The Hitstun Dilemma

[CaP_Omega]

During the demo days of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, there have been instances of low hitstun crippling the fundamental combat functions of the game. For example: Fox could be punished after hitting with U-tilt at low percents (same with Sonic's N-air and some other character's lighter attacks I'm sure), Corrin's Neutral-B didn't keep victims of the charge blast in place long enough for a charged bite to connect, Samus's jab could be interrupted with just about anything, Little Mac couldn't pull off a combo whatsoever, etc. Well, luckily, one of those specific problems has been addressed, so Corrin isn't so bad. Wait. Oh crap, that's still pretty bad.

So, it seems that some party in the development field has been playing hardball with this idea of low hitstun. I mean, we've seen the demos, we've seen the game leaks, we're going into 2 months of the official release of the game, and these problems still kinda exist. That begs the question: Why don't they just drop this low hitstun idea? Yes, one can ask, "But why don't they just solve those problems by changing the moves?", but another will ask, "Why can Inkling get easy offstage KO setups while Ganondorf can hardly get D-throw -> N-air?", "Why can Chrom combo F-air into oblivion when Marth can hardly combo F-air into anything?". The answer to those questions is: higher hitstun wouldn't matter to a lot of characters who have good combo game.

Seriously, upping the hitstun just a little bit could do a lot for lesser characters: Incineroar could have U-tilt -> U-air, N-air, or Up-B. Kirby could have Drag down F-air -> Jab, Tilts, or Grab. Samus could have a properly functioning jab. Sheik could have decent damage output. But what would be better than all of this? What would be better than any character having better combo game? Training mode would have a reliable and satisfying combo counter.

Now there's major update that has been announced, and it's coming soon. A version progression from 1.2.0 to 2.0.0 is a really big jump - which more than likely includes bug fixes and mechanical changes - so one can hope that an increase in hitstun is one of the provided alterations. But if it's not. . . why so much effort?

 

[Quillion]

What they really need to do for hitstun (and if not for this game, in the next hopefully) is to separate knockback and hitstun. Ever since Smash 64, hitstun has entirely been a function of knockback, and it really annoys me since it disadvantages the characters with bad frame data heavily.

We need characters with low hitstun and characters with high hitstun. A universal hitstun buff is a lazy solution.

 

[CaP_Omega]

What they really need to do for hitstun (and if not for this game, in the next hopefully) is to separate knockback and hitstun. Ever since Smash 64, hitstun has entirely been a function of knockback, and it really annoys me since it disadvantages the characters with bad frame data heavily.

We need characters with low hitstun and characters with high hitstun. A universal hitstun buff is a lazy solution.

Ya know, I agree with you on some level, because that would make the game a little more streamlined and I think that would help a lot of characters. However, the game has already been released, and creating an entirely new system for hitstun would also mean working it into training mode as well. . . which I think, from whatever modding experience I have, would probably be the single hardest thing they could do for any update.
(Gotta stop myself before I get any more excited. I'm just glad people are interested.)
EDIT: That is an interesting topic, though. What characters would you want that to effect? What moves?

 

[MrGameguycolor]

I'm with ya on this one.

I still can't stand it that Doc (The Strong Mario BTW) has 5 moves that are punishable on-hit at low percents.

Spoiler: List of Moves

-Up-Smash
-Both sour and sweet Nair
-Both sour and sweet Bair
-Up-air
-Both sour and sweet Up-B

And there's probably way more attacks out there...
Moves not safe on hit should not be a thing ever. (Unless your opponent is crouch canceling or actually doing something)

They could try increasing the base hitstun on low knockback moves while lowing the stun on knockback-growth.
But that could just lead on other problems like low % kill confirms and death combos like Luigi's 0-to-death.

Sad thing is, it would just be better to increase the low base knockback on all those moves we don't even know about to prevent this crap.

 

[Quillion]

That is an interesting topic, though. What characters would you want that to effect? What moves?

I mainly just want the heavy characters to have more hitstun on their moves. The speedsters already work with the current hitstun system very well, but everyone else with less-than-par frame data can't really take advantage of it.

I know some people will bring up that heavies don't need combos when they can end a stock in 3-4 solid hits, but that just makes them very polarizing to play since they need to work way too hard to get advantage, but said advantage can end things then and there.

On a more general level, I just want frame data and hitstum to complement one another instead of working against each other as of yet. Bowser and Ganon need high hitstun, Fox and Sheik can have the current hitstun, and Mario, Luigi, and Link can have hitstun somewhere in the middle. Just for a few examples.

