The Brawlplusery - Brawl+ Codeset - Updated 3rd April

[ph00tbag]

@ph00tbag and ShortFuse: if you come into a Brawl+ thread, you can expect to find some level of bias for it and against vBrawl. Sorry. However, as someone said, Brawl+ has it's course pretty well chartered, so unless you all have radically new ideas, there's little point in starting even a civilized debate about it, let alone a flame war.

Apparently, the idea that Brawl is a decent game is pretty radical around here, so I'll keep saying it. And I think there's a lot of point in starting a civilized debate about it, because I think this codeset's charted course has a goal that is undesirable to me, and I'm evidently not alone, so I don't think I'm all that crazy for thinking that way.

I feel like most of the people in this thread are starting from the patently false assumption that Brawl is entirely a bad game, so if they can make even the weakest argument against some aspect, they will remove it, whether that aspect is really problematic or not, and aside from ShortFuse and me, no one has really tried to make a counterargument, it seems. This just tells me that no one in here is really concerned about analyzing what actually works in Brawl, whether they know what works or not.

I love your black and white statments.

@Orca "...your opinion is wrong."
@me "...it's not apt at all."

I guess my entire analogy is not apt at all because you said so, huh?

Read it again. Distill it down. "Brawl+ is vBrawl with more options." That's not even an opinion, it's a fact, and you're over here telling me I'm ignorant?

I make black and white statements, then I back them up by telling you what you sound like to me. Argue with what I'm presenting. If I'm misunderstanding you, that's not necessarily my fault. I call them as I see them, so it's your duty to yourself to clarify if I misread.

Do you know why I called your analogy not apt? Because you didn't mention Brawl+ at all. You said Brawl was like chess without certain pieces. You made no reference to what a full game of chess actually is, I was lead to believe that you were simply saying that Brawl was in itself a game with none but the most basic options, and like I said, that shows that you are either willfully ignoring the reality of the way people play Brawl, or you don't actually know.

And even now, you still give a problematic analogy. Allow me to give you a better one. With Brawl, we are playing chess, but Brawl+ is Raumschach chess. You've created a slew of new options (removed a few others), and possibly even made a deeper game. Is it better? Who knows?

This goes even further. Believe it or not, there is an investment to make in Brawl+, although it's not financial. I can either forgo purchasing any new games from now on for my Wii, or run the risk of installing Firmware version 3.4. Not everyone will be willing to take that risk. I have one friend who was incredibly excited at the notion of removing tripping, but when I told him about the details of version 3.4, he decided against it. Say what you will about whether it's a legitimate fear; others may not share your optimism. For this reason, some will only have access to Brawl+ through their friends.

And you still haven't touched the enforceability issue.

--------------------------

On the topic of problems with 3.1, I've been getting the black rumble today. It happens if I'm holding down at the end of a match. I'm using a three day old codeset, though, so if any changes have been made since, then it might have already been fixed.

 

[kupo15]

I too got the black rumble with 3.1 yesterday but only once. Then had a hard time rebooting it once then it was fine.

 

[Espy Rose]

I can't really say much besides how much I <3 you guys for doing this.

I mean, when I can pull off things like this, then I'm happy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFJtUMBODuE

lol.
But seriously, keep up the good work. This project is becoming twice as awesome with each passing day.

 

[Phyvo]

<attacking analogies after random analogies were posted>

Could we stop trying to be clever by making analogies and tearing down other people's analogies? If people are trying to make some kind of argument than they can do so. Saying "X is like Y" is not an argument, it's an explanation of the thesis of an argument, and it should remain that way.

Ph00t in particular: if you look at the original post...

Brawl+ throws the Queen, Knight and Bishop back in the mix.

Yeah. Um. He did mention Brawl+ in regards to his analogy. Not that it has any bearing on the truth of anyone's actual argument. It's a bloody analogy.

As for cheaters, they do put Brawl+ at a disadvantage, but I don't think that cheaters are the main threat. If the cheat has to be so small none of the top players notices it, then there can't be any grossly game changing cheats in effect. Moreover, any cheat supporting one character or nerfing another will affect many people, and unless the cheater is *almost* better than everyone else to begin with (*and* better than everyone else with his main) he can't effectively win anything. Not to mention that with people recording tourney vids there should be an good record of what happened by analyzing the vid. A vid which can then be watched by pro smashers all around who could see that something is off.

I'm not saying that cheating won't be an issue, I'm just saying that it's not a big one. Brawl+ has *way* bigger worries right now than cheating, some of which you may be bringing up.

 

[kupo15]

The TO will just use his sd card on all the wiis. Cheating problem solved

 

[Squall_Leonhart]

Hey, I got some questions for people who have played Melee:

1. Do the characters in Brawl+ behave similar to their performence in Melee? I'm talking mostly about C. Falcon, Sheik, Link, Fox and Marth, if not please elaborate if you can.

2. How bad did Snake end with Brawl+?

3. Is there any tier list for Brawl+? or at least would you mind to give your opinions?

Thanks in advance.

