The Brawlplusery - Brawl+ Codeset - Updated 3rd April

[kupo15]

They work and the player can't get out of them. Same effect, never really found what the big fuss over chaingrabs was.

Chain grabs =/= infinities (ICers)

CGs you have some control over escaping with DI and teching like combos. Infinite, you might as well put down your controller and have a beer why you wait because there is nothing you can do about it. Better yet, there is one thing you can do, unplug their controller.

 

[PanzerOceania]

...just like I said in my previous post, you can get out of grabs just like combos. Button mash or hope for the lucky instant-break out. Just like you can get out of combos. Granted, the dificulty changes based on the combo/grab (if they do many jabs, it is easier to escape, just like if their combo allows teching vs. a guaranteed combo).

the whole concept behind infinites are that if preformed perfectly there are 0 frames of escape time, where as most other moves can't be set up that perfectly, especially if it's arials (which most combos are)

 

[Blank Mauser]

Chain grabs =/= infinities (ICers)

CGs you have some control over escaping with DI and teching like combos. Infinite, you might as well put down your controller and have a beer why you wait because there is nothing you can do about it. Better yet, there is one thing you can do, unplug their controller.

Bah, I usually use that time to think. There aren't always going to be fun speed activate moments in smash.

 

[PanzerOceania]

Bah, I usually use that time to think. There aren't always going to be fun speed activate moments in smash.

the point is you shouldn't have to, we CAN fix it, but as I've said at least 3 times now, if we are going to take that out, something needs to be put in, and so far I haven't seen an IC mains step in with suggestions (I don't main IC so I have no place to suggest what would be a good buff)

 

[Jiangjunizzy]

Do you know what fighting game communities refer to players like you as? Take a gander at David Sirlins book Playing To Win. You'll find out rather quickly.

man, get off your high horse.
some of us have more productive things to do other than READ about the mystifying complexities of competitive gaming. just get out there and kick ***.. seriously, wtf?

since you obviously don't know just how much we can do with brawl+, i'll briefly go over our hopeful goal and overall theme. the theme of brawl+ is to enhance competitive gameplay, but what that really means is that we want make every character viable and fun to play as and even against.

from the tone of your posts it sounds as though you just came from the competitive brawl scene where the theme of that game is to scavenge the barrens of sakurai's kitchen floor for any possible table scraps of competitive strategies or techs that may have been left over so that you could incorporate into the metagame of that already broken drivel of a game.

the idea of 0-death combos is is not an argument of numbers, tactics, or satistics. and by asking for such things, you miss the complete point.

let's think for a moment about why exactly there are tournaments for games. is it because when mom and dad go out of town for a few days you think to yourself, man, "i wish there were 30 oily nerds in my basement playing video games for 12 hours"? or was it specifically designed for random people that don't know each other to gather together to see who can swing their gaming ***** around the most effectively in a display of alpha male dominance? ..or maybe it's because the game is actually fun to play seriously? do you think anyone would play starcraft, dota, street fighter, cod, counter strike or EVEN CHESS competitively if they were boring as ****?

fun is a huge factor competitive gaming. and if you don't see why 0-death inescapable chain grabs aren't fun, then like i said, please don't ever go into game development.

at tourneys, i strongly believe that the audience are a huge factor in determine the success of a game being played competitively. i don't know worth 2 ****s about starcraft, but I can watch a vid of that game and be instantly drawn into the action. its blood pumping and it's fun as hell to watch. almost anyone can mention the legendary ken vs chun li fight, or numerous melee matches. this intense gameplay is what keeps a game alive for years. you must understand that people who play at tournaments are actually performers in an act; a display of skill and prowess in an abstracted form. but in order for that performance to have attendance, it must be enjoyable to watch.

why do you think brawl was removed from EVO? why do you think so many people gave up on the game? why do you think melee players shun it as inferior?

the reason ice climbers place so low is because they're difficult to master and the only thing (reportedly) going for them are 0-death inescapable chain grabs with incredibly stupid conditions attached to them. perhaps this rings a bell in your head.. that maybe they suck, and need fixing? some claimed that w/o DDD's chaingrab he has become a crap character.. people went as far as saying that he's probably one of the worst. within just a few days, many players found that he can actually hold his own without his chain grab.

i don't know anything about ice climbers, i don't claim to. all i claim is that they're not fun to watch, not fun to play against, and not fun to learn; and that these mere fact hurts their chances in tourneys and their placing in tier lists more than anything.