 

[CaP_Omega]

I mainly just want the heavy characters to have more hitstun on their moves. The speedsters already work with the current hitstun system very well, but everyone else with less-than-par frame data can't really take advantage of it.

I know some people will bring up that heavies don't need combos when they can end a stock in 3-4 solid hits, but that just makes them very polarizing to play since they need to work way too hard to get advantage, but said advantage can end things then and there.

On a more general level, I just want frame data and hitstum to complement one another instead of working against each other as of yet. Bowser and Ganon need high hitstun, Fox and Sheik can have the current hitstun, and Mario, Luigi, and Link can have hitstun somewhere in the middle. Just for a few examples.

Alright, this I must unfortunately disagree with about 95%.

I believe most heavy characters are actually pretty well off in terms of being able to get a few hits in, because they're pretty quick this time around. A few heavies are even part of the small group of characters in the game that have kill confirms, such as Ike or Rob - and they have very reliable ones. Yes, characters like Ganondorf and Bowser could use some more hitstun, but Bowser himself is fast enough and Ganondorf's moves have high enough priority for both of them to not need that much more of it. They can already borderline combo people once and KO them at 40% - 60% off a dumb smash attack. That's kinda how they work sometimes.

As far as middle weights go - specifically the ones you listed, being Mario, Luigi, and Link - they actually tend to function the best with the current amount of hitstun. Mario has simple frame traps out of U-tilt, U-air, and Falling D-air, and is very close to getting U-air ladders. Luigi. . . would be able to regularly combo people to death if not simply for Smash DI already, so much more hitstun could make him a problem. Link, even as a zoner, has some of the best combo tools in the game, and some of his combo tools are also his pressure tools. That's not to say they couldn't use a little extra hitstun, but they're still okay.

And, just to keep the fast ones on the short end: Fox is good, Sheik is not. The only real problem Fox has is his U-tilt is a risky move at low percents, but he can still get frame traps off of it after like 25%. Sheik just gets a few tilts and a few aerials, and then she has to scramble. Doesn't help that she does like no damage and has a lot of trouble fishing for a kill.

EDIT/TL;DR: I do still think the idea of move specific hitstun is cool, but it has to be more refined than prioritizing characters by their slowness/heaviness.

 

[Crystanium]

Samus's jab could be interrupted with just about anything,

It still can.

That begs the question:

You mean, "That raises the question". Begging the question is an informal logical fallacy.

 

[CaP_Omega]

It still can.

Yes. . . and I clarified that by saying that it was one of the many problems involving low hitstun in the demo as an example, and Corrin's Neutral B not linking properly was the only one that was fixed out of the examples I gave.

You mean, "That raises the question". Begging the question is an informal logical fallacy.

 

[Crystanium]

Yes. . . and I clarified that by saying that it was one of the many problems involving low hitstun in the demo as an example, and Corrin's Neutral B not linking properly was the only one that was fixed out of the examples I gave.

I heard the issue wasn't hitstun, but the angle, which is 361°. Geometrically, that doesn't make any sense, but that's what's keeping Samus' jab 1 from consistently connecting with jab 2. Ness and Mario also suffer a similar problem. See Sakurai angle.

 

[CaP_Omega]

Oh. . . Heck. . . Well then, fixing either that or the hitstun will do it. But I opt for hitstun for. . . pretty much the sake of everything that is unsafe on hit at low percents, and combos for characters that struggle to.

 

[Necro'lic]

EDIT/TL;DR: I do still think the idea of move specific hitstun is cool, but it has to be more refined than prioritizing characters by their slowness/heaviness.

I always say to remember the upsides and downsides of each character, so to that end, hitstun being variable would only be a good thing. However, I would definitely not simplify it so much, apart from one particular instance.

Firstly, like MrGameguycolor said, unsafe on hit moves should not exist, period. Every form of move should at minimum, have its hitstun end one frame after said move's FAF. Since the way hitstun works now can't allow for that level of precision, there's yet another reason to separate damage output from hitstun value.

Unlike Quillion (or maybe exactly like him and he just oversimplified his examples), I would base hitstun values on what the moves are meant to do. For example, Bowser is not combo based, so he doesn't need higher hitstun values for later combos, though his specific combo starters could maybe get more for low percent combos only to counteract their poor frame data. Similarly, if a combo based character is slower than a speedster, like Kirby, despite being middle of the road in terms of mobility, they too can get more hitstun. Similarly, Jigglypuff, a usually slow character, can have less hitstun in some moves in order to not easily combo into Rest (thus balancing Rest a lot easier).