 

[shanus]

Expect a Beta 3.2 Release Thursday evening.

HypeHypeHype

Epic beyond belief, etc,etc. /passes out

 

[goodoldganon]

What options that were available in vBrawl aren't available in B+, besides camping without fear of punishment?

EDIT: Sounds good Shanus. I'm playing mad SF4 instead of Brawl but I'll get around to trying it.

 

[ph00tbag]

Yeah. Um. He did mention Brawl+ in regards to his analogy. Not that it has any bearing on the truth of anyone's actual argument. It's a bloody analogy.

With this interpretation, it's an even worse analogy, because it tries to assert that Brawl+ is closer to the core of what the game is about, which is just downright presumptuous. But whatever. It's an analogy after all.

The TO will just use his sd card on all the wiis. Cheating problem solved

Your hypothetical TO has a lot of spare SD cards lying around. Especially given the threat of theft.

 

[cAm8ooo]

You dont have to keep the SD card in the wii. You just load it up, take it out, go to the next wii. After all wiis r loaded the TO can keep his SD card. Easy as that

 

[ph00tbag]

You dont have to keep the SD card in the wii. You just load it up, take it out, go to the next wii. After all wiis r loaded the TO can keep his SD card. Easy as that

Okay, that makes sense.

 

[kupo15]

You dont have to keep the SD card in the wii. You just load it up, take it out, go to the next wii. After all wiis r loaded the TO can keep his SD card. Easy as that

^This

I was trying to tell Foxy that but I guess he didn't do it and asked for others to bring their SD cards

 

[trojanpooh]

So no clues as to what is new in 3.2 eh? Will there be big/exciting changes, or is it just some value tweaking?

 

[B.W.]

Does the SD card let you use it for codes from Wii to Wii?

I know you can't do that with saved files, so I wouldn't know about it being done with codes. I'd imagine it'd work, seeing as how HBC is reading what's on the card for the data entered and not for file transfer and what not.

I may have just answered my own question too.

 

[zxeon]

So no clues as to what is new in 3.2 eh? Will there be big/exciting changes, or is it just some value tweaking?

Expect awesome. Drop by the IRC channel if you want to find out.

 

[BEES]

Except that impurities in the water and air are measurable, whereas priority is not easily quantifiable in the slightest. There is no value that the game reads as "priority." It is not just the game taking a pair of pre-programmed values that are weighed against each other and the higher one wins. It isn't something you can just slap a modifier on. "Priority" is just a result of the way moves interact with each other, which I detailed in my above post. You cannot directly modify priority.

Priority is what determines whether two attacks clang or not. All attacks have to have a quantifiable amount of priority to clang. The exception is grabs. Certain grabs have priority over certain other grabs, but they cannot clang, so the outcome is partially dependent upon the controller port...

There was talk about making a code to fix the controller port priority imbalance. Possibly making same-priority grabs clang off each other, instead of giving it to the first controller.

 

[zxeon]

Priority isn't something that can't be manufactured. If we use invulnerability or super armor frames we can create artificial priority for certain moves.

 

[Shell]

Priority is what determines whether two attacks clang or not. All attacks have to have a quantifiable amount of priority to clang. The exception is grabs. Certain grabs have priority over certain other grabs, but they cannot clang, so the outcome is partially dependent upon the controller port...

There was talk about making a code to fix the controller port priority imbalance. Possibly making same-priority grabs clang off each other, instead of giving it to the first controller.

The clang effect that you're talking about is just a function of damage. However, this fails to encompass the other factors that determine a move's general sense priority, as leafgreen mentioned, such as move speed and disjointedness. Listen to what people are telling you.

Stop trying to make up a quantifiable priority number.

 

[thesage]

The clang effect that you're talking about is just a function of damage. However, this fails to encompass the other factors that determine a move's general sense priority, as leafgreen mentioned, such as move speed and disjointedness. Listen to what people are telling you.

Stop trying to make up a quantifiable priority number.

Damage does not have an effect on priority, it's just that moves that clank with each other tend to do within ten damage of each other, at least, this was true in melee lol.

There are many things that determine what is generally known as priority, but when it comes to when hitboxes actually clank, that does have a quantifiable number (at least in melee...). Priority works weirdly in brawl though. This is the first game in which aerials can clank with certain smash attacks.

 

[ShortFuse]

Go get it, kids!
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=222151

Right now all you can do with it is calculate Grav/Jump values even so, that's a huge life saver.

 

[cAm8ooo]

WOW. That looks great. Good work.

 

[trojanpooh]

One change I really don't like MK's tornado. While I understand that it needed to be nerfed, the method in which is was nerfed changed the attack completely. Rather than removing its vertical raise, why not just cut it in half?

 

[Almas]

Metaknight can still rise during his tornado.

 

[trojanpooh]

But how much? On the first page it says he can barely change his height, and I remember it just slightly rising up when I was testing. Unfortunately I didn't get very long because I stopped due to freezes.

