Smash Charge Canceling

[metaXzero]

Falco500. How do know for sure this would distort balance? A canceled charged Smash is an attack that doesn't come out. If you are constantly canceling your Smashes, you are not landing any Smashes and becoming predicatable.

Everytime I view this idea in my head, it would make Smashes like a slimmed down version of Focus Attacks in SF4. Only things that seperate the 2 are how Focus Attacks can actually take one hit without being interruptted and how Focus Attacks can become unblockable, where Smash attacks can be interrupted during the charging frames and will never break full shields . And Focus Attacks didn't become spammable.

Alas, we can't know how effective Smash cancel would be unless someone makes a code.

 

[Kitamerby]

Charged smashes already see enough use as a timed delay and a spacing mechanic. Many Fsmashes for example, draw your body backwards before being unleashed. Peach's Usmash puts you into a crouch of sorts. Aside from that, they're also used for punishing predictable pathing or indecisive players.

My immediate gut feeling is this opening another can of worms with DACUS. I don't remember off the top of my head if any other smash attacks hit before the charge frame occurs, but Snake's Usmash does...

My other feeling is still that sloppy move usage should not be promoted. Smash charge canceling will only put you at an advantage because they'll already be on the defensive trying to get around your attack. Even if they're in a spot where they can outprioritize you completely regardless of whether you cancel or not, then that's just you being sloppy. IMO... just use your smashes more shrewdly and be satisfied.

Ness's Usmash and Dsmash hit before and during the charge iirc. (Yoyo has a hitbox)

Anyways, yeah, I agree with Ryoko completely. Another thing to consider is the fact that smashes can be released at any time during the charge. iirc, in Street Fighter, they have to wait for a full charge, while in Smash, you can release them at any time you want. Charged smashes are already situationally useful in vBrawl due to landing lag and mindgames. (Sonic players commonly use strategies like this) Charged smashes are very-high-risk-very-high-reward. I don't think we should turn them into no-risk-very-high-reward.

Also, yeah, I like predicting a whiffed charge and then punishing their lag. This is just rewarding sloppy play. <<

Also, now that I think about it, canceling would negate the entire idea of smash-charge vulnerability, wouldn't it? But this is probably minor.

 

[metaXzero]

Dang. I forgot about Ness' Yoyo. :/

No. Focus Attacks can be released at any time during charging. You don't have to charge fully or even at all (but uncharged or minimally charged Focus Attacks can be blocked). Besides Focus Attacks having more going for them then cancel-able Smash attacks (1 hit armor throughout the entire thing, able to break blocks when charged enough) they are almost the same.

As long as Smash canceling isn't by shielding. If the Smash is still released, it's still punishable.

 

[Sterowent]

a lot of DACUS doesn't apply since many characters have terrible DACUS.

same for pivot smashes, especially for characters with lots of friction.

i still like my idea. your next smash after a canceled charge smash is weaker somehow.
opening up on that, this could be progressive, so every time it's done the next smash gets even weaker.

think of the combo possibilities! or think of how punishable this could be. also consider that slashy's original idea set Specific times you could cancel the smash rather than Anytime.

this doesn't seem as terrible as a lot of this thread makes it out to be, especially with all these limiters.

 

[Slashy]

I also suggested making it trip if we don't go with the specific frame idea.

 

[Rocann]

In Street Fighter, you don't have to wait for a full charge. You can also cancel at any time. I am still against this idea for all the reasons Ryoko has gone over.

 

[Arkaether]

metaXzero, I don't think you realize something. Allowing charge cancel smashes leads into no-risk/high-reward situations. If the opponent doesn't see it, you get the advantage. If the opponent does see it, you cancel and you're both on neutral ground. You realize there is no disadvantage to using them whatsoever? You either end up neutral or advantaged. No-risk/high-reward situations are counterproductive to any sort of competition. If you can illustrate a way in which canceling a smash wouldn't end up in that sort of situation (like I suggested, 10-15 frames of lag), then I could see it working. Otherwise, it's pointless.

 

[metaXzero]

metaXzero, I don't think you realize something. Allowing charge cancel smashes leads into no-risk/high-reward situations. If the opponent doesn't see it, you get the advantage. If the opponent does see it, you cancel and you're both on neutral ground. You realize there is no disadvantage to using them whatsoever? You either end up neutral or advantaged. No-risk/high-reward situations are counterproductive to any sort of competition. If you can illustrate a way in which canceling a smash wouldn't end up in that sort of situation (like I suggested, 10-15 frames of lag), then I could see it working. Otherwise, it's pointless.

Smash cancel wouldn't suddenly replace aerial approaches, or grounded approaches with crouch cancel. It'd be an option, but not some do it or lose thing.

Of course we don't want the ability to cancel a Smash and be able to do anything immediately afterwards (like Smash cancel->shield->grab). Yeah some lag animation that would help.