 

[PanzerOceania]

further more if you analyze what makes something fun, and what makes something competitive, they are one in the same, lack of predictability. We are trying to keep the game surprising and less predictable. It takes skill to get out of a combo, even if we make the window tiny, a few frames window for someone to DI out of something is good, it shouldn't be easy, hell no, they should get punished for leaving themselves open, but when it becomes impossible to escape then it becomes predictable, both players should at all times be thinking and INPUTTING in the match. IN other words, at no point should there be a part of the game where player 2 might as well set his controller down for several seconds because it is very LITERALLY impossible to do anything about it.

 

[kupo15]

I always felt that the heart of competition was what made something fun. Like the two above me, ICers alt grabbing to me is very uncompetitive and therefore lacks fun which is important to gaming or else the replay value won't be very high. That's just me

 

[SketchHurricane]

The problem with banking on fun is that it is subjective. A lot of people say CG'ing isn't fun, but I guarantee you that there are people that do think it's fun. We all think that violence is fun, or we wouldn't be playing a fighting game. It's not much of a stretch to find enjoyment in completely and utterly disabling your opponent with a display of skill. A game developer who understand that fun is important can still be terrible at game design if he makes something that HE thinks is fun and no one else does. Subjective, subjective, subjective.

This is why you have to be careful using fun as an argument, because it's potentially an argument that will never end. Sure, DDD's CG was completely boring and stupid because it consisted of one grab and one grab only. IC's, on the other hand, can get retardedly creative with their CG in comparison to DDD's, and that alone can be fun for the person performing the CG. It can also be fun to watch a creative chain grab as well.

Your entire argument to remove 0-death IC chaingrabs can be used against you, Jiang. That is what a subjective argument yields. Once again, I'm not stating this to show my position on the matter, I'm stating this to make a point about the "fun" argument and nothing more.

 

[cooler1339]

Why did we remove chain grabs and jab locks if we are keeping an infinite? Ness and Lucas should be able to be infinite grabbed as well again. Do you guys have anything to go by or do you just do whatever sounds cool?

 

[PanzerOceania]

it's not that fun is the be all and end all, but the general consensus is that infinites are not fun. I think I stated it clearly though that it is too predictable and that does not equate competition. Also as stated by cooler, we removed the other ones so it wouldn't be right to keep the IC infinite. We are trying to create a dynamic game, just like watching DDD's go at it is boring to watch, it's the same idea, we don't want to see one character where they do the same thing over and over again, we want variety, dynamic play, fun, speed fighting you know?

 

[Blank Mauser]

Why don't we remove grab release infinites in teams matches then? When you get grabbed you might as well put your controller down right? Its pretty boring to watch two people pummel someone back and forth. Its even easier to set up and also even harder to mess up. Its 0-death and you can't do anything about it.

If we are realistically thinking about giving IC's better desyncing options and also keep there intense grab game then maybe I would be for this, but for now theres no reason to fix this.

 

[PanzerOceania]

that is such a weak example, in team battles if you are being teamed up on, you still have your teammate to break you out.

 

[Blank Mauser]

Really now? Its situational with Ice Climbers too, you get rid of their teamate and they can't do the grab. I thought the whole argument for this was that infinites are boring. If its true then why don't we get rid of it too?

Or is the argument now that IC's infinites are more dominant and broken? If so then give me examples of when Ice Climbers have ever been top tier.

 

[Greenpoe]

further more if you analyze what makes something fun, and what makes something competitive, they are one in the same, lack of predictability. We are trying to keep the game surprising and less predictable. It takes skill to get out of a combo, even if we make the window tiny, a few frames window for someone to DI out of something is good, it shouldn't be easy, hell no, they should get punished for leaving themselves open, but when it becomes impossible to escape then it becomes predictable, both players should at all times be thinking and INPUTTING in the match. IN other words, at no point should there be a part of the game where player 2 might as well set his controller down for several seconds because it is very LITERALLY impossible to do anything about it.

Lack of predictability isn't what makes the game fun. Turn items on, create thousands of terrible custom stages with every stage ON in the random selection, always choose a random character, and play with the sole Wiimote. That's EXTREMELY unpredictable, but it isn't fun. Each move is predictable, since they'll do about the same thing every time, with a few mixups.

 

[cooler1339]

I could care less if this game has Infinites or not but if you keep this one I want my free ness and Lucas kills back.

Does anyone even read greenpoes nonsense? Guy kind of just says whatever is floating around in his head.

