The definition of a combo

[Mazaloth]

Smash has no combo's, none at all.
However, in smash you can link attacks that consecutivly hit.
Because of DI, and FF and other techniques, combo'ing is impossible.
Though, the thing about that is if an successfuly land all consecutive hits, that takes real skill.
Our so-called 'Combos' take more skill then any other game.

 

[Twin Dreams]

Smash has no combo's, none at all.
However, in smash you can link attacks that consecutivly hit.
Because of DI, and FF and other techniques, combo'ing is impossible.
Though, the thing about that is if an successfuly land all consecutive hits, that takes real skill.
Our so-called 'Combos' take more skill then any other game.

......................

 

[rubiksfriend]

Aren't consecutive hits defined as a combo?

 

[DwaynBibad]

Aren't consecutive hits defined as a combo?

No consecutive hits are consecutive hits.
Combos are consecutive hits that are GUARANTEED after the first hit.

Also landing consecutive hits in Brawl doesn't take more skill than landing combos in other fighting games, because guessing isn't a skill last time I checked.

 

[Koga]

Adhearing to the idea of the traditional "combo" as a staple of a good game is just closed-mindedness, this should sound familiar.. you're creating a self made set of ideas towards a game that hinder you from playing it well and adapting. Drop the dogma, stop linking ken combos and dictionary.com entries, and actually think about your own inclination to what game mechanics you like for yourself.

QFT! Sirlin FTW

Smashboards has become a scrubfest and its hard to discuss things with people who are not open minded about the game.

please change you guys.

 

[Jackal478]

Sounds like somebody has been on the receiving end of one too many Ken combos.

In other words:

BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.

Smooth Criminal

Haha. I mean, besides the fact i've never faced any big names like Ken in smash.

xD

 

[rubiksfriend]

Also landing consecutive hits in Brawl doesn't take more skill than landing combos in other fighting games, because guessing isn't a skill last time I checked.

Combos in Smash DO take more skill because instead of pressing memorized combinations of a few, select buttons, you must use a very sensitive control stick and time your moves right, account for DI, etc.

 

[Zankoku]

QFT! Sirlin FTW

Smashboards has become a scrubfest and its hard to discuss things with people who are not open minded about the game.

please change you guys.

Right. Because being open-minded involves changing the definition of a word that has the same meaning among all fighter games.

The combos are limited in Brawl, and most of the good players are accepting that and playing with that in mind. After all, trying to force something that isn't there is only bound to get you killed.

 

[Koga]

Combos in Smash DO take more skill because instead of pressing memorized combinations of a few, select buttons, you must use a very sensitive control stick and time your moves right, account for DI, etc.

exactly, Smash isn't a game that rewards hours sitting infront of your TV practicing button imputs; it rewards game expirience. Most of the Veteran fighting game pros on these boards struggle with that concept because that's how they now fighting games. In many games, you can just go into practice mode and reherse imputs untill you get it down and then you'll be pretty good. Smash isn't like that by nature. Instead of 236B for mario to shoot a fireball you press B and that's it. its more of a choices game than a rehersal game.

@Anoku

I was saying change the Definition. My post was directed at all the people who are judging brawl's worth based on pre-made definitions and standards that prevents them from taking the game for what it is and learning and adapting.

basically, even if brawl doesn't have combo's in the traditional sense; that doesn't make it an uncompetative game; it doesn't need to have the traditional method's of punishment to be a good tourney game. The tourney's my group hold's are great, (Zamus seems to do well every week, strange as i don't see much mention of her) and there's no problem with its tourney worth, i just dont get why so many people keep bashing it.

 

[Twin Dreams]

I don't care if brawl has them or not.


The definition of a combo as defined by the the competitive fighting game community has been linked several times.



That's all their is to it.



Think of it like words. A combo of letters is a word. If there's a space, the word is ended.


A combo is a string of moves. If there's a space, the combo is ended.

in other words...

A combo is a consecutive string of attacks that are inescapable once one of the attacks hit.