 

[shanus]

But how much? On the first page it says he can barely change his height, and I remember it just slightly rising up when I was testing. Unfortunately I didn't get very long because I stopped due to freezes.

About a full hop height or slightly more, not nearly as much as before, but still very useful.

 

[trojanpooh]

In that case forget what I said until I get a chance to test it out better myself once Beta 3.2 is released. If what you say is true (which I'm sure it is) I likely won't have a problem, but we'll see.

 

[Vilt]

God I need a wii. ; ;

 

[leafgreen386]

Priority is what determines whether two attacks clang or not. All attacks have to have a quantifiable amount of priority to clang. The exception is grabs. Certain grabs have priority over certain other grabs, but they cannot clang, so the outcome is partially dependent upon the controller port...

There was talk about making a code to fix the controller port priority imbalance. Possibly making same-priority grabs clang off each other, instead of giving it to the first controller.

Protip: Read what you're saying before you send it. It makes you look a lot less stupid. Oh, and read other people's posts before you post, too. That also helps you look a lot less stupid.

I said that attacks clanking is a result of damage - if they do within 10% of each other they will clank. However, when it comes to one move going through another move, there are many many more non-quantifiable values that go into determining it. I'm gonna c/p my first post on this, in an attempt to drive it through your thick skull.

What we see as "priority" is just a combination of the effects of range and disjointedness, damage a move does (two ground moves will "clink" if they deal within 10% of each other), and the speed and duration of the move.

You can also throw invincibility onto this list. These are the factors that determine whether a move will go through another one. That is all.

The only quantifiable measures of "priority" in the game are in the determination of whether two attacks will clank (which is a rare occurrence to begin with, considering neither move can be overlapping the opponent's hurtbox prior to the clash; most hitbox/hurtbox interactions will be a result from the qualities mentioned in my quote, and those are in fact what a person is usually referring to when talking about "priority" on moves) and in grab priority, which, as you stated, is determined by controller port, which honestly, is not the same thing (and it would be especially hard to tell you were talking about controller port priority to begin with when you say things like "I think as a side-effect it could fix the controller slot priority problem too"). Controller port priority on grabs comes into effect whenever two players would grab each other on the same frame, which is obviously not a "normal" hitbox/hurtbox interaction (where the attacks would either both go through or both clash). I (and I'm sure plenty of others) would like to get a code that makes it so that instead of one grab going through and the other failing that it initiates a grounded grab break for both players, which would fix this problem. But we're not removing clanking on moves - there's no reason to, and if you wanted to change priority in any other way, then I'm sorry, but that's just not possible.

 

[stingers]

i like some systems other games have, where if you do something on the exact same frame then you enter a little head on battle where whoever mashes a button faster wins

I think it'd apply nicely to grabs.

 

[B.W.]

i like some systems other games have, where if you do something on the exact same frame then you enter a little head on battle where whoever mashes a button faster wins

I think it'd apply nicely to grabs.

Better idea. Two people grab each other. Then bomb-ombs come out of know where like in sudden death mode. Everybody wiiiinns.

Actually this could be a pretty decent idea if possible at all. But the problem really would be the fact that there's no hold animation to delay the grabs. There really wouldn't be any way to make this possible without it looking horrible.. Hell it may not even be possible at all.

 

[thesage]

There are many things that determine what is generally known as priority, but when it comes to when hitboxes actually clank, that does have a quantifiable number (at least in melee...). Priority works weirdly in brawl though. This is the first game in which aerials can clank with certain smash attacks.

I said that attacks clanking is a result of damage - if they do within 10% of each other they will clank. However, when it comes to one move going through another move, there are many many more non-quantifiable values that go into determining it. I'm gonna c/p my first post on this, in an attempt to drive it through your thick skull.

While you were correct for the most part, the 10% damage rule is not true. There is a certain value for the priority of certain moves, but changing them will hardly affect them (unless they are projectiles).

 

[peachfvl]

when would 3.2 be released¿

 

[Almas]

The newest version has just been released.

The website attached to it should be updated. With the need for codes dropping (and the difficulty of creating the remaining needed ones surpassing my own skill), I'm starting my time working on a more official webspace. It'll take some time for me to get up, but hopefully it'll give us a more presentable homepage, and provide a good storage place for some of the community projects in the works.

 

[shanus]

Gogogogo 3.2

Enjoy all

 

[cAm8ooo]

Good work to everyone who worked on 3.2

 

[Jiangjunizzy]

updated the FAQ.

 

[GPDP]

Is there a line missing on the Frame Speed Modifier code? It says 23 lines, but I only count 22, and there's a gap in the second line of that code in the OP.

The code manager also says there's a total of 218 lines, while the OP says it's 220.

 

[shanus]

I removed a line and missed updating it from 23 to 22.

 

[kupo15]

why is the hitlag at 60% now?

 

[spunit262]

why is the hitlag at 60% now?

For Zero Suit Samus.