only one who has called you out on it before. You may not mean to do it, but it comes across that way. It just gets annoying after a while, no offense.
He has a lot of great points for newer players to improve on. I just disagree on certain points, and think that distortions and misinformation are much more rampant in the individualized setting than throughout the community as a whole, although that depends on what kind of players we're talking about to begin with. If you are isolated from the community, and your skill level/group skill level is not high enough, there's a good chance you will base character opinions on whoever is winning, instead of trying to analyze or actually correctly analyzing what is happening. A person may have the intuition to mix things up and explore the character, but still lack the ability to coherently flow or formulate a solid plan for winning and fail to understand whether the new idea is viable or not. With different skill levels, that can also throw off whether something is actually viable or not. Playing with friends (if they are not solid tournament players) will be hard to actually tell if something is good or not.
You can have the same issues with tournament players, but the difference is that the community at large (for tournament goers) have a better environment for growing and exploring the game, for a variety of reasons. The smash community will be bigger than your group, will probably have more character diversity, and collectively will have the advantage of spreading information and ideas that 3 guys at home may not know about or see. The biggest thing though, is that even if we accept the idea that the community has it generally wrong, that we will still explore and refine the game at a greater pace than "homegrown" players on their own would have. I mean it takes genius or near genius level ability and focus to truly be able to do it on your own, the kind of ability like M2K sitting for countless hours in Melee making the spreadsheet of character stats. Even THEN, what if the community was helping him throughout the process? Like, there's not a downside of ideas and opinions being proliferated and discussed throughout the community. You will shape the metagame at a quicker and more meaningful pace, to get towards the "real" game.
At the end of the day, you need more people if you want to truly advance the game. The community may get it blatantly wrong sometimes, but having a platform on this grand scale for the game to advance and be discussed, strongly outweighs the disadvantage of people being lazy and adhering only to what they "think" works.
Also for Pika, he improved from Melee. However, there are other characters introduced that are clearly better than him, and some of the buffed characters were close to him in Melee and now may be ahead. Mario and DK were close, and they both may be above him viability wise. He should only be higher up on people's lists if they can prove useful applications of QAC for offense. Otherwise, he should not be that high and in the grand scale of things, his viability in this game may be slimmer because of newer/better threats. For the majority of his MU's, the only changes that would seem to matter would be the new Bair, and whether or not you can muster something useful from QAC. MAYBE the improved Upb? Like, Pikachu did not get a new universal tool for approaching or for comboing in general. No massive thing was changed for him.
TL:DR
You usually need competent partners to gain a certain level of ability to see what's truly wrong with what you are doing. Having that right off the bat without a community or help from others is pretty hard. Being able to effectively analyze yourself and improve without years of experience or solid gameplay logged in with opponents, is even rarer.
You can have the same issues with tournament players, but the difference is that the community at large (for tournament goers) have a better environment for growing and exploring the game, for a variety of reasons. The smash community will be bigger than your group, will probably have more character diversity, and collectively will have the advantage of spreading information and ideas that 3 guys at home may not know about or see. The biggest thing though, is that even if we accept the idea that the community has it generally wrong, that we will still explore and refine the game at a greater pace than "homegrown" players on their own would have. I mean it takes genius or near genius level ability and focus to truly be able to do it on your own, the kind of ability like M2K sitting for countless hours in Melee making the spreadsheet of character stats. Even THEN, what if the community was helping him throughout the process? Like, there's not a downside of ideas and opinions being proliferated and discussed throughout the community. You will shape the metagame at a quicker and more meaningful pace, to get towards the "real" game.
At the end of the day, you need more people if you want to truly advance the game. The community may get it blatantly wrong sometimes, but having a platform on this grand scale for the game to advance and be discussed, strongly outweighs the disadvantage of people being lazy and adhering only to what they "think" works.
Also for Pika, he improved from Melee. However, there are other characters introduced that are clearly better than him, and some of the buffed characters were close to him in Melee and now may be ahead. Mario and DK were close, and they both may be above him viability wise. He should only be higher up on people's lists if they can prove useful applications of QAC for offense. Otherwise, he should not be that high and in the grand scale of things, his viability in this game may be slimmer because of newer/better threats. For the majority of his MU's, the only changes that would seem to matter would be the new Bair, and whether or not you can muster something useful from QAC. MAYBE the improved Upb? Like, Pikachu did not get a new universal tool for approaching or for comboing in general. No massive thing was changed for him.
TL:DR
You usually need competent partners to gain a certain level of ability to see what's truly wrong with what you are doing. Having that right off the bat without a community or help from others is pretty hard. Being able to effectively analyze yourself and improve without years of experience or solid gameplay logged in with opponents, is even rarer.
Spot on.The finer details don't need explaining beyond that really.
Though I don't like the way you describe things as right and wrong. This for example, again.
If something isn't accurate, it's understandable and expected. We all know it's not possible to have the knowledge-base to know it all accurately, basically ever (really), but knowing that's the case, if something is 'wrong' at the moment, that's not to be shunned. I wouldn't call it 'wrong' so much as a necessary step through ignorance.
It's always interesting.