 

[kupo15]

Really now? Its situational with Ice Climbers too, you get rid of their teamate and they can't do the grab. I thought the whole argument for this was that infinites are boring. If its true then why don't we get rid of it too?

Or is the argument now that IC's infinites are more dominant and broken? If so then give me examples of when Ice Climbers have ever been top tier.

Stop playing devils advocate. This counter argument is the dumbest thing I've read in a while

 

[Team Giza]

Do you know what fighting game communities refer to players like you as? Take a gander at David Sirlins book Playing To Win. You'll find out rather quickly

The book applies to stuff after the game is finished. It is telling you how to play games effectively, how to win. Playing to Win doesn't have anything to do with designing the game. Though there are things in the book that will give you some ideas on what not to do but other works by Sirlin are much better for game design. This is actually the difference here. Brawl+ is not complete, and thus the rule of playing to win do not apply currently. When the game is finished then you can start talking about that.

Don't get me wrong though, I don't personally think Ice Climbers chainthrows need to be removed.

 

[Blank Mauser]

Stop playing devils advocate. This counter argument is the dumbest thing I've read in a while

Your nerfing a character because you think "infinites are gay." Why do we insist on fixing what isn't broken?

Tell the Ice Climber mains what justifies taking something away from a middle tier character, because it being 0-death and inescapable is not a good enough reason.

I honestly never saw whats wrong with the grab releases on Wario(Its pretty tough to grab a good Wario btw) seeing as how platforms ruined them, and Ness and Lucas I can only sort of justify as even though they're pretty floaty at least one of them needs to get in close for a deathgrab and the other one needed serious help in other ways.

Edit: Ew Sirlin. <_<

 

[cooler1339]

All the others were removed. All keeping this one does is make the project look unprofessional.

Keep one keep them all.

 

[Dark Sonic]

further more if you analyze what makes something fun, and what makes something competitive, they are one in the same, lack of predictability. We are trying to keep the game surprising and less predictable. It takes skill to get out of a combo, even if we make the window tiny, a few frames window for someone to DI out of something is good, it shouldn't be easy, hell no, they should get punished for leaving themselves open, but when it becomes impossible to escape then it becomes predictable, both players should at all times be thinking and INPUTTING in the match. IN other words, at no point should there be a part of the game where player 2 might as well set his controller down for several seconds because it is very LITERALLY impossible to do anything about it.

Lack of predictability is not what makes something fun, nor is it what makes it competitive.

Yomi layers, or they ability to trick your opponent by predicting their move and countering it, is what you likely meant. However, it doesn't stop there.

Tricking your opponent is fun, but what's more fun (to a certain degree of course) is knowing that by tricking your opponent you can cause a lot of damage (the thing that brawl lacked). Knowing that if you can get that one hit then you start a devastating chain of events (both the combo itself and the positioning advantage left after the combo), which is all the more reason to make sure that you are the one predicting the opponent and not the other way around. In otherwords, the concept of risk and reward is what makes it fun.


I do believe that an infinite grab is very powerful, but the solution for avoiding the infinite is actually fairly simple. Don't be in the conditions neccesary for the infinite to occur (this is entirely possible for an entire match against Ice Climbers). In other words, don't get grabbed by Ice Climbers (which have terrible grab range and very, very few grab setups that are all easy to avoid) while Nana is with Popo. It's actually not that difficult in game. You might meet the conditions once in a while and thus lose that one stock, but overall Ice Climbers really aren't that good of a character, and basically fall to every kind of zoning game.

There really is nothing broken about the infinite. It's extremely hard to land on players near your level (much like Falcon punch really) and it's on a character who's really not even a threat otherwise.

@Cooler-the removal of the DDD infinite was a result of added hitstun causing characters to fall over rather than land on their feet. The removal of the Marth grab release chaingrab and air release infinites on Wario was the result of the standardization of grab releases (as in they're all the same length now). In a sense, these infinites were removed as bi-products of other changes.

 

[cooler1339]

Everything you just said applied to every other grab release/chain combo and they were removed. Why should I justify this one over the others?

What about ness/lucas?

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^Ah...but we didn't actually remove the infinites on them, we just made all grab releases the same length for both the grabber and the grabee, based on the principle that a grab release is an inherently neutral position (and after meeting much opposition from Bowser mains, we compromised by allowing Bowser to keep his global advantage that he had by still getting some guranteed hits, but only minor ones that would be used to generate a positioning advantage, much like a throw).

