Tier List Speculation

[Life]

The purpose of Wario Waft is to get players to approach Wario IMO. Otherwise he could get camped out somewhat, maybe not Bowser levels of camped-out but it'd be the best way to deal with him. Any change to Waft should keep that in mind.

 

[InfinityCollision]

I agree to a certain extent, but the opposite also holds true: it may encourage Wario to play to the clock if he's down and knows he'll have a full charge soon.

 

[robosteven]

you obviously know this but saying "a pikmin can kill" is kind of redundant because they kill at different percents, with pretty huge gaps in between for most. so yes, he can kill with at least one of them, but it would also be a total pain in the *** depending on where they are because of how weird whistle can be sometimes

imo whistle should just put the Pikmin next in line in front and the one in front in the back.

I'd like to see whistle get the **** buffed out of it.

this is kind of a loaded argument so im gonna ask before i say something that'll let you edge all over me some more, what do you mean by rebalanced around set order?

I was going to comment on this later in the post, but it was more balanced around the idea of farming. In spite of my pushing for set order, it's just to get the "oh whoops you respawned with your opponent at like 130% and all you have is a white and a yellow" which happens to me all the goddamn time and there's nothing I can do about it at all. Farming doesn't belong in the game, but I don't think that, even if it's possible to do against good players, that it could become Olimar's #1 gameplan simply for the sheer time it would take.

So basically I'm saying that whether farming is a bad thing or not it shouldn't even matter in the long run.

why are we still defending farming. farming shouldnt be promoted or kept in the game, its stupid and isnt exactly a part of olimar's "design" and shouldnt really be because like i said, its ****ing boring. hate to break it to you, but i dont like doing things that isnt interacting with my opponent while im playing fighting games. you sure got me tho with that "stop" i think im gonna rethink my statements now

Whenever I think about pluck order and removing the random element to the character, farming is usually last on my list (and typically not even included on my list) of reasons to include a set order. Whether or not it's possible or useable doesn't really matter at all to me, I just want to be able to figure out what tools I'm working with quicker which, as you've said, leads to more interaction and fighting and less figuring out what to do with what you have. ...because you'll know what you have ahead of time.

Whether it's boring or not is irrelevant in a game that includes Jigglypuff among the cast of characters.

...So no, I'm not defending farming. I'm trying to say that set order is better than leaving in RNG.

if you like farming then play brawl or some

I would've gone with Harvest Moon as a comparison, but I mean

you do you.

 

[Zigludo]

for mario it would likely be a lot longer since he doesn't have the quickest double jump in the game

I thought that title went to Falco, not Fox? in Melee, at least

You guys are going about fixing bowser the wrong way, you don't fix a characters polarizated matchup spreads by giving them strong singular tools that will inevitably break characters in some matchups and lose hard to others.

+2 points to Gryffindor for usage of the word "polarizated"

EDIT: I wish this board would auto-merge double posts to cater to my carelessness

 

[DrinkingFood]

Lmao just supposed to be polarized. Great, now that I have typed it wrong once, my phone seems to want to correct to it anytime I spell polarized wrong. I don't think polarizated is even a word

Also falco's double jump moves farther but I'm pretty sure Fox's moves faster to compensate or his extreme gravity

 

[Zigludo]

it's got to be extremely close, Falco's gravity is very nearly the same as Fox's. if anything I would assume that Falco's ledgedash is slightly slower because I think his airdodge landing is 1 frame longer or something

 

[MagnesD3]

You keep saying that, but I've yet to see you substantiate that argument.

Neither aura nor solarbeam promote degenerate gameplay; quite the opposite in fact. Removing carryover between stocks would, at face value, make those characters atypically momentum-based. There would be more incentive to use resources near the end of a stock rather than meaningful considerations of whether to use or preserve them. A player getting steamrolled would have more difficulty getting anything going, while an advantaged player would only benefit from whatever compensations you might propose. Instead of maintaining the status quo while improving design, I would argue that your proposals actually worsen it to no tangible benefit and would consume substantial dev resources in the process.

Waft could perhaps use a change, but I see carryover as less of a potential issue in that case than the timer-based nature of the move.


Are you aware of why it's like that? I assure you it's not without reason.

I've already explained why it's bad design. It eliminates the risk/reward system of a move by not using it before you die that almost all characters have on their charged moves and it also promotes a linear usage of the said move.