 

[Veil2222]

Smash =/= to other fighting games in mechanics or goals, combos in smash =/= to other fighting games in mechanics or goals. The definition because of that is different for brawl, it's a non-traditional fighter so assuming a traditional fighter mindset is the best way to approach brawl isn't a good assumption.

With that said, I'm going to say again, a lot of characters do have things that are close to combos, the difference is they aren't garunteed, and you have to predict the opponents DI to pull it off. They still happen, they're just more reliant on your opponent making a mistake and taking an opener to the face.

 

[A New England Winter]

Sonic, Zamus, Ike... yeah, I said it, Toon Link, Marth, and Metaknight all have very close sequential hits dependent on percent and opponent DI, which for me, is the definition of a combo in brawl. There are more chars that have a few, but those are the ones I know first hand you can predict DI after connecting and follow up with 1-5 hits for anywhere from 7-30% dmg. You can either let the definition of a combo make your game, or let your game make the definition of it's own combos, one of those makes more sense to me. Adhearing to the idea of the traditional "combo" as a staple of a good game is just closed-mindedness, this should sound familiar.. you're creating a self made set of ideas towards a game that hinder you from playing it well and adapting. Drop the dogma, stop linking ken combos and dictionary.com entries, and actually think about your own inclination to what game mechanics you like for yourself.

Finally, someone on Smash Boards who doesn't spout incoherent and utterly ******** tripe. This man speaks the truth.

 

[rubiksfriend]

The combos in Smash are unlike other fighting games: they require skill, account for DI, ingenuity, etc., not just mindless button presses. Within the Smash series, Smash64 has the most because of its longer hitstun. Melee has less, but still plenty. Brawl, with completely different hit stuns, has a few, but even they don't compare to those in Melee. I miss the thrill of executing a Cap. Falcon or Marth combo. It's a great feeling of accomplishment to succeed in inventive combos and see the results of you work. It's an incentive to get better.

 

[Taymond]

Smash =/= to other fighting games in mechanics or goals, combos in smash =/= to other fighting games in mechanics or goals. The definition because of that is different for brawl, it's a non-traditional fighter so assuming a traditional fighter mindset is the best way to approach brawl isn't a good assumption.

With that said, I'm going to say again, a lot of characters do have things that are close to combos, the difference is they aren't garunteed, and you have to predict the opponents DI to pull it off. They still happen, they're just more reliant on your opponent making a mistake and taking an opener to the face.

Who cares if Smash isn't identical to other fighting games?
Nobody cares, that is who.

No fighting game == any other fighting game. Every fighting game, and every game, period, has subtle nuances unique to itself. Every game is different. Who cares?

Smash is, however, a fighting game. It's part of a genre. The use of recurrent terminology within a genre is for the benefit of everyone who picks up a game of that genre. Can you imagine if every manufacturing company had a different name for a nail or a screw? We use recurring terminology so that players of various games can communicate with each other.

The definition does not have to be different because Brawl is a different game. That's just a childish, stubborn attitude. You don't get to decide what terminology Brawl adapts. What you want doesn't matter. Brawl is a part of a genre and it will adopt a large part of its terminology that is common across that genre. This is how categorization works, individual items inherit characteristics from the categories they belong to.

Every child wants to eat desert first, but we don't eat desert first, do we? The child's selfish wants do not transcend the common practice. The child must learn to accept the desert-eating rules society imposes if it wants to remain a part of society.

Brawl is not the most revolutionary, unique game ever created. It's not so obscenely different and new that it falls into no category. It, in fact, falls pretty well into the category of a "fighting game." Terms that are common across that entire genre will apply to Smash in the same way they apply to the other games within the genre. It is selfish and spoiled to expect otherwise.

 

[behemoth]

Why does the word combo matter so much!?!?!

Win. The. Match.

This is what you should be thinking. This thread asked for the definition. The definition was given.

Now, it looks like a bunch of people have sand in their ******s simply because Brawl has almost no traditional combos!