Technically it is that change that removed the infinites, not us directly saying "we need to remove these infinites" (or at least I never said it and that is not officially why we changed grab release mechanics), no different from us "removing" the DDD chaingrab by globally increasing hitstun

 

[CountKaiser]

I thought that we were removing the IC infinite because it didn't allow the grabbed a chance to get out of it. In other words, the victim can't do anything as long as the assailant is performing the infinite correctly.

This is the definition of broken. I wouldn't mind the infinite so much if there was something I could do about it. Having to wait for my opponent to mess up in order to get out is ridiculous.

Their cg can stay, that is part of what makes the unique. What I want is to simply remove the infinite that they have.

Now then, what other buff could they use should the infinite be removed?

 

[cooler1339]

That's a cheap way to word it. It was directly related to the problem. And did I really double post? My bad. Thought both those merged posts were between yours.

 

[Almas]

You can always instant grab release.

No, but seriously, why work on overbuffing the Ice Climbers as reimbursement for removing what is effectively their only viable strategy?

We should observe how it performs in tournament play, and if ICs are shown to be overpowered (note that ICs have the same chaingrabs in Brawl and nothing is done), then WEAKEN the chaingrab by increasing the knockback of Downthrow, to remove the solo climber chaingrab (which can lead into the duo climber infinite grab, even if the opponent separates the climbers during low %). If ICs still prove to be hard to beat (which, they won't), then it's time to seriously reconsider things.

In Melee, ICs had a few infinite chaingrabs that couldn't effectively be DIed out of, either. And most of them were easier to pull off. Popo Downthrow -> Nana Dair -> Popo Grab etc. is extremely easy to pull off and will work on players regardless of DI provided you space the Dair well. The Brawl chaingrab requires different timing on a per-character basis. Of course it's still possible. But the flatland drillshine infinite of Fox on Peach in Melee is possible, too, and that matchup isn't considerably skewed in Fox' favour.

'Fun' arguments are often inane. I don't find it "fun" to get hit by 3-4 utilts in a row, doing 30-40% damage, regardless of how I try to DI. But I counteract this by spacing myself effectively, as most utilts have incredibly poor hitboxes, so I deserve the damage should I get hit by them. The same principle applies.

 

[GamerGuitarist7]

what about pokemon trainer users who still want pokemon to swap on death? will a code be put in place so it's kind of optional in the future?

 

[Almas]

The Pokémon fix is still one of those things that is kind of in the air.

Ideally, yeah, we'd like a system where the trainer can choose exactly which Pokémon he gets after any swap or death. But that will be line consuming, and right now we don't have lines.

Also in consideration is Independant Pokémon codes, but those are also line consuming.

I wouldn't be surprised if we end up removing no-autoswap for a little while, to add more essential changes (fixing certain moves like Sheik's Ftilt and Pika's Dthrow). Sadly, these fixes are just more important right now, and with the current setup, we've seen that all three Pokémon are viable to an extent.

I found it quite interesting today when I FINALLY convinced my friend who plays squirtle to try out ivysaur, despite complaints in advance about how bad Ivy was. Within about a minute into the game he had fallen in love.

 

[PanzerOceania]

you guys completely misunderstood what I meant by unpredictable, I didn't mean ******** item battles with no skill involved, of COURSE not. What I meant was a situation where, once initiated, only has one outcome, the opponent should always be able to fight back. Sure the IC aren't top tier but they could have a more interesting strategy than use an infinite.

 

[SketchHurricane]

WEAKEN the chaingrab by increasing the knockback of Downthrow, to remove the solo climber chaingrab (which can lead into the duo climber infinite grab, even if the opponent separates the climbers during low %)

Wow someone listened to my idea? I'd go so far as to do this as soon as the knocback code is good, and not wait. It suits ICs more to not be able to CG with one climber, and would satisfy (to an extent) people who think it's unfair to take away other one-throw CG's but not IC's.

 

[PanzerOceania]

sounds good to me

 

[Dark Sonic]

This is the definition of broken. I wouldn't mind the infinite so much if there was something I could do about it. Having to wait for my opponent to mess up in order to get out is ridiculous.

Umm....then I guess Falcon's up throw to knee on Marth was broken (guranteed regardless of DI after 70%). Guess Shiek's d-throw->fair was broken too, and Ice Climber's chaingrabs in melee, ect, ect.

There are a lot of powerful techniques that work regardless of the opponent's input. That makes them reliable. A move is safe on block when the opponent cannot attack you before you can move (in other words, the opponent's input doesn't matter once the conditions have been met). A "string" (which is the actual word for what we often refer to as combos) is only a true "combo" (by literal definition) if the opponent can't escape it after the conditions have been met (getting hit).