I'm confused by your logic - them making a decision and weighing options, even when one option is generally considered better, seems objectively less brain dead than saying use the option because there's nothing to weigh and decide on.

It's more brain dead since there is no risk of keeping the move to yourself ever since you will always have it for a guaranteed kill setup.

 

[InfinityCollision]

It's been noted that carryover creates more involved decision-making at least three times now. Do you expend aura in hopes of extending your stock and adding percent/taking another stock and possibly recouping the aura spent, or do you conserve it? Do you go for the yolo solarbeam, or save it for a better opportunity on your next stock? It's a meaningful choice, one that would disappear under your proposal. That's not linear.

 

[MagnesD3]

We've explained that carryover creates more involved decision-making at high percents at least twice now. Do you expend aura in hopes of extending your stock and adding percent/taking another stock, or do you conserve it to build momentum going into your next stock? It's a meaningful choice, one that would disappear under your proposal.

Not really. It just sounds like not wanting change mostly because it's a nerf to characters that may or may not need it when it comes to balance. When looked at from a game design point it seems silly especially when you look at how the overall game runs. I'm just trying to clear the silly stuff like 3.5. Carrying over a charge type move upon death when you lost that round/stock is bad design.

 

[InfinityCollision]

Not really.

Explain.

When looked at from a game design point

Stop trying to fall back on this, it's lazy.

 

[nimigoha]

I've already explained why it's bad design. It eliminates the risk/reward system of a move by not using it before you die that almost all characters have on their charged moves and it also promotes a linear usage of the said move.


It's more brain dead since there is no risk of keeping the move to yourself ever since you will always have it.

It's not risk though. No one is arguing about risk.

We're saying it's weighing up whether you use the move before or after you die.

I'm not certain how you still fail to grasp this after it's been said like 4 times.

Having the charge lost upon death is brain dead because if you're about to die, you use it. Simple. I'm Samus and not going to make it back to the stage. Use charge shot.

I'm Lucario and might be able to make it back if I use aura OR I can use the aura next stock to aid a combo.

It. Is. A. Decision.

Get this through your mind.

And stop falling on "bad design". Back it up. What is "bad design"?

Stop comparing it to charge moves. They're completely different.

 

[KakuCP9]

For the hundredth time already. It's not just about holding resources after stock loss, its what goes into obtaining the resources and what the character does with those resources. If you can't acknowledge this, you can't continue this conversation. Also all this talk about resources is giving me low tier city flashbacks.

Shameless topic change time. How's Lucas been? Been a while since I heard anything about him (that or I've been living under a rock regarding the matter). He doing alright?

 

[steelguttey]

imo whistle should just put the Pikmin next in line in front and the one in front in the back.

I'd like to see whistle get the **** buffed out of it.


I was going to comment on this later in the post, but it was more balanced around the idea of farming. In spite of my pushing for set order, it's just to get the "oh whoops you respawned with your opponent at like 130% and all you have is a white and a yellow" which happens to me all the goddamn time and there's nothing I can do about it at all. Farming doesn't belong in the game, but I don't think that, even if it's possible to do against good players, that it could become Olimar's #1 gameplan simply for the sheer time it would take.

So basically I'm saying that whether farming is a bad thing or not it shouldn't even matter in the long run.


Whenever I think about pluck order and removing the random element to the character, farming is usually last on my list (and typically not even included on my list) of reasons to include a set order. Whether or not it's possible or useable doesn't really matter at all to me, I just want to be able to figure out what tools I'm working with quicker which, as you've said, leads to more interaction and fighting and less figuring out what to do with what you have. ...because you'll know what you have ahead of time.

Whether it's boring or not is irrelevant in a game that includes Jigglypuff among the cast of characters.

...So no, I'm not defending farming. I'm trying to say that set order is better than leaving in RNG.


I would've gone with Harvest Moon as a comparison, but I mean

you do you.

im too lazy to quote specifically but im going in order so

honestly? yes. im kinda tired of sh fairing to cycle pikmin. dont judge me but thats how i thought it worked until like late 3.5 LMAOO

i agree with you that that is a huge pain in the ass situation but i still dont think set order is solution to that, i still think there are other ideas, not even gonna plug my idea. and i know thats just an example situation but yellow fsmash is really fast and surprisingly strong, leaf yellow fsmash can kill midweights at like ~%130 from mid stage. regardless

the thing is that theres a whole lotta matchups where you want one or two specific pikmin and nothing else and if you want that its gonna require you to farm. if you want to fix this issue you'd have to do some heavy normalizing *shudder*

jigglypuff is boring, but she still interacts with her opponent in ways that are a little intuitive

when i say i like rng more than set order please dont take it as me saying that i like rng because its my least favorite thing ever. i just dont think set order would be healthy for the character and there is a ton of other options we can go with.

u got me there

 

[MagnesD3]

It's not risk though. No one is arguing about risk.