Those kinds of analysis of characters (referring to Pika here) are where things get easily skewed. It's going to take the emergence of play to 'see' how good Pika is, but it doesn't HAVE to. The greatest 'buff' to Pika is the fact that he's non-punishable on recovery with little lag/no lag from that whole 'QAC' thing. Nothing to do with the offense in brings directly, but the fact that he can do a lot more than he could in Melee off-stage/leading off-stage because there's no punishment or risk factor to it.
This is the same for Falcon. Side-B opens of his leeway for doing things he wouldn't be able to do otherwise. Not recovery, but overall mobility around the ledge, which both of these characters thrive off of. No universal tool for approaching/comboing in general? I wouldn't give Falcon a new tool in the form of a different aerial/thing like that, but instead a way of maneuvering better in a niche functional situation. That's what Pika got (the Bair is nice too hehe)
This type of stuff doesn't 'need' to emerge to be seen, but it's the kind of thing that people miss while looking for very concrete things (offensive combos with tools/etc) instead.
At the same time, I don't really care about what people think about characters/tiers since they don't actually change anything, as nobody really does I'm sure (aside from the practical sense of developing the game itself, I should add), but it provides a wonderful beacon to bring up the topics I do care about.
2 small notes.
Ignorance is a good thing, the way people take this as condescending/insulting is reasonable, but it's really not logical. Ignorance is the easiest thing to overcome in the world. <3 it.
Otherwise, this points aren't only for newer players. It's a pretty universal concept, and I've spent more hours coaching tournament-winning players than I have newbies. This isn't for new or old, good or bad, smash or other. It's all of it. Awareness isn't exclusive to anything. haha
Communities are the best. I'd love to have a collection of the 'essay's' I've posted on those, as it's a beautiful topic.
Vashimus, I'd like to do a better job of that. Still new to public forum stuff, and it's a lot different than in-person discussion, and probably more different than private-message discussion. Both of which I'm accustomed to.
Often I think it's vocabulary, and posting too much at once, but is there anything in particular you can comment on my posting? I'd like to help, but not hurt, so any thoughts you have that can help me are much appreciated. That goes for everyone.
Edit/PS: Thanks for speaking up about it (and others), the more communication the better. After all, what's the point of a community if it doesn't communicate about the communication that's taking place?
Though I don't like the way you describe things as right and wrong. This for example, again.
If something isn't accurate, it's understandable and expected. We all know it's not possible to have the knowledge-base to know it all accurately, basically ever (really), but knowing that's the case, if something is 'wrong' at the moment, that's not to be shunned. I wouldn't call it 'wrong' so much as a necessary step through ignorance.
It's always interesting.
Those kinds of analysis of characters (referring to Pika here) are where things get easily skewed. It's going to take the emergence of play to 'see' how good Pika is, but it doesn't HAVE to. The greatest 'buff' to Pika is the fact that he's non-punishable on recovery with little lag/no lag from that whole 'QAC' thing. Nothing to do with the offense in brings directly, but the fact that he can do a lot more than he could in Melee off-stage/leading off-stage because there's no punishment or risk factor to it.
This is the same for Falcon. Side-B opens of his leeway for doing things he wouldn't be able to do otherwise. Not recovery, but overall mobility around the ledge, which both of these characters thrive off of. No universal tool for approaching/comboing in general? I wouldn't give Falcon a new tool in the form of a different aerial/thing like that, but instead a way of maneuvering better in a niche functional situation. That's what Pika got (the Bair is nice too hehe)
This type of stuff doesn't 'need' to emerge to be seen, but it's the kind of thing that people miss while looking for very concrete things (offensive combos with tools/etc) instead.
At the same time, I don't really care about what people think about characters/tiers since they don't actually change anything, as nobody really does I'm sure (aside from the practical sense of developing the game itself, I should add), but it provides a wonderful beacon to bring up the topics I do care about.
2 small notes.
Ignorance is a good thing, the way people take this as condescending/insulting is reasonable, but it's really not logical. Ignorance is the easiest thing to overcome in the world. <3 it.
Otherwise, this points aren't only for newer players. It's a pretty universal concept, and I've spent more hours coaching tournament-winning players than I have newbies. This isn't for new or old, good or bad, smash or other. It's all of it. Awareness isn't exclusive to anything. haha
Communities are the best. I'd love to have a collection of the 'essay's' I've posted on those, as it's a beautiful topic.
Vashimus, I'd like to do a better job of that. Still new to public forum stuff, and it's a lot different than in-person discussion, and probably more different than private-message discussion. Both of which I'm accustomed to.
Often I think it's vocabulary, and posting too much at once, but is there anything in particular you can comment on my posting? I'd like to help, but not hurt, so any thoughts you have that can help me are much appreciated. That goes for everyone.
Edit/PS: Thanks for speaking up about it (and others), the more communication the better. After all, what's the point of a community if it doesn't communicate about the communication that's taking place?
cannedbread
Smash Lord
guys please
Bryonato
Green Hat
Jesus Christ
MaxThunder
PM Support
so... much... text...
there should be like... an essay thread or something...
also reverse hit bair to grab with marth looks awezome=)...
there should be like... an essay thread or something...
also reverse hit bair to grab with marth looks awezome=)...
- Status