So freaking what!?

It still takes skill to have multiple moves ready based on d.i. So no one is telling you that their e-***** is bigger than yours because other games have combos.

This thread poses a simple question, which has received a simple answer.

Move on.


Edit: check out my post count man, far out!

 

[neo_sporin]

My definition of combo- Consecutive attacks that all happen to land whether or not they COULD have been avoided after the first one or not, the person got hit and thus i comboed them. Especially in brawl where it is possible to get out of most combos, if you dont get out when you can its the same result...butt whoopin time

 

[Kyd]

Combos.....
sure there aren't combos in brawl in the traditional sense, but if you link attacks correctly they can be made into a combo because opponents cant predict everything.

Brawl is a good game, people who say they dont like the combos are liers. Combos arent their problem, everybody's more worried about the fact that they fixed the games glitches and imperfections and they can no long exploit them, nothing more. Melee players, i doubt you would land half of your combos without, say, wavedashing and L Canceling, which were flaws to begin with. Get over yourselves.

if you want tekken or street fighter combos than go play tekken or street fighter and quit complaining. This is Brawl, not street fighter, we use Nintendo based (plus Sonic and Snake) characters not Ryu and Ken. If combos make a game great than Tekken would still be on the competative circuit. I miss when games were enjoyed, now everybody just criticizes everything.

 

[Grunt]

if you want tekken or street fighter combos than go play tekken or street fighter and quit complaining. This is Brawl, not street fighter, we use Nintendo based (plus Sonic and Snake) characters not Ryu and Ken. If combos make a game great than Tekken would still be on the competative circuit. I miss when games were enjoyed, now everybody just criticizes everything.

Since you just said everything that ever needed to be said, i will now say something to the effect of you summing it all up.

*ahem*

"I agree 100%, [/thread]"

 

[Kyd]

[Charley and Candy Mountain]
"Shun the non-believer, SHHHUUUUNNNN!!!"
Play Brawl or dont, its that simple.
oh and please im begging somebody to call me a lier about the whole wavedashing L Canceling thing, please honestly try to tell me you hate the game for any other reason.

 

[Veil2222]

Kyd, don't drag this into a flame war. L-cancel was intended in smash 64/melee, but what made combos possible was the physics... the hitstun/gravity/speed. I could do plenty of combos in melee without l-cancel/wavedash.

I'm on your side of the debate, but your posts were just so pointlessly offensive and antagonistic to the other side, without much productivity, that I felt like defending them. You should probably try to be less provocative with your points, people will respect them a lot more.

 

[Kyd]

long night, insomnia..... im not the greatest to talk to in times like this but i need something to pass the time.

But.... to make my argument more productive
Speed and gravity arent issues with Brawl due to the fact that you can edit both of them in special brawl (which i was on the border of doing at the last tourney i hosted). My only problem with combos being the center of attention is sometimes people break the game over them, say, two great players play a match but one player starts a tremendous combo and the other player(who could possibly be better in terms of skill) are trapped until the combo ends, which could be a hit away from a KO.

The wavedashing and L Canceling comment was based on fact too, at least 95% of the people that tell me how much they prefer melee say its because of those things, the rest of which say something about the stages or dimished skill gap(read sig please).

 

[Taymond]

If that statistic is right, Kyd, then you need to stop talking to so many whiners. Lack of Melee techs are not the real problems with Brawl's game engine. It was a bit of a shame to lose some of the things we had been accustomed to, but who cares? As long as Brawl stacks up the same competitively, through different means, nobody really cared all that much. The problem was that it didn't.

I'd LOVE to call you out on it. First off, though I don't hate Brawl, I do think that a lot of poor decisions were made in its production that led to an end result much less than what it could've been. And I do not think that because wavedashing and L-Canceling are gone. Also, there was nothing even slightly glitchy about L-Canceling, it was as intended a feature as jumping. Some arguments can be made towards the "intendedness" of wavedashing, as well, but I won't bother because they're not as strong. They can at best prove the awareness of wavelanding during production, which doesn't really say much about intent.