 

[Sterowent]

blah, ignoring the ability to add limiters on moves.

if you see an obvious problem with a technique, propose a solution instead of assuming it's unsalvageable.
but make sure they're interesting. after all, if it's just easy to punish, then what's the point of the charge cancel.

 

[Arkaether]

There isn't. And it's not my job to salvage a technique that I see as doomed; it's your job. And unless you can think of a good solution, it's not going to get anywhere.

 

[metaXzero]

SF4 cancels the Focus Attack with a dash. Maybe give this Smash cancel a special dash in whatever direction, but make it unable to dash attack, shield or any attack until it ends.

This whole discussion won't get anywhere unless we ever get some form of code. I think hackers who would do this like Phantom Wings are taking a break from it all right now though...

 

[nightSN]

how about making the shield smaller and more vulnerable if you cancel? this could reduce spamming?

 

[CyberGlitch]

Just adding a proper number of frames for lag should reduce spamming. It's that simple, and it'd benefit characters with more useless smashes (because of slowness) more than those smashes that quickly come out and have little lag. Character balance?

 

[Qzzy]

How about we do this to certain attacks, like Ganon's punch? Hell, it be nice if you could store it like DK.

 

[CyberGlitch]

Storing would be overpowered. Ganon's punch is not a Smash attack and cannot be charged.

 

[Slashy]

What about just allowing certain frames in which you can cancel? So you can not cancel on whim?

 

[Sterowent]

There isn't. And it's not my job to salvage a technique that I see as doomed; it's your job. And unless you can think of a good solution, it's not going to get anywhere.

i already made suggestions.

they've just been...well, ignored, i guess.

 

[Slashy]

We can weaken the shield everytime the technique is used, making it punishable.

We can also do the frame idea along with this.

 

[Arkaether]

If they've been ignored, it means they're not good enough. Honestly, though, even though I was against it at first, I'm starting to support the idea given a good enough vulnerability. It seems like it'd be quite interesting.

 

[GenoGar]

I think Lucario would reap the most of the benefits of a canceled smash.

If a Lucario studders or pivots a f-smash and starts charging... you either...

a) step back and allow it to finish
b) jump over it and intercept it
c) run in and shield/ pshield
d) projectile spam him

for A: If you step/roll/dash backwards, he successfully spaced himself by simply throwing that thing out. He puts pressure on you while retaining full advantage and nearly 0 draw backs due to the duration and spacing of this move supplemented with the pivot/studder. There is such little ending lag that there's no way to follow up on it. If he wanted to, he could cancel it and already put himself in a decent position since he just spaced himself for AS spam. Imma charge my... oh you retreating? I guess I'll stop then.

for B: If a Lucario even sees that jump, he can cancel his smash immediately. Given the range of this move, I would say Lucario would have enough time to simply cancel it and shield grab whatever you have approaching with in the air.

for C: Unless you power shield it, the increased hit stun will save Lucario in almost all cases.

for D: You don't have super human reflexes, so the chances are you'll get a shot in when Lucario is around 1/3 charged. If the distance is too far between you and Lucario, he can simply cancel his smash and shield.


So what do you do? If Lucario is at a reasonable distance away and he starts charging his smash, what can you do? If you don't have a projectile, there isn't much you can do since Lucario can simply cancel it if he sees any threat above the hitbox. If you wait for it to end, there's so little lag afterwards that you gained nothing and Lucario is continuing to pressure you to advance.

So should I have to rely on power shielding to beat this every single time?



The future of Lucario players everywhere is... pivot/studder step charge f-smash and watch your opponent's reaction. When there's no decay, no stale move negation, no risk in the end.... you get a viable/high priority/disjointed/near lagless/high duration kill move that can be put away.


I guess the gist of this is... smash canceling eliminates key weaknesses of smashes and makes it too good of a move not to abuse.

-

I like the cancel -> auto-tripping idea, it ends faster than the smash and you get invincibility frames, but doesn't allow you to totally dominate defensively.

 

[metaXzero]

GenoGar. Are you actually saying that Lucario will be God Tier with Smash canceling? No matter how I look at this, I can't see this suddenly being broken or replacing appraches. But we'll have to see in practice.

You do know no one wants a Smash cancel that can immediately go into anything (especially a shield). Their will be some lag (in some form). Provided this code is ever made...

 

[GenoGar]

Some of posts hinted that it was shield-canceled... but yeah, that'd be too broken as previous posters have stated. I just mapped out a situation.



I'd like for this to work if it had a cancel viable for competitive play. (like auto tripping)

 

[CyberGlitch]

It'd either be set to cancel with the shield button (which is why we may have implied shield canceling) or the jump button. This doesn't mean it immediately goes into a shield or jump, it just cancels the attack and gives a little lag before you can do anything else.

 

[V-K]

I don´t see how that could be broken.
I would really like to have smash charge canceling in the game.

