Vectoring: The replacement to Directional Influence in Smash 4

[Chiroz]

"For explanation purposes, let's assume the percentage of this is 20%. You are hit by an Upsmash whose knockback value at your current percentage is 100. For simplicity's sake, the trajectory of this attack is 90 degrees, straight upward. You are holding down, which grants you a vector downwards of 20 (units per frame, I'm just going to use numbers from now on)."

So, basically, vectoring is you altering the amount of knockback you receive based on the percentage of damage you were at, and the power of the move used against you. The knockback of the power of a move is, of course, determined by your weight, the damage percentage you have, and how stale that move is beforehand.

This new replacement of directional influence will definitely benefit vertical heavy hitters more, and more so for moves that hit VERY hard vertically (say Ganon's Aerial Wizkick KOing Robin at 90% off the ground). Vectoring is less helpful when you are at lower percentages, and more helpful when you are at higher percentages. Characters find it tougher and tougher to kill as percentages go up.

I'm sure you've seen many replays of the game, and you've noticed that sometimes the players have a very hard time KOing each other despite the very high percentages. This is, as stated above, because of vectoring & coupled with the stale factor of a move.

If a decent vertical knockback move should KO your opponent at 130%, your opponent can vector his or her way to saving him or herself much more efficiently than he or she can from a vertical knockback move that should KO you at 90%.

KOs will be much more early out of just the sheer knockback power of some heavy hitting moves and we'll see vectoring of many KOing moves, that don't hit as hard, at very high percentages.

All of this is if vectored downwards, not upwards.

I don't think this is how it works. It's a % of the knockback you were dealt with.


Assuming VI is 20%: If you are knocked 1000 at 90% and you VI downwards you will end up 800 units away from where you were before.

If on the other hand you are knocked 1000 units at 130% you will still end up at 800 units away from where you were before.




What % you are hit at doesn't matter for VI directly, it's just how much you are knocked away which does depend on %, but you were making it depend on % twice.

Also there is no difference between Vertical or Horizontal VI from what we know of as of yet.




It's basically a you can survive for X% longer card in terms of survivability. Doesn't matter who you are or who you are fighting honestly. Obviously what this means for the combo game is still to be determined.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

Probably going with KI (Knockback Influence).

To be honest I was gaming some theories on something similar to this (though I wasn't about to get rough and tough with the details like so). I noticed actually while trying to spam down tilts that when I got hit my knock back would send me sprawling across the ground, almost as if crouch canceling was an actual thing. In fact it wasn't even vague, I actually thought multiple times that I had crouch canceled. It makes sense given what happened to me that this would be what's going on.

 

[Chiroz]

Probably going with KI (Knockback Influence).

To be honest I was gaming some theories on something similar to this (though I wasn't about to get rough and tough with the details like so). I noticed actually while trying to spam down tilts that when I got hit my knock back would send me sprawling across the ground, almost as if crouch canceling was an actual thing. In fact it wasn't even vague, I actually thought multiple times that I had crouch canceled. It makes sense given what happened to me that this would be what's going on.

Yea I had noticed this too while playing and thought that maybe some attacks had different trajectories depending on if they hit you while crouched or not (since it wasn't consistent with all attacks and the fact that I still had hitstun I had discarded the possibility of crouch cancelling being back).

 

[d z]

Probably going with KI (Knockback Influence).

It doesn't influence knockback though, if knockback changed, so would hitstun. Its a vector addition to knockback, hence Vectoring.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

It doesn't influence knockback though, if knockback changed, so would hitstun. Its a vector addition to knockback, hence Vectoring.

To be fair, you're still influencing the direction of something, so I don't see why we still couldn't just call it DI and clarify that it's just different in this game than the past ones. If this is truly what's going on, then it's the only thing there to take DI's place anyway.

 

[Chiroz]

It doesn't influence knockback though, if knockback changed, so would hitstun. Its a vector addition to knockback, hence Vectoring.

By the way, how sure are we it doesn't influence hitstun? How was this tested?

