The Clank rule needs to change

[Ripple]

I should preface this is a small suggested change but has potential influence a lot

For those of you who don't about the clank rule, it is a certain property that most grounded moves have when the hitboxes collide. This rule causes either attacks to be beaten or they tie and both characters go into a recoil state.

The current "rule" (more like game mechanic really) is that if a grounded move is within 8% of another attack a recoil will happen. Anything higher, and the more damaging hitbox will continue as normal.

I think this threshold of 8% is currently way too high and I think it should be halved to 4%.

Why?

Right now, for the sake of argument, we'll say you have a jab that does 4%. In order to beat that jab, your character must do a move that does 13% or greater in damage. The average damage of nearly all tilts in the game is 10.1% damage. very few tilts in the game do 13% or more.

I think that this is a "problem" because it tells me that in our 3 steps of power for our grounded A moves (Jab, tilt, Smash), a players has to go up 2 orders of power in order to beat out a jab. And that if tilts do an average of 10%, they will clank most smashes in the game also.

an average damage jab should not clank with an average damage tilt. tilts should win. and average damage tilts should lose to average damage smashes.

This rule change also gives the added benefit of indirectly buffing the fatties since they have some of the more damaging moves in the game. they will win more often against other moves.

the only downside that I can think of to this is that some moves will definitely need to be reajusted in damage after this change which will take some work to do.

thoughts? concerns?

 

[Krauserlols]

So thats how its called. Those awkward moments when a Super missile is blocked by captain falcon's jab. Sounds interresting but i hae to leave the numbers to other more versed Smasher since i dont know specific percentages of attacks and how it can be affected by this.

So long as this doesnt mess with those intense moments when you and your foe are about 90% and you just collide like 4 jab in a row on your seat to see who will get the upper hand afterwards. Yeah good times.

Also HELLOW FELLOW SAMUS FAN!

 

[robosteven]

Maybe this rule should only be implemented (if possible) to the fatties and Ganondorf?

 

[Krauserlols]

Maybe this rule should only be implemented (if possible) to the fatties and Ganondorf?

But Heavies like Bowser and Gannondorf already deal more damage that most lighter characters dont they?

 

[MagnesD3]

This change makes sense to me, smashes should beat tilts and jabs, tilts should beat jabs and jabs can clank with jabs. This seems like intuitive design.

 

[robosteven]

But Heavies like Bowser and Gannondorf already deal more damage that most lighter characters dont they?

True.

 

[Krauserlols]

This change makes sense to me, smashes should beat tilts and jabs, tilts should beat jabs and jabs can clank with jabs.

Not all the time cause there are tilts that deal more damage than others like you cant compare Gannondorf side tilt to Olimar's for example.

Also i love your signature, is that a thing he actually says.

 

[pooch182]

An example of where this might not be the best change to implement: Marth F-Smash. Clanking with F-Smash, and most of Marth's moves on the ground is kind of a big part of the MU for a lot of characters (Samus), and would probably make dealing with Marth even harder for characters that already can struggle to keep up.

Another issue is something as large as DeDeDe ftilt, which has just incredibly massive range. If, all of a sudden, I can't clank that move and escape the situation, I just start getting walled out at a range that I can basically only contest with Zair, which not many characters have access to.

Also, would this have an effect on the potency of missiles? If missiles can't be easily swatted away, I could very easily see Samus being incredibly broken in a lot of scenarios. Projectiles in general don't really need any sort of buffing at all, so if they wouldn't be touched, that would be nice.

 

[JOE!]

+1 support for this.


Edit:

Missiles have a different property to them due to being a hurtbox as well IIRC, any hit will blow them up.

 

[pooch182]

Not necessarily any hit, but yeah, the only clankable projectile (IIRC) is Gordo.