 

[Slashy]

I was saying that you could shield cancel it, but only during certain frames, and your shield is reduced to almost nothing every time you do it, reducing spamming.

 

[Sterowent]

If they've been ignored, it means they're not good enough. Honestly, though, even though I was against it at first, I'm starting to support the idea given a good enough vulnerability. It seems like it'd be quite interesting.

Or too unusual. As the author, of course there's biased. but given some addressing, ideas could at least be derived from them...

I'm not ready to give up on my suggestions here.
Consider that if you made this decay Smashes as a whole whenever it's used. At that point, your opponent has one less option to use against you, so the point of canceling your smashes would have a nasty drawback for the cost of saving you from some punishment.

also consider that if it were canceled enough, a smash move would be usable to initiate a combo. if that were the case, it wouldn't be so much a punishment as a viable tactic, but only at low percents and if the smash had the cooldown you'd hope it would.

If this idea doesn't sit well, at least consider the idea of making Charged smashes better by giving them nigh instant hitboxes after, say, 1/3 charged and past that.
Charged smashes are far from in use and require prediction that's certainly best used elsewhere, such as in starting combos. This would put them in a better position to punish but would keep you stationary. You'd probably see more charged DACUS as well.
If need be, give these smashes more winddown by some balanced amount of frames.

In every idea, though, there could as well be a limit to how many times you can cancel before canceling again.
A decent limiter might be to make the cancel usable again only after connecting a smash.

 

[5ive]

ignore post.

 

[Slashy]

Yeah, maybe we can limit it to a number of times per stock.

 

[crazycrackers]

I'd be fine with canceling with shield as long as doing so would deteriorate your shield heavily. This opens risk for shieldbreaks and prevents people from over-abusing this. It would have high reward (you get to cancel your smash) but also would come at a cost (your shield gets hit with something hard basically)

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

What about just forcing a techroll if you hit R or L during a smash charge?

Still don't like the idea though. The entire point of a smash charge is to put you in a vulnerable position in exchange for a more powerful attack.

 

[crazycrackers]

What about just forcing a techroll if you hit R or L during a smash charge?

Still don't like the idea though. The entire point of a smash charge is to put you in a vulnerable position in exchange for a more powerful attack.

I don't really like the idea either actually. It, in a way, defeats the purpose of charging smashes.

 

[metaXzero]

@Tatsuman
And by canceling that Smash, you sacrifice that strong attack in favor of moving out of it. It balances itself out and adds depth (if the SC is implemented properly).

@crazycrackers. How does it defeat the purpose of charging Smashes? You can't it if you release it.

 

[crazycrackers]

@Tatsuman
And by canceling that Smash, you sacrifice that strong attack in favor of moving out of it. It balances itself out and adds depth (if the SC is implemented properly).

@crazycrackers. How does it defeat the purpose of charging Smashes? You can't it if you release it.

Sorry I phrased that terribly. I basically was saying it removes the risk/reward factor. I'm not completely against it but it would need a good amount of testing for sure.

 

[Slashy]

You lose the reward (the powerful smash), while getting out of the risk. If we give lots of shield damage, (like I have said before) it will be a punishment for trying to remove risk.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

And by canceling that Smash, you sacrifice that strong attack in favor of moving out of it. It balances itself out and adds depth (if the SC is implemented properly).

It really doesn't. You're not left open. So you get a powerful attack with the charge and you aren't nearly as vulnerable, and no commitment. It'd also cut a huge amount of lag from some smashes.
No balance here, you're just adding an escape.

Shield damage just seems like a bad idea. It'd still be unpunishable.

 

[Wingflier]

BRAWL+. Try it, and you'll never want to go back.

God, Amen to this. Though I even know people who tried it and didn't like it!

What's even worse is people that regularly switch between the two. I am not sure whether to deep admiration or deep horror for these people. I could never go back.

Wing

 

[Rhubarbo]

No, it's not necessary

/thread

 

[Numbuh 214]

*sigh* Yet another misunderstood topic.

The TC was trying to make us think about how smash canceling could be balanced.

I personally think a small bit of lag would be nice; maybe tripping if it didn't look and sound silly tripping in place.

 

[CyberGlitch]

It'd also cut a huge amount of lag from some smashes.

Either you're misunderstanding what we're proposing (only canceling during the charge), or I'm misunderstanding you, Tatsuman.

As for the "it's not necessary" comment, neither is shield jumping, but it's still there to make shields a bit more useful. This could add depth to the game, and any addition to the game that adds depth should be deeply considered.

People have already mentioned that they'd like a new "AT" added, to add just a bit more depth to Brawl. Dash Canceling and dash dancing partially fulfill this role. Smash canceling might complete it.

 

[Dai Tian]

I actually wouldn't mind this idea if that reduced shield were to be implemented with it. If you cancel a smash attack you'd be left with a heavily reduced shield until it recovers naturally, with further shield reduction if spammed. Something like that could be tested out at least.