Combos aren't, in themselves, the problem, no. All of the changes that have almost wiped out the ability to combo however, are the problems. Lower hitstun? Really? That's defensible? Why should a defender be able to react after being hit before the attacker is? If the advantage goes to the defender in every confrontation, there is no incentive to be the attacker, the most important principle of a fighting game. That's how a fighting game progresses, because the defender needs to overcome the attacker and become the attacker in order to win.

In Brawl, the defender doesn't have to become the attack to win. They can just trade hits anytime they let themselves get hit, and perfect shield for a free hit the rest of the time. The deck is stacked in favor of the defender, so why should anyone attack? What's the benefit?


Edit: Oh, and in response to your sig... Yes. Yes there was. So.. you're wrong. *shrugs* Misrepresenting fact, unfortunately, does not really prove anything.

 

[Dolphin-Safe]

Brawl is a good game, people who say they dont like the combos are liers. Combos arent their problem, everybody's more worried about the fact that they fixed the games glitches and imperfections and they can no long exploit them, nothing more. Melee players, i doubt you would land half of your combos without, say, wavedashing and L Canceling, which were flaws to begin with. Get over yourselves.

oh and please im begging somebody to call me a lier about the whole wavedashing L Canceling thing, please honestly try to tell me you hate the game for any other reason.

No, I won't call you a "lier".


I will, however, call you an ignorant schmuck that will suck *** at Brawl too with such a scrubby mindset.

 

[DarkKnight077]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hRjil3AL3Y This is a combo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pykSDax14Uo This is a combo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzNzaPJKSbs&feature=related this is not a combo. These are people being dumb.

 

[Kyd]

i probably will suck at Brawl, i dont have money for tournaments or internet(this is my friend's comp). The reason i play Smash is because its a fun game, and the community(generally, not always) is friendlier than that of other games such as Halo or Gears of War. My mindset has nothing to do with my lack of skill. I don't play the game religiously because i have a life to live, and im not bashing anybody here by saying that. I have many things to deal with and being the greatest smash player in the world is not one of them. Dont use this paragraph as a reason to bash or something like that, its the fact that getting Brawl and a Wii was luck in itself for me.


Back to the topic...
Defenders dont always have the advantages, only against attackers who practially flail about swinging widly. I've done this myself a few times and yes its devastating to face a good defensive player like that. Playing defensive has the advantage of camping, making the opponent come to you, dodge at the right time then finally start swinging until you have enough space to camp again.

There are offensive advantages though. Pressure game is enormous. Using the right characters and moves will give you more attacks that the defending opponent may not expect. Chain attacks or projectile spam them into playing offensive so you can bring them out of the defense, which may give the player who was offensive from the start the advantage due to the forced offense from the opponent. There are numerous ways to break someone's defensive and even ways to exploit them at times.

 

[Zankoku]

No, you're describing Melee's gameplay. Brawl's gameplay is more like... land a hit on them, and either hope they don't respond and try to hit them again; or wait for their response because they WILL get out of hitstun faster than you can reach them, then chase during the lag of whatever they did. Of course, characters like Meta Knight will have far faster responses and far less lag for those responses, making the first option suicide and the second option putting both of you on even ground again.

 

[Kyd]

i never had trouble playing the way i described on Brawl. lets use Wolf for example. Defensive player is camping and Wolf runs up. Short hop and Nair with Wolf and since there's no lag upon landing from it you can grab instantly. if they sidestep dodge then do the same and try again. its not impossible i promise you.

 

[Zankoku]

Shieldstun is smaller than the hitlag you've produce by hitting their shield. Shieldgrab is possible unless you use a Shine or jab. Neither actually sets up for anything, and the next time you approach with a running SH nair they'll be ready for you, if they hadn't been already.