We're saying it's weighing up whether you use the move before or after you die.

I'm not certain how you still fail to grasp this after it's been said like 4 times.

Having the charge lost upon death is brain dead because if you're about to die, you use it. Simple. I'm Samus and not going to make it back to the stage. Use charge shot.

I'm Lucario and might be able to make it back if I use aura OR I can use the aura next stock to aid a combo.

It. Is. A. Decision.

Get this through your mind.

And stop falling on "bad design". Back it up. What is "bad design"?

Samus usually wouldn't be it in that situation unless it was a situation the player thought it would actually work.

The risk of the move is if you don't use it you are gonna lose it and the Samus won't get to keep it till next stock and just wait for a guaranteed setup. The Risk of using it too early or not getting to use it all should be an important balance not having that risk means there is less calculation on whether or not to use a move since you'll always have it, most players will just wait until guaranteed kill combos to use them if that's the case.

Like Wario or Ivysaur, they are basically given a guarantee that they are gonna kill with that move next stock, and that's bad design. When you lose a stock it should be back to square one minus the damage/positioning of the opponent, but for you it should be up to the players skill to earn that tool again.

The risk not existing is the bad design, the lack of intelligent decision making comes from a lack of weigh options in the moment of battle. I find it much easier to make deductions on when I should use the move when I'm 80% sure this stock is going down during this edgeguard because it isn't as much of an interact able moment, usually things are slowed down during this exchange and because almost every time just losing the stock and keeping the guaranteed charge kill move is not a bad option since you will have it next round.

For the hundredth time already. It's not just about holding resources after stock loss, its what goes into obtaining the resources and what the character does with those resources. If you can't acknowledge this, you can't continue this conversation. Also all this talk about resources is giving me low tier city flashbacks.

Shameless topic change time. How's Lucas been? Been a while since I heard anything about him (that or I've been living under a rock regarding the matter). He doing alright?

Warios has a auto timer, you just have to live which isn't unreasonable at all to do it's basically guarenteed to come up each stock unless you are getting recked. Ivy has to has to charge hers like everybody else, she even gets the unique benefit of gaining health while charging and not only that she can charge through other-means such as grab, up smash, up air and down air. It requires quite a bit more work to a grieve than the waft but you are constantly gaining health benefits while charging for this very powerful that has a non linear way of charging it AND you get to keep the charge after death unlike everyone else.

Lucarios is a bit different since his aura mechanic is his main design, he earns his through hitting foes which is completely fair and he definitely needs aura. I still don't think he should get his resource mechanic at the start of the round in anyway but he would need tweaking most likely to allow for him to get charge easier from his opponents or have his tools buffed in neutral to make his non aura form a bit better. But that is a bit more complicated and not an easy fix like ivy and warios are.

Long story short this is what goes into achieving these charges but at least in warios and ivysaur case the shouldn't be allowed a free pass of keeping their charge upon death as their means of charging aren't all that special to exclude them from what every other characters charge moves suffer upon death.

 

[MagnesD3]

Delete this

 

[nimigoha]

Jesus you're still comparing them to other charge moves.

 

[MagnesD3]

Jesus you're still comparing them to other charge moves.

Yes because they aren't all that different to be completely removed from the risk standard. (Cept maybe lucario but still I have my qualms with that as well.)

 

[DrinkingFood]

it's got to be extremely close, Falco's gravity is very nearly the same as Fox's. if anything I would assume that Falco's ledgedash is slightly slower because I think his airdodge landing is 1 frame longer or something

falco's gravity isn't actually close to fox's
his fall speed is
fox's gravity is actually an extreme outlier
http://i.imgur.com/L2PGvSg.png
the initial slope of the lines represent the characters' gravity, how their current falling speed increases over time
the flat portion is their terminal velocity, which is the max downward falling speed, assuming no fast fall. Gravity acts to decrease upward momentum during a jump, which means that the higher the rate of downward acceleration to counter their upward jump momentum, the faster they need to be moving initially to reach a certain height. Fox's double jump already goes very high, it doesn't go as high as falco's, but he loses most of his speed in the first few frames, and those first few frames he travels the most distance, it's an extremely fast double jump and I'm pretty sure it moves faster than falco's for most of the distance traveled

also everybody's airdodge landing is 10 frames

 