@ Strong Badam

Note: Just so I don't pass off as an asshole, I am not claiming it wasn't tested or anything of the sort. I appreciate all the effort you did to collect this data and present it to us. I am just curious as to how the hitstun part was tested.

 

[GrownCannoli]

Thanks for the information and the effort put into the OP.

 

[DarkDream]

This sucks pretty bad. All this is going to do is allow people to escape combos and survive longer with zero negatives. Game is already defensive enough, now the rearward for landing a hit will be even less.

 

[B.W.]

This was a great post @ Strong Badam . Good **** on this find.

Opinion time though: Calling this something other than DI is silly.

You're still "influencing" your "direction" when you're hit. The mechanic is handled differently in this game, but the idea of holding a direction is still there.

As an example from another game series, SF2 and SF3/4 all have links, but they're handled differently in SF2 than they are in SF3/4. We still call them links though because the general idea is the same.

Nobody wants to explain why someone said "good vectoring" to people who are not in the know about this. Calling it DI gets the same point across, and no one has to explain why there was a name change for something so similar.

 

[KingBroly]

So...by holding the Circle Pad/Analog Stick in the direction towards the stage when knocked back/off/out, you can potentially prevent a KO?

 

[Bladeviper]

So...by holding the Circle Pad/Analog Stick in the direction towards the stage when knocked back/off/out, you can potentially prevent a KO?

yes although this will impact the mid percent range combos more. at least the lower percent ones should still work

 

[Reila]

Whether it's balanced around it or not, the biggest effect this will have on the game is that people will have more of an ability to escape low-percent options. This means that low-percent strings and pressure will be much more varied; there will be fewer "this works every time, bread-and-butter" things, which is arguably a good thing.

There will still be a good bit of combos, as what would've been optimal DI in past Smash games against setup throws often appears to be the best direction for VI in Smash 4 against those same moves, so they are unlikely to see significant differences there. It can also be used against you, since if VI affects you a good deal more at low percents than DI did, a quick tilt or Smash could put you into edgeguard position that much faster with bad VI. A simple example would be between Mario D-Tilt (which benefits from greater hitstun in Smash 4) and D-Smash; if the opponent holds Forward, D-Tilt sets up for lots of nastiness, and holding Away puts you offstage earlier from D-Smash.

I'm sure that many examples will be found in the coming months where this creates significant mix-ups, both offensively and defensively, even at lower percents.

It can be pretty variable, though, and in many cases they are very close to each other.

For better or worse, this should also encourage every character to use different throws as a mix-up or for positioning, instead of the "why would you not do D-Throw as Melee Falcon/Brawl Falco/etc." That's some improvement, IMO.

Read almost the entire thread and those two posts are the ones I agree the most with. I don't see Vectoring as a bad thing.

one thing i do wonder is that maybe this wont be the same, or maybe not as strong, in the wii u version, the 3ds version has been maybe with more casual players in mind for the most part.

I find this unlikely, mainly because the 3DS version is the main version of the game, at least in Japan. Why would they want to alienate Japanese players, as well as the huge number of people who are going to buy Smash 3DS in the West? I think both versions play exactly the same, controllers aside.

 

[Bladeviper]

one thing i do wonder is that maybe this wont be the same, or maybe not as strong, in the wii u version, the 3ds version has been made with more casual players in mind for the most part.

 

[Fex13]

This sucks pretty bad. All this is going to do is allow people to escape combos and survive longer with zero negatives. Game is already defensive enough, now the rearward for landing a hit will be even less.

this.
does this really have to exist... im so mad right now.

 

[Chiroz]

I have a legitimate mathematical question.

Why are we all assuming that VI lets you live longer than what DI would? Wouldn't that technically depend on how much VI influences your knockback distance? Something which we still don't know for sure.



Let me explain myself.

We know DI doesn't change how much you are knocked away but only changes the direction you are knocked away.

Let's say that blast zones are 750 units away from the middle of FD.

If you are hit by a perfectly horizontal attack with a knockback of 1000 units, DIng perfectly upwards will cause you to be launched 1000 units diagonally which would be equal to about 707 both upwards and to the side, thus surviving the blow.