 

[Taymond]

No, Kyd, that's simply not true. In Brawl.. a player who just got hit by a move will often recover from hitstun before the player who made the attack. This is what I'm talking about by "favoring the defender." I'm not talking about a camping attitude, I'm talking about the way the game was designed, the very basis of the game engine. I'm not even talking about a timely spotdodge, shieldgrab, whatever legitimate defensive options.

I'm talking about if I hit you, before I can act to either attack again or retreat or whatever, you can attack. Before I can retreat, you can hit me back. So every time I go to hit you, you have the option to hit me back, period. No "bad decision" or "bad DI' necessary on my part. Period. Now, if I had chosen to wait for you to attack me instead, I could potentially have perfect shielded your attack and attacked you back or shieldgrabbed you, because of the incredibly low shield-drop lag. The very core of Brawl's game engine favors the defender, by default.

Yes, with good playing, you can still beat a player playing defensively, certainly if that player isn't as good as you. Skill still beats skill, yeah, but not necessarily in closer games. In a very basic, integral way, Brawl itself favors a defender in a confrontation. It doesn't make sense to design a game that way, because there needs to be incentive to fight. There needs to be incentive to attack, for the defender to become the attacker or the attacker to remain it.

 

[DarkKnight077]

I use Bomerang titling on the ground and then short hop arrow and then maybe a nair with Link. Yea nice try. What next?

 

[Lightning Ice]

No, Kyd, that's simply not true. In Brawl.. a player who just got hit by a move will often recover from hitstun before the player who made the attack. This is what I'm talking about by "favoring the defender." I'm not talking about a camping attitude, I'm talking about the way the game was designed, the very basis of the game engine. I'm not even talking about a timely spotdodge, shieldgrab, whatever legitimate defensive options.

I'm talking about if I hit you, before I can act to either attack again or retreat or whatever, you can attack. Before I can retreat, you can hit me back. So every time I go to hit you, you have the option to hit me back, period. No "bad decision" or "bad DI' necessary on my part. Period. Now, if I had chosen to wait for you to attack me instead, I could potentially have perfect shielded your attack and attacked you back or shieldgrabbed you, because of the incredibly low shield-drop lag. The very core of Brawl's game engine favors the defender, by default.

Yes, with good playing, you can still beat a player playing defensively, certainly if that player isn't as good as you. Skill still beats skill, yeah, but not necessarily in closer games. In a very basic, integral way, Brawl itself favors a defender in a confrontation. It doesn't make sense to design a game that way, because there needs to be incentive to fight. There needs to be incentive to attack, for the defender to become the attacker or the attacker to remain it.

That's an exaggeration, very few moves allow your opponent to recover before you do and be completely ready to attack you and the few moves that can shouldn't be used. If you space yourself well you can apply enough pressure so that they can't attack you and you can continue to slash away at them safely.
Also combos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHfGqpHBZI4
Okay grab combos, but they're still combos.

 

[Taymond]

Perfect shield the boomerang, perfect shield the arrow, hold it for the nair, and grab you because shield-drop lag is so low. Grab attack, G&W Dthrow, and maybe techchase for a Dsmash. And heck, if I'm Ice Climbers I just won, anyway.

Edit: To above poster: Several characters can act in between Shiek Ftilts, and I think it's fair to say that's pretty quick a move.

 

[Kyd]

well i play offensive with my characters and i tend to lock in consecutive hits a lot, but i will admit its best to land a good knockback hit early just to stop their defensive. Perfect shield into a grab, something a lot like what happened in Melee many times, is something you learn to fight. i typically stay airborne and use attacks that typically give me fast retreat, high knockback, or allow me to get around behind the opponent forcing them to turn around, by which time i could already have followed up with another attack to the same effect.

 

[DarkKnight077]

Bleh I hate ICs. x.x; Wait wouldn't you move after the boomerang though? Depending on on how far you went because there are times when you go do backwards sometimes. Then I would be ok, but after when it comes back it's small chance that happens. Bleh I hate ICs.

Well...least the Ken combo is still in.