[robosteven]

im too lazy to quote specifically but im going in order so

honestly? yes. im kinda tired of sh fairing to cycle pikmin. dont judge me but thats how i thought it worked until like late 3.5 LMAOO

This is how I've been doing it considering it's more reliable (and oftentimes quicker) than mashing whistle a bunch.

i agree with you that that is a huge pain in the *** situation but i still dont think set order is solution to that, i still think there are other ideas, not even gonna plug my idea.

imho set order > rng

I think this is probably the main point where our opinions differ. I know other, more controllable, less farm-centric ideas would be better, but outside of ones that are overly complicated and/or near impossible to code, nothing's really coming to mind. I feel like the idea of hold b and a direction and you get a specific color could work, but it would absolutely need to be sharpened.

the thing is that theres a whole lotta matchups where you want one or two specific pikmin and nothing else and if you want that its gonna require you to farm. if you want to fix this issue you'd have to do some heavy normalizing *shudder*

I've had relatively good success just using every Pikmin in every matchup but using certain ones for certain tasks at different times. My only problem I've seen is the respawn one mentioned. Every Pikmin is pretty much useable at every percent for most situations except whites, and that's in the situation of "I need to hit someone and they need to die right now." Buffing the KB of whites is not an acceptable solution. I think reworking whistle (and by reworking I mean buffing the everloving hell out of it) would solve this problem singlehandedly, considering that in spite of the frequent yellow+white combo I respawn with I've never respawned with two whites. Solo yellow is great.

jigglypuff is boring, but she still interacts with her opponent in ways that are a little intuitive

Boring is subjective was my point. I ****ing love Jigglypuff. The issue is whether or not something like farming would tie in with the ideology of PM as a competitive game, and I don't see it being abused considering the fast-paced nature of PM. Running away and avoiding the player is technically a form of interaction.

when i say i like rng more than set order please dont take it as me saying that i like rng because its my least favorite thing ever. i just dont think set order would be healthy for the character and there is a ton of other options we can go with.

I don't think the character is or ever has been "healthy" in PM thus far. Jetpack was a step in the right direction. Whites not doing a buttload of damage with every moment of contact was another.

And the second part I just straight disagree with if we're explicitly referring to good options.



I just want the character to make more sense to everyone involved with any interaction with him.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

@ MagnesD3
Again, as I said before, why is "bad design" relevant in a competitive environment? If it can be changed with little to no adverse affects, fine. A good example of this would be Dr. Mario's fsmash I guess? They changed it so it has the "light" effect instead of electric so the hitlag is the same no matter the costume you are using. It is inconsequential in game, but costumes should not change anything about gameplay so it was removed (this is the first thing that popped into my head, there are probably better examples). What you are arguing for is definitely of consequence. The sole justification is game design though, which is where I draw issue with. Typically, game design is an effort by the creators of a game to make said game as intuitive and easy to pick up as possible because the target audience is so large (appeal to casual gamers who don't want to learn complex mechanics). Game design can't make everything extremely basic, because games need to target the more advanced players too, so a balance has to be made (or in some cases, just accept few purchases in order to target the hardcore audience).

Competitive games are a different story though; PM even more so (not being sold). So while Game design is something we strive for, this game is intended for people who are expected to want to learn the deeper mechanics of the game. So having things that don't line up with the rest of the game, aren't intuitive, are "bad game design", or whatever else is ok. Not always, but there is a certain judgement to be made. Does the mechanic add deeper interactions than a similar mechanic that is more intuitive? Is it still pretty easy to understand with a little bit of research?

With Lucario, what exactly are you suggesting? He loses all aura charges he has when he dies and starts at 0? The affect would be the same as in 3.0 where you always got an aura charge upon respawning and you didn't keep any you currently had. Suddenly, there is no reason not to use aura to recover since you get it back when you die anyways, might as well try to augment your recovery. As you are seeing with your other issue with aura (starting the match with one), one little change makes a big difference. Taking away your "free" and "unearned" charge at the start of the match means you have a significant impairment. Do you compensate his neutral tools without aura? Now aura charges are less vital and you can spend them more carelessly since it isn't such a detriment for neutral. Do you make it easier to acquire aura? Now you just need one opening to get that aura and every opening since is that much easier to continue getting aura. Do you do one of the previous two, but also nerf aura options to compensate? Now you are just dumbing down his unique traits to incorporate a "game design" change, one that doesn't seem to bother too many people.