But now, being hit by the same attack from the same position while using VI will not save you unless VI is higher than 25% of your knockback. Even though it reduces your overall knockback that doesn't mean it saves you from death.



Basically how can we really tell if perfect VI is better than perfect DI for survival with no actual values for VI?




Edit: Also in both study cases that we know of, VI helped Jigglypuff survive a maximum of about 6-7% more than she would of if she hadn't VI'ed at all (Possibly even less than that as VI wasn't tested at 46-50%). I would really like to try and gauge just how much VI helps by picking the most heavy character in the game (Bowser) and hitting him with the weakest launch attack in the game that can KO at a perfectly vertical angle.

 

[Deleted member 245254]

this.
does this really have to exist... im so mad right now.

I'm a little confused.

All I've ever known about DI is that most any given player considers it one of the most important parts of Melee's competitive tool set...and yet somehow this pisses you off...?

 

[Renji64]

rip hype and future combo videos.

 

[Fex13]

I'm a little confused.

All I've ever known about DI is that most any given player considers it one of the most important parts of Melee's competitive tool set...and yet somehow this pisses you off...?

this is not DI. and all i want are some TRUE combos in this game...is this too much to ask? it seems to me that players do everything for such combos not to exist... i hate this whole you hit me, i hit you brawl style gameplay. and that mechanic just promotes exactly that. making the game a 3 stock 10 minute hit and run fest like brawl. maybe im exaggerating, but this just kills a little bit of my hype, hoping this game wouldve some meleeish combo potential... so im sorry for that. maybe it turns out be as not being so bad. peace.

 

[Hitaku]

I'm a little confused.

All I've ever known about DI is that most any given player considers it one of the most important parts of Melee's competitive tool set...and yet somehow this pisses you off...?

The beauty of DI was that so long as you could read your opponent, you could typically still follow up with a combo. Because VI can actually increase the knock back you receive, players will be escaping combos entirely. Conveniently, being above your opponent in Smash 4 isn't exactly advantageous. While it's nice that VIing away has a downside, I would hate to see the meta evolve into a hit, chase, wait, and reset pattern. As much as I love this game, I can't see that being too fun to play let alone watch. As far as I see it this would be the worst case scenario. Hopefully this is all being blown out of proportion and we will still have some decent combo potential.

 

[Bladeviper]

this is not DI. and all i want are some TRUE combos in this game...is this too much to ask? it seems to me that players do everything for such combos not to exist... i hate this whole you hit me, i hit you brawl style gameplay. and that mechanic just promotes exactly that. making the game a 3 stock 10 minute hit and run fest like brawl. maybe im exaggerating, but this just kills a little bit of my hype, hoping this game wouldve some meleeish combo potential... so im sorry for that. maybe it turns out be as not being so bad. peace.

it seems you can still combo at lower percents so its not like combo are not in at all

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

I suppose that I want to see how this plays out in the long run, but that's going to take a while. People thought blast zones were an issue; VI is the real beast.

 

[Shaya]

The sensationalism in reactions are quite depressing. You do know that REGULAR DI doesn't exist in this game and that REGULAR DI would probably be allowing people to get out of combos and live for higher percent ANYWAY.

We already have statistics that show us people aren't dying at exuberant percent nor are matches going for extended periods of time.

The type of stupidity involved in just immediately QQing about something we haven't even fully explored yet is just crazy, people need to pull their heads out. An initial opinion is one thing (you don't need to echo it though, especially not 150 odd times), calling doomsday is just facetious, and boggling this thread with crap is just insulting to those who are actually putting effort into expanding our knowledge of the game and explaining how the mechanic works to others.

 

[Fex13]

The beauty of DI was that so long as you could read your opponent, you could typically still follow up with a combo. Because VI can actually increase the knock back you receive, players will be escaping combos entirely. Conveniently, being above your opponent in Smash 4 isn't exactly advantageous. While it's nice that VIing away has a downside, I would hate to see the meta evolve into a hit, chase, wait, and reset pattern. As much as I love this game, I can't see that being too fun to play let alone watch. As far as I see it this would be the worst case scenario. Hopefully this is all being blown out of proportion and we will still have some decent combo potential.

exactly this. this is the tiny but important difference. in melee as long as you were able to react properly it was still a true combo no matter if the opponent went a bit more up or down....but this just kills the follow up by just flying too far no matter if i react frame perfect or not, i will just not get you....but whatever

 

[Hitaku]

You do know that REGULAR DI doesn't exist in this game and that REGULAR DI would probably be allowing people to get out of combos and live for higher percent ANYWAY.