 

[Spralwers]

The other interaction to consider is vs projectiles. I won't get into specifics but a lot of interaction with projectile heavy characters vs fatties will change. Ganon for instance will get a free down B through Link's boomerang and Samus's super missiles and I'll take that all day every day. I do think 8% is a huge disparity and agree it should be lower, but that would actually be a big change to implement since you need to go through all the movesets and re-evaluate damages.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

What if priority was set in terms of class? (Jabs, Tilts, Smash) Then just set the clanking rule within each class individually. Aerials and Projectiles would still need to be talked about though

 

[Ripple]

Part of a problem of being fatty is indeed the projectile game and getting walled out by them. If Mario fire ball, Luigi's, Wolf's, charged ZSS laser, Ivy leaf, Link weak rang, small aura sphere, PK freeze, shadow ball, thunderjolt, din's fire

did no more than 7% at min charge (which I think is extremely reasonable) and we gave each fatty a f-tilt (or other forward move) that did at least 12%. They wouldn't be walled out nearly as badly and could actually swat projectile + approach

 

[pooch182]

Aerials don't clank.

 

[PlateProp]

4% is too low. While I dislike this idea completely for the reasons about Marth above, if it had to happen I wouldn't want to see anything less than 6%

 

[Ripple]

so instead of nerfing marth's damage by 1-2%, you'd rather have an entire game mechanic revolved around him?

 

[pooch182]

I mean, toning down damage means a lot for a lot of moves. You're asking to change percents for follow ups for a lot of characters, when things kill, what combos into what, etc. It's a lot of huge changes to like the entire cast if you want this rule to change.

 

[Binary Clone]

Aerials don't clank with anything, unless you count swatting projectiles, which is pretty much a different kind of interaction.

Unless you're Metaknight, apparently. Then you can clank aerials with dash attack and with your face during getup attack because why the **** not


But I agree, the clank rule is pretty weird.. I'm pretty sure Ganon's jab (8%) will clank with ROB's forward smash (16%).
Ganon's jab is active frame 3, and ROB's fsmash is active frame 15.

Regardless of the overarching matchup there, I think it's kind of absurd that a move with 5 times the startup will clank. A smash should not clank with a jab. That interaction is pretty weird.

 

[Ripple]

I mean, toning down damage means a lot for a lot of moves. You're asking to change percents for follow ups for a lot of characters, when things kill, what combos into what, etc. It's a lot of huge changes to like the entire cast if you want this rule to change.

no, because even if you change damage you can still change BKB and KBG to give you basically the same knockback at every % an old move would do. like what has been done in the past to many moves.

you are simply changing the damage of the move and not the knockback.

 

[PlateProp]

so instead of nerfing marth's damage by 1-2%, you'd rather have an entire game mechanic revolved around him?

Why should we change an entire mechanic because you dont like that your character can be countered out by weaker faster moves because yours are slow? /s

People are already becoming adverse to how characters have been becoming weaker each patch, and implementing this would allow characters with longer reaches to steamroll stubbies even moreso than they already do, because then they only have their shield to fall back on (I believe in the future that clanking will esentially become the 3rd strike parry of this game) and removes a ton of interactions. Not to mention that it would require retooling percents across the board, recalculating BKB and KBG values to have them get the same effect.

 

[MagnesD3]

I think smashes should only clank with smashes but beat tilts and jabs.

Tilts only clank with tilts, but they beat jabs.

Jabs only clank with jabs.

IMO this would be the best system.


Of course this only applies to standing grounded moves, projectiles, dash attacks and aerials are a different story.

 

[Ripple]

Why should we change an entire mechanic because you dont like that your character can be countered out by weaker faster moves because yours are slow? /s

People are already becoming adverse to how characters have been becoming weaker each patch, and implementing this would allow characters with longer reaches to steamroll stubbies even moreso than they already do, because then they only have their shield to fall back on (I believe in the future that clanking will esentially become the 3rd strike parry of this game) and removes a ton of interactions. Not to mention that it would require retooling percents across the board, recalculating BKB and KBG values to have them get the same effect.

if stubbies don't have any form of getting in on those who have more range than them other than attempting to clank with a ground move, then it sounds like its way more of a problem with the design of them rather than a problem with the grounded clank mechanic as it stands right now.