Yet you say that anything that can be performed regardless of the opponent's input is broken? Then I will show you many instances where that statement proves to be false (I really will just pull up a bunch of videos if you ask).

 

[PanzerOceania]

I do agree there is nothing wrong with guaranteed moves like if you perfect shield your opponent for a guaranteed grab etc. those are earned, the thing that makes infinites different sonic is that they don't end.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I do agree there is nothing wrong with guaranteed moves like if you perfect shield your opponent for a guaranteed grab etc. those are earned, the thing that makes infinites different sonic is that they don't end.

They do end...we already have a no stalling rule (infinites cannot be done past 300% remember.)

They end in death. Simple solution? Learn how to fight Ice Climbers. Sheik could get solo chaingrabbed by Ice Climbers for about 80% in melee, in addition to the other Ice Climber chaingrabs/infinites (like...all of them).

Sheik currently ***** Ice Climbers regardless, since you just play the matchup without actually getting grabbed.

 

[trojanpooh]

I've got a question, how long until we have version 1.0 of the Plusery codeset. Obviously I don't mean beta 1.0, I mean Brawl+ 1.0. And is anyone working of fixing the freeze glitch? If you guys can't find out whats wrong, you could probably shut off control once a winner is found. Just a thought. It seems like now that Gecko 2.0 has been delayed indefinitely, we are probably pretty close to as complete as possible. In my eyes, these are the things that still need to be fixed before Brawl+ V1.0 goes gold.

*Freeze Glitch
*Multiple tries for all tether recoveries
*A finished momentum code
*Any tweaking of values that still needs to be done
*If there is any room left, no ladders. (1 line)

What is the popular opinion on scar jumping (also 1 line)?

 

[PanzerOceania]

we will probably get 1.0 when we iron out all the issues, obviously that is a little ways away as we still have objectives that haven't been completed and little glitches still being worked on. I'm sure the main guys want to have it really solid before we tell everyone "it's ready" so that we don't give a bad impression.

we are only now starting to do brawl+ tutorial/what's new vids, and have only had 1 podcast, I'd say give it a few months minimum.

 

[kupo15]

Umm....then I guess Falcon's up throw to knee on Marth was broken (guranteed regardless of DI after 70%). Guess Shiek's d-throw->fair was broken too, and Ice Climber's chaingrabs in melee, ect, ect.

There are a lot of powerful techniques that work regardless of the opponent's input. That makes them reliable. A move is safe on block when the opponent cannot attack you before you can move (in other words, the opponent's input doesn't matter once the conditions have been met). A "string" (which is the actual word for what we often refer to as combos) is only a true "combo" (by literal definition) if the opponent can't escape it after the conditions have been met (getting hit).

Yet you say that anything that can be performed regardless of the opponent's input is broken? Then I will show you many instances where that statement proves to be false (I really will just pull up a bunch of videos if you ask).

It sounds like your pulling a devils advocate as well. The difference between what you described and the ICers infinite is this. Your example of reliable moves are when specific conditions are met. The ICers infinite works at any percent (within reasonable limits) and doesn't require specific conditions (like percent) and you only have to land a grab. So this the only move that regardless of where you are in the match, one grab will equal a stock.

 

[spunit262]

Unless Nana is gone.

 

[cAm8ooo]

Why the heck would we use the no ladders code in the competitive codeset?

 

[PanzerOceania]

kupo has a point.

 

[Dark Sonic]

It sounds like your pulling a devils advocate as well. The difference between what you described and the ICers infinite is this. Your example of reliable moves are when specific conditions are met. The ICers infinite works at any percent (within reasonable limits) and doesn't require specific conditions (like percent) and you only have to land a grab. So this the only move that regardless of where you are in the match, one grab will equal a stock.

Actually, the two conditions that have to be met are

1. You get grabbed

and

2. Nana is with Popo.

How is this any different than

1. Get Marth to 70%

and

2. Grab him

Or Sheik's d-throw fair, which is also not percentage specific (within reasonable limits)? Percentage is merely a condition, no different than any other conditions needed to perform techniques. These techniques are actually seen far more frequently than the IC chaingrab, and have a profound effect on their matchups. (It's guaranteed combos like this that makes the matchup bearable for Falcon and makes Sheik have an advantage)

It's quite possible to avoid having these two conditions line up (I support removing the solo chaingrab btw, since it in turn makes the second condition far easier to fulfill)

And actually, the dual chaingrabs on Sheik are not percentage specific.