That's not really the point here. The fact of the matter is people enjoyed the amount of combos that they were seeing in Smash 4 from the game play they've been observing. The amount of time that people were living was already pushing the limit for some, now that time will be increasing even further. If suddenly we discovered that DI in Smash 4 could equally mitigate combos they would be just as disappointed. VI is not the issue, the issue is that the introduction of VI means that we're going to lose out on something most people were very happy with. Again, this is the worst case scenario which most people assume right off the bat. I've still not personally seen how heavy this is going to effect things.

 

[Jerodak]

@ Strong Badam I have a few questions for you.

1. Is there a window for vector inputs by the defending player, or can you apply the vector anytime during knockback?

2. Let's say for some reason, someone is holding up when taking a hit, but the person that hit them used a vertical K.O move. After taking the hit with the upwards vector already applied, the player reacts by pressing down. What happens in this situation? Does it create a new vector and replace the old one? Does it create a new vector while leaving the first vector? Or will it ignore the input altogether while leaving the original vector?

3. Was there any extensive testing done with this against low-mid percent combos? How badly does it actually affect the combo game? I think a good idea would be to try Mario's Dthrow to up tilt combos on Link with link holding different directions to see if it allows him to escape for free.

Sorry if someone else already asked these questions, and thanks for your time.

 

[Fex13]

it wont be matter too much in low to mid level play. but people who really try to be perfect at the game will avoid almost any combo with that. wait 1-2 years from now and we will have the hit and run meta game again.

 

[Yoshi Kirishima]

To be fair, you're still influencing the direction of something, so I don't see why we still couldn't just call it DI and clarify that it's just different in this game than the past ones. If this is truly what's going on, then it's the only thing there to take DI's place anyway.

Agreed. "Making a vector" still involves a directional input, which ends up influencing your flight. Hence, it is still a directional influence, and I don't see a need to use a different term. After all, DI worked differently in Melee than in Brawl too, we don't change the name just for that.

 

[Shaya]

That's not really the point here. The fact of the matter is people enjoyed the amount of combos that they were seeing in Smash 4 from the game play they've been observing. Because that game play was without VI, some of that is going to change. If suddenly we discovered that DI in Smash 4 could equally mitigate combos they would be just as disappointed. VI is not the issue, the issue is that the introduction of VI means that we're going to lose out on something most people were very happy with. Again, this is the worst case scenario which most people assume right off the bat. I've still not personally seen how heavy this is going to effect things.

But the matches you are seeing are with people already using "VI".
Unless they haven't played Smash before.
Holding up/away is already very normal for getting out of combos. This is a standard thing.

I think most people would've been less happy with no DI at all (actually, personally, maybe not, as long as SDI/Shuffling was still a thing, ala 64), as DI is a major depth point/skill based mechanic for most veteran smash players.
The issue that is apparently noticeable here is getting the kill. Where holding in/down is going to save you, but we don't know by how much this is going to save you
REMEMBER THE EXAMPLE GIVEN:
A fully charged game and watch up smash kills Jigglypuff at 47% and 53% with BEST CASE VI.
Do you know how much the difference in kill power Marth's tipper forward smash has in Brawl in comparison from no DI to best case DI? It's something like 80% to 130% on midweights.
I'll take my kill moves in this game with VI, thanks.

I would be a lot more sympathetic to QQ about the depth of DI being cut down. But instead it's about making the game more campy and things not killing... when that just seems preposterous without ANY PROOF.

 

[Phyr]

The hitstun is the same. It will only change what attack you have to followup with.

I think this will make it more interesting.

 

[Kamo.]

Interestingly enough and contrary to our prior perceptions of Directional Influence, when holding either left or right, Jigglypuff still dies at 47%, even though she clearly is sent to the left or right and not straight up.