 

[Spralwers]

stubby characters (i.e. ness, Mario bros, lucario, Pikachu, lucas, sonic, squirtle, probs a few others) have enough mobility to weave in and out of the range of long reaching high endlag hitboxes and come in with an attack on a successful read or to punish whiff endlag. I don't think clanking has ever been actual staple counterplay for stubbies to get in on large reach characters, only situational at best (like Luigi's tornado, due to its distance and active frames).

An attack powering through a projectile has one disadvantage compared to regular clanking. The attack has to suffer regular endlag. The risk/reward is different. Ranged hitboxes powering through projectiles allows projectile users to bait out those attacks and punish the endlag. So while fatties would have more options to break through the projectiles, the stubbies with projectiles can just as easily bait those and punish. I think it can deepen the interactions.

 

[DMG]

I think I have a better idea. Give stronger moves better frame advantage if they clank. Two forces of different power levels colliding should mean the weaker one gets forced back / has longer to recover.

This should mean if D3 Ftilt gets clanked by some lowly jab, that jabber doesn't get a 1:1 reset. He has to deal with the disadvantage of having a weaker move clank: give him a little animation of guarding or minor recoil and give D3 some frame advantage (does not have to mean they literally push backwards, can keep their placement the same as normal clank resets)

 

[CORY]

I thought it actually currently worked the other way from that, with the attack with lower damage having less endlag on clank? Unless that was changed over from melee...

 

[DMG]

I dunno the rules but stronger move should have adv IMO and would partly address this

 

[Ripple]

in melee, moves that did more damage suffered more recoil lag than those that did less damage. as that kinda makes sense seeing as how weaker moves generally have less cooldown.

In PM, I believe if a clank happens, people will always be at frame neutral

 

[MagnesD3]

I think I have a better idea. Give stronger moves better frame advantage if they clank. Two forces of different power levels colliding should mean the weaker one gets forced back / has longer to recover.

This should mean if D3 Ftilt gets clanked by some lowly jab, that jabber doesn't get a 1:1 reset. He has to deal with the disadvantage of having a weaker move clank: give him a little animation of guarding or minor recoil and give D3 some frame advantage (does not have to mean they literally push backwards, can keep their placement the same as normal clank resets)

This is also an interesting solution.

 

[Chevy]

+1 support for this.


Edit:

Missiles have a different property to them due to being a hurtbox as well IIRC, any hit will blow them up.

Missiles do not have a hurtbox. Unstaled fire smash missiles do 12%, which trade with anything that does at least 4%, so generally everything destroys them because of the priority rule. One of the biggest changes to the Sheik matchup in PM is that missiles will power through an entire barrage of needles(staleness dependent), because needles to like 3% or so unstaled(also they lost hurtboxes from Melee.

 

[DrinkingFood]

This is something I've been thinking about for awhile. It really helps buff fatties too since their moves usually do more damage, giving them more opportunities to just raw beat projectiles and pokes rather than playing around it with their usually ****ty defensive tools like large size, bad general movement, and bad shield movement.

I also wish that we could see aerials not straight up ignore the clank rule, for the same reason. Like the hitboxes interact, but basically for no reason because the move just continues anyway.

 

[Ripple]

I've been told by higher ups the game is already balanced with the current clank rule in mind so looks like this people can just go back to the tier list discussion thread as its not gonna change.

Dash dance becomes better as a result of lower clank

disjoints become too stupid

swordsmen are balanced with 8% in mind...

etc.

I need to find something else to write on for DT app

 

[MagnesD3]

I've been told by higher ups the game is already balanced with the current clank rule in mind so looks like this people can just go back to the tier list discussion thread as its not gonna change.

Dash dance becomes better as a result of lower clank

disjoints become too stupid

swordsmen are balanced with 8% in mind...

etc.

I need to find something else to write on for DT app

Thats a shame.

 

[Bazkip]

I've been told by higher ups the game is already balanced with the current clank rule in mind so looks like this people can just go back to the tier list discussion thread as its not gonna change.