With Wario, what exactly are you suggesting? Waft doesn't carry over between stocks, but the timer stays exactly the same? What exactly does this accomplish? It means if he is recovering and there isn't much chance of making it back, waft is a no brainer. That doesn't promote more thoughtful gameplay, that promotes less. You mentioned earlier that nobody uses Waft for recovery, is that the main goal of this change, to try and make it a legitimate option? While it would increase Waft's use in recovery, that's by forcing the Wario player to camp and stall the each stock for an entire minute to use his unique mechanic. And if he fails by a little bit, then he gets it for recovery instead. That doesn't promote interesting decisions, that just promotes camping. The current system, while "bad game design", at least has some thoughtful decisions instead of panicked use of the move because you aren't certain if you will get another chance. If I have the potential to kill with Waft, but I choose not to since I am uncertain of my setup, at least I know I can use it next stock. Your proposition would make me panic and use it any possible chance because if I don't I might not get it. That doesn't sound appealing to me, especially over an objection that I don't think matters that much in the grand scheme of things.

With Ivysaur, what exactly are you suggesting? 5 less point of charge, but doesn't carry over between stocks? This one will be shorter since its pretty much borrowed from the other two, but why exactly does that need to happen? In this case (other than the panic thing), there isn't much thoughtful interaction (but there is none being added by your system, sooo...). When my (scrubby) Ivysaur is messing around against cpu's, I find myself saving solar beams if the opponent is at 100 or above since it is too good of a kill option to use at that percent. (this could go with waft too) With this new idea, either I use the solar beam at a "poor" time and am unsure if it will hit, I use it at a high percent where its benefit is lost anyways, or I manage to take half a stock (or something similar) and get them to 70-80 and get a good setup. To me, that just makes it very situational and rare to ever come up in a match.

I made assumptions in this post, feel free to point out where I misunderstood what you are arguing. I don't expect you to respond to every single point I made. This is more of where I am coming from and trying to show my thought process so that you can better respond to my main point about game design. I also found it curious that you mention Ivy/Wario don't need any compensation for the change, but later discuss compensation for Lucario changes. Could you explain that, because Ivy/Wario are in a much lower tier position to begin with. Ivysaur tends to rely on gimp kills, so a strong kill move like Solar Beam is crucial (up is harder to land imo, you aren't really gonna combo into upsmash, etc). Wario at least has Up air to kill (blast zone kills here) and he too relies on gimps.

 

[MagnesD3]

@ MagnesD3
Again, as I said before, why is "bad design" relevant in a competitive environment?

A huge point in 3.5 was to eliminate the bad design from certain characters moves to make the game better overall.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

And what did those design changes create? Deeper and more meaningful decisions. It was a design and direction change, but its result didn't lessen the meaningful interactions, it enhanced them. What you are suggesting is the opposite. It detracts from meaningful decisions in the name of game design.

 

[Saproling]

This is the new continues circle we have been waiting for no more fox talk only "charge shots".

 

[howbadisbad]

Fox should be able to charge his blaster to shoot shines

 

[JOE!]

I made a thing

This is a proof of concept more than a stable build, as seen by me not making him stay put after moving, as well as going too far lol.

The punch deals less damage and knockback the further you travel. Starting at 16%, it will go down to 11 then 6%, all at the sakurai angle.

 

[nimigoha]

I made a thing

This is a proof of concept more than a stable build, as seen by me not making him stay put after moving, as well as going too far lol.

The punch deals less damage and knockback the further you travel. Starting at 16%, it will go down to 11 then 6%, all at the sakurai angle.

That's pretty neat. This is in place of his Fsmash correct? What happens when you charge it?

 

[JOE!]

It is a new fsmash yes. Nothing special aside from holding the pose longer and more damage, but I may make the charge increase distance (to what you see here).

 

[Bazkip]

@ MagnesD3
Again, as I said before, why is "bad design" relevant in a competitive environment? If it can be changed with little to no adverse affects, fine. A good example of this would be Dr. Mario's fsmash I guess? They changed it so it has the "light" effect instead of electric so the hitlag is the same no matter the costume you are using. It is inconsequential in game, but costumes should not change anything about gameplay so it was removed (this is the first thing that popped into my head, there are probably better examples).