 

[Zankoku]

Powershieldgrabbing wasn't actually very good in Melee - there were better, faster things you could do with a powershield than shieldgrab. Even a standing grab.

Using personal experience as circumstantial evidence that it's possible to combo (well, yes, it is possible, but not a whole lot) isn't a particularly good idea.

Why are we even arguing this point? There are combos in Brawl, they have been and always should be defined as when the attacks were consecutive (that is, when the chain of attacks were inescapable), they exist in the form of 2- or 3-hit combos in Brawl, and there should be no altering of definitions just because Brawl is a different game from Melee or whatever. Guess what? Melee's a different game from Smash 64, and that's a different game from Street Fighter, Guilty Gear, etc. We never altered the definition of a combo back then, either. Brawl deserves no such special treatment.

 

[Veil2222]

Yes, brawl does, considering the goals of the game are completely different. Combos in all other games are used to cause a percentage depletion of the lifebar, in brawl, they are intended to accumulate damage in anticipation of a strong hit, a good edgeguard, or a good chase of the edge to slam your opponent into the side of the screen. The stock/dmg% changes the emphasis of the game, but because of melee's physics combos could set up into the strong kill moves, edgeguarding only happened when one player messed up defending and got knocked off early, or someone missed a finishing blow off a combo for a kill. Brawl changes this by removing the killing aspect of combos with enhanced DI and other defensive capabilities, now, combos are down in the 1-4 hit range with tech chasing, and the game is more about spacing for oppertunity for kill hits. You can keep your definition of a combo, but don't fault the game as a whole because combos aren't as important as in other games.

 

[Taymond]

No, you're describing the intent of consecutive hits in Brawl. Combos are the same thing in Brawl that they have been in every other fighting game, there is just much less emphasis on the combos Brawl does have. Just because you decide to call a combo something else and give it a whole new definition, that doesn't make it true. That makes it.. silly.

You redefine a combo in order to prove why a combo should be redefined in Brawl. I smell faulty logic. You're only describing the goals of Brawl, but there's nothing in your argument that would suggest any of that is called a combo. No, combos are what they always have been and they will always be the same thing. We don't change definitions of terms that apply to larger group for one of its elements.

We don't refer to the "fourth wall" as the "fourth wall" in books, video games, movies, theatre, but call it the "gralbingsnap" in television. We call it a fourth wall. The concept is no different, you're just talking about something different.

Combos haven't changed, you're just talking about something else. Yes, you're right, fighting games are different. This one doesn't place a whole lot of emphasis on combos. It's much easier to just.. say that, than it is to assume that all fighting games MUST rely on combos, therefore since Brawl doesn't rely heavily on what other games call combos, Brawl must have a different definition of a combo!

That doesn't make any sense, you're using the wrong constant. The constant IS the combo definition, not a fighting game's reliance on combos. If a new fighting game relies on something that's not a traditional combo, we don't call whatever that thing is a combo, we just say "hey, this fighting game doesn't rely so heavily on combos. Neat/gay/cool/whatever."

 

[DarkStar92]

I agree with Ankoku, there are some 2- or 3- hit combos in brawl. And so what if we don't have 10- hit combos, we can always use some mind-reading and consecutive hits. And for ppl who are saying that u can't get multiple hits because almost all consecutive hits are escapeable, that doesn't mean u can always escape from them. But that isn't the point, the point is that we need to accept that ppl say combo instead of consecutive hits (and then we can ask is it escapeable) or every1 needs to use the word consecutive hits (or C-hits or something).

 

[Kyd]

how about combination of hits? lets find an abbreviation for that. combo sounds good.

By the way, if thats how you define it then why is that forward B into a meteor with marth called a Ken combo in Melee? it is escapable . Rename the tactic.

 

[Zankoku]

The Ken Combo is Forward Air into a Down Air spike. Given proper spacing and improper DI, it will register as two consecutive hits and is thus a true combo.

But yes, let us rename the tactic because you don't know what it actually describes. We'll call it the "fair dair combo."