Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Leon is over 21 I think.
Said the exact same thing. Shiz is unreal. I thought RAIN was fast.
.
EDIT: Double post. Stupid internet.Why shouldn't we?
More often than not, it's a bad idea. People can take advantage of your moving forward.Why shouldn't we?
Generally speaking, I find that hard to believe. Tell that to Meta Knight or King Dedede as most characters.I can take much more advantage of my opponent moving backwards.
Players matter more than characters [inb4notvsMKQQscrubbydiscrub]. The sooner I can read him, the easier I can adapt, the easier it is to win. If I don't approach I force no reaction and can't get through to the opposing player as easily because there's nothing for me to read.
Assuming this was 100% true, would it even make sense for these players to be defensive in most situations? As long as you can read your opponent - which as far as I can see is the most effective way to win - approaching him and keeping him at bay shuts his options down perfectly fine. Why give him the option of a come back if you can just keep on holding him down?
Because you -can't- read your opponent in a lot of situations. Some things, like certain situations against an excellent Dedede, are just impossible to read if the player is smart about the use. Approaching generally means that in order to have a chance at hitting, you have to cover a certain amount of distance before getting a hit. The defensive player can often throw out a safe move with the added unpredictability of where he will be--He could move forward, or backward, or not at all; sometimes, it's even outright invincible. The number of options available to the defensive player is almost always a greater number than if the same player was playing offensively.Assuming this was 100% true, would it even make sense for these players to be defensive in most situations? As long as you can read your opponent - which as far as I can see is the most effective way to win - approaching him and keeping him at bay shuts his options down perfectly fine. Why give him the option of a come back if you can just keep on holding him down?
i truly madly deeply wanna hear your reasoning for that.
The movement is invincible, not the tactic itself. Rolling, spotdodging, airdodging and certain attacks give you a number of invincibility frames. I wasn't saying that they make for an unstoppable force, hahah.
It's easier to read someone coming at you than it is a stationary target. Being comitted to something decreases options, you cannot really deny that.Assuming this was 100% true, would it even make sense for these players to be defensive in most situations? As long as you can read your opponent - which as far as I can see is the most effective way to win - approaching him and keeping him at bay shuts his options down perfectly fine. Why give him the option of a come back if you can just keep on holding him down?
It's easier to read your opponent's defensive moves when he is required to react than to read your opponent's approach when he has the freedom to be creative and cloak his approaches. If you memorize my first three approach choices you still know nothing of me because I have all options to approach completely different the next 3 times.
They do it all the time, because I still lose sometimes.
lol under the crowd's pressure yeah.