They reverted it back to electric though.

 

[nimigoha]

It is a new fsmash yes. Nothing special aside from holding the pose longer and more damage, but I may make the charge increase distance (to what you see here).

Cool. Does it have armour?

 

[MagnesD3]

And what did those design changes create? Deeper and more meaningful decisions. It was a design and direction change, but its result didn't lessen the meaningful interactions, it enhanced them. What you are suggesting is the opposite. It detracts from meaningful decisions in the name of game design.

So you say game design has no relevant hold on the competitive nature of a game and are agreeing with the 3.5 changes that promoted good game design over bad? I'm confused because it sounds like you are contradicting yourself. I'm all for the 3.5 design philosophy that's actually the point of me wanting those changes to occur so bad design is removed..

 

[DrinkingFood]

I made a thing

This is a proof of concept more than a stable build, as seen by me not making him stay put after moving, as well as going too far lol.

The punch deals less damage and knockback the further you travel. Starting at 16%, it will go down to 11 then 6%, all at the sakurai angle.

it looks like you made the movement animation based rather than momentum based

 

[hamyojo]

I went back like 20 pages and couldn't find a tier list made by a player with an account that was made before 2014/have heard of them getting results. Ugh. I want to see good, knowledgeable players' tier lists. Stop discussing things and just give me a visual to look at and angrily disagree with on the internet!

 

[JOE!]

it looks like you made the movement animation based rather than momentum based

Hm, can't seem to see where that is put on say, Wolf Fsmash. At least in PSA... is there somethign different with Wolf Fsmash animation/other moves like it that allow the boost?



EDIT:

Nevermind, I saw I moved the wrong bone to move him, and then it'd snap back to where that "correct" bone was.

 

[mimgrim]

bad design

You keep using that word....

I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[Jonyc128]

They reverted it back to electric though.

Still don't know why but yea, Mario and Doc's Forward smash have different properties now

 

[Doctor Aids]

Still don't know why but yea, Mario and Doc's Forward smash have different properties now

I don't think so, the effect is still light, they just added the lightning sound back to doc, same properties on both fsmashes just different sound effects.

 

[TheGravyTrain]

@ MagnesD3

I've said it multiple times, I dont know how you missed it. Game design changes, if it doesn't decrease the thoughtful interactions (or in the case of a lot of 3.5 changes, increased them), I am fine with game design changes since the end result is deeper interactions. The changes you are suggested are game design changes just like 3.5, but they don't increase thoughtful interactions/keep it at the same level, they decrease thoughtful interactions.

I'll try and put it another way. Any given change, you can ignore whether if it was made because of game design. If it increases thoughtful interactions its good, if it keeps the level of interactions its the same I dont really care, and if it decreases the level of interactions I dont like it.

 

[MagnesD3]

@ MagnesD3

I've said it multiple times, I dont know how you missed it. Game design changes, if it doesn't decrease the thoughtful interactions (or in the case of a lot of 3.5 changes, increased them), I am fine with game design changes since the end result is deeper interactions. The changes you are suggested are game design changes just like 3.5, but they don't increase thoughtful interactions/keep it at the same level, they decrease thoughtful interactions.

I'll try and put it another way. Any given change, you can ignore whether if it was made because of game design. If it increases thoughtful interactions its good, if it keeps the level of interactions its the same I dont really care, and if it decreases the level of interactions I dont like it.

I believe it decreases thoughtful interactions and makes choices obvious in the moment due to a lack of risk in Wario and ivysaur a case.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

@ "Bad design" discussion
Staaaahp, just staahp it.

I made a thing

This is a proof of concept more than a stable build, as seen by me not making him stay put after moving, as well as going too far lol.

The punch deals less damage and knockback the further you travel. Starting at 16%, it will go down to 11 then 6%, all at the sakurai angle.

Sugoi. I hope something like this gets in.

 

[nimigoha]

I can't believe it's been over 18 hours and you still don't realize that Waft and Solarbeam increase thoughtful interactions if they carry over a stock.

If literally every person in this thread disagrees with you and tells you why you're wrong, and you keep ignoring them and spouting "bad design" and "but muh charge B moves" and "there's no risk involved" then this isn't a discussion anymore. It's like playing Nerf wars with a kid who keeps saying "that doesn't count, I had a forcefield!"

Open your mind.