Note I'm not directly advocating for these changes, but these are better and more complex examples of how hitstun separating from damage can work in terms of balancing characters.

 

[Luigifan18]

I always say to remember the upsides and downsides of each character, so to that end, hitstun being variable would only be a good thing. However, I would definitely not simplify it so much, apart from one particular instance.

Firstly, like MrGameguycolor said, unsafe on hit moves should not exist, period. Every form of move should at minimum, have its hitstun end one frame after said move's FAF. Since the way hitstun works now can't allow for that level of precision, there's yet another reason to separate damage output from hitstun value.

Unlike Quillion (or maybe exactly like him and he just oversimplified his examples), I would base hitstun values on what the moves are meant to do. For example, Bowser is not combo based, so he doesn't need higher hitstun values for later combos, though his specific combo starters could maybe get more for low percent combos only to counteract their poor frame data. Similarly, if a combo based character is slower than a speedster, like Kirby, despite being middle of the road in terms of mobility, they too can get more hitstun. Similarly, Jigglypuff, a usually slow character, can have less hitstun in some moves in order to not easily combo into Rest (thus balancing Rest a lot easier).

Note I'm not directly advocating for these changes, but these are better and more complex examples of how hitstun separating from damage can work in terms of balancing characters.

While every move should definitely have its own base hitstun value so that moves that are supposed to combo can do so, I don't think completely separating hitstun from knockback is a good idea; Brawl de facto put a hard cap on hitstun with its hitstun canceling mechanic, and we all know how that turned out. If characters take the same hitstun no matter how far they're launched, I fear that the hitstun of kill moves won't be great enough to stop characters from performing momentum-canceling shenanigans to save themselves at realistic kill percents.

 

[Necro'lic]

While every move should definitely have its own base hitstun value so that moves that are supposed to combo can do so, I don't think completely separating hitstun from knockback is a good idea; Brawl de facto put a hard cap on hitstun with its hitstun canceling mechanic, and we all know how that turned out. If characters take the same hitstun no matter how far they're launched, I fear that the hitstun of kill moves won't be great enough to stop characters from performing momentum-canceling shenanigans to save themselves at realistic kill percents.

Firstly, who said there would be a hard limit to hitstun? I didn't and I'm not sure how separating hitstun from damage would equate to that. Second, Ultimate's balloon knockback would solve the whole kill moves not having enough hitstun thing well enough, considering hitstun already gradually decreases the more knockback you take (barring lower knockback hits).

 

[Quillion]

Unlike Quillion(or maybe exactly like him and he just oversimplified his examples), I would base hitstun values on what the moves are meant to do. For example, Bowser is not combo based, so he doesn't need higher hitstun values for later combos, though his specific combo starters could maybe get more for low percent combos only to counteract their poor frame data. Similarly, if a combo based character is slower than a speedster, like Kirby, despite being middle of the road in terms of mobility, they too can get more hitstun. Similarly, Jigglypuff, a usually slow character, can have less hitstun in some moves in order to not easily combo into Rest (thus balancing Rest a lot easier).

Note I'm not directly advocating for these changes, but these are better and more complex examples of how hitstun separating from damage can work in terms of balancing characters.

Yeah, this is a much better way of wording what I meant. Even the non-combo-heavy characters need a few combo moves to be good, and said combo moves need more hitstun. I can even see a scenario where the late hits of sex kick moves get a bit of a hitstun boost so they can be a little more effective at being meaty.

While every move should definitely have its own base hitstun value so that moves that are supposed to combo can do so, I don't think completely separating hitstun from knockback is a good idea; Brawl de facto put a hard cap on hitstun with its hitstun canceling mechanic, and we all know how that turned out. If characters take the same hitstun no matter how far they're launched, I fear that the hitstun of kill moves won't be great enough to stop characters from performing momentum-canceling shenanigans to save themselves at realistic kill percents.

When I talk about "hitstun knockback separation", I just mean that hitstun shouldn't entirely be a function of knockback as it currently is. Hitstun should absolutely grow with knockback, but it shouldn't be entirely dependent on it. I think a good idea would be a system where we have the current hitstun growth formula, but said hitstun gets an "adjustment" depending on the move. Pretty much, they would have one or two frames extra hitstun or maybe one or two frames less regardless of knockback just to balance out moves better.

That said, I'm just an armchair Smash designer, so I think someone else could think of something better.