Dash dance becomes better as a result of lower clank

disjoints become too stupid

swordsmen are balanced with 8% in mind...

etc.

I need to find something else to write on for DT app

Does this mean @ DMG 's idea is also off the table? Cause that seemed like a neat solution without breaking balancing.

 

[DrinkingFood]

I've been told by higher ups the game is already balanced with the current clank rule in mind so looks like this people can just go back to the tier list discussion thread as its not gonna change.

Dash dance becomes better as a result of lower clank

disjoints become too stupid

swordsmen are balanced with 8% in mind...

etc.

I need to find something else to write on for DT app

but I don't see how this improves DD. Most of the characters have have good DDs don't have high damage moves to clank a lot of stuff out. FORCING them to DD more by making their clanking ability worse isn't a buff to DDing, it just means they have reduced options to deal with certain moves.
and how are swordsmen balanced with 8% in mind when the two main swordsmen with clanking ability (marth/roy) are ****ing copy pasted from Melee. Lmao, it's kinda just a cop-out response I think.

 

[Ripple]

[9/16/2015 9:50:00 PM] ???: i think it would also make slow characters even worse, since choosing when to attack would be even better than it already is
[9/16/2015 9:50:12 PM] ???: which is really ****ing good btw
[9/16/2015 10:01:52 PM] Ripple: low commitment moves are already what people abuse right now though. I don't see how getting people to use stronger moves would be this bad
[9/16/2015 10:02:12 PM] ???: because they wouldnt. they would just DD harder
[9/16/2015 10:02:55 PM] Random1: not to belabor a point, but don't a fair amount of people and characters DD heavily already?
[9/16/2015 10:03:33 PM] random2: I don't think it's even possible to DD harder at this point.
[9/16/2015 10:03:36 PM] ???: yes but the opportunity cost for alternatives would be way too high
[9/16/2015 10:03:56 PM] ???: as much as i like free wins with marth, i dont need him to go up 3 tiers lol


obviously not official dt statement, but a DT member explaining to me why it shouldn't be changed

 

[Deleted member]

I've been told by higher ups the game is already balanced with the current clank rule in mind so looks like this people can just go back to the tier list discussion thread as its not gonna change.

Dash dance becomes better as a result of lower clank

disjoints become too stupid

swordsmen are balanced with 8% in mind...

etc.

I need to find something else to write on for DT app

first off, there is no shame in evaluating game mechanics, regardless of whether you're "right or wrong" (as if that even matters, we have all been VERY wrong before). experimentation is good.

second, this still has potential for good open-ended discussion. anything that forces us to reconsider macro game interaction can only bring new ideas to the table- we've already had this discussion many times with regards to automatic L canceling, universal dacus, altering CC mechanics, and edge mechanics. if you notice, some of these are in our game already.

and if you put this on a playtester application, i can only speak for myself here, but i would see it as a good thing.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

Snip

This conversation is weird because it's kinda skewing the idea of neutral/footies.

Low commitment moves are used to get hits in and or cause a reaction from your opponent with low risk of punishment. If this reaction is to DD, which is using movement to bait the opponent to attack, wouldn't people just disjoint/projectile as a proper response? Disjoints would be countered by a strong move if it was read/blocked/etc. This sounds healthy to me..

What is this person really saying? Or am I missing something.

 

[Deleted member]

you dont understand dash dancing for starters

 

[MegaMissingno]

I'm hesitant to change long-standing elements that could end up having far reaching repercussions that could really **** up balance. Clanks exist for a reason, and suddenly letting certain characters easily beat clanks sounds like it could be a problem.

That said though, the idea of just affecting frame advantage sounds interesting, and I'm curious as to what that'd look like. But that might still be too jarring of a change. Maybe if we were making a new game from scratch, but at this point in PM's lifespan I'd probably say don't mess with it.

 

[Tomaster]

disjoints become too stupid

swordsmen are balanced with 8% in mind...

Yea, specifically Marth in mind, this would make him way too good (and annoying).