So is there something going on with Smash 4 that's making this not work? If Jigglypuff uses DI and is sent to the left or right after the u-smash, she is flying up a longer path to the blast zone than if she were just sent straight up (I think), so realistically she would have a better chance of surviving. Don't know why I'm asking this, I'm just curious because I think DI in previous Smash games has made a lot of sense to me.

 

[Rybaia]

That's not really the point here. The fact of the matter is people enjoyed the amount of combos that they were seeing in Smash 4 from the game play they've been observing. Because that game play was without VI, some of that is going to change. If suddenly we discovered that DI in Smash 4 could equally mitigate combos they would be just as disappointed. VI is not the issue, the issue is that the introduction of VI means that we're going to lose out on something most people were very happy with. Again, this is the worst case scenario which most people assume right off the bat. I've still not personally seen how heavy this is going to effect things.

I actually think that people are just QQing just bacause this is something new.
Most of the Melee pros agree that with perfect DI combos would not exist in Melee and that you can mitigate the combo potential by alot with a good one yet in 15 years even the tip top level players sometimes do some terrible DI and get destroyed for this mistake. 15 years and still players at the top level of the game miss even some basic DI.
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion expecially since 95% of the community still hasn't played the damn game.
I agree with Shaya this is really silly.

 

[Accelerator]

To be fair, you're still influencing the direction of something, so I don't see why we still couldn't just call it DI and clarify that it's just different in this game than the past ones. If this is truly what's going on, then it's the only thing there to take DI's place anyway.

You aren't influencing the direction of something, you're influencing the knock back value of something.

 

[Mr. KoopaTurtle]

But the matches you are seeing are with people already using "VI".
Unless they haven't played Smash before.
Holding up/away is already very normal for getting out of combos. This is a standard thing.

I think most people would've been less happy with no DI at all (actually, personally, maybe not, as long as SDI/Shuffling was still a thing, ala 64), as DI is a major depth point/skill based mechanic for most veteran smash players.
The issue that is apparently noticeable here is getting the kill. Where holding in/down is going to save you, but we don't know by how much this is going to save you
REMEMBER THE EXAMPLE GIVEN:
A fully charged game and watch up smash kills Jigglypuff at 47% and 53% with BEST CASE VI.
Do you know how much the difference in kill power Marth's tipper forward smash has in Brawl in comparison from no DI to best case DI? It's something like 80% to 130% on midweights.
I'll take my kill moves in this game with VI, thanks.

So do you think people are going to start experimenting with the roster and each character's kill moves to discover when a move kills with and withoust using VI?

 

[SaintChairface]

The sensationalism in reactions are quite depressing. You do know that REGULAR DI doesn't exist in this game and that REGULAR DI would probably be allowing people to get out of combos and live for higher percent ANYWAY.

We already have statistics that show us people aren't dying at exuberant percent nor are matches going for extended periods of time.

The type of stupidity involved in just immediately QQing about something we haven't even fully explored yet is just crazy, people need to pull their heads out. An initial opinion is one thing (you don't need to echo it though, especially not 150 odd times), calling doomsday is just facetious, and boggling this thread with crap is just insulting to those who are actually putting effort into expanding our knowledge of the game and explaining how the mechanic works to others.

Thank you for the dose of sanity. I will admit that I did not read through the entire 12 pages of immediate QQing, so I apologize if any of this is repeated.

We were given the results of only 1 experiment and a large number of metaphorical figures. We need more experimentation to understand this new phenomenon. For instance, is the influence vector proportional to the knockback vector, the current damage, or both (or perhaps neither if its a flat rate which is highly doubtful)

We need a larger sample to make the distiction.

Experiment 2: we take a character with a percent and attack that would move them from the center of the stage to just off the edge, then find out how much more percentage it takes if they apply a directly opposing vector.

Experiment 3/4: use a lower/higher percent with with a move with more/less natural knockback

Apart from separating the proportionality of the resistance vector it might also be a good idea to design similar experiments around combo escape vectors and other experiments on very low percentage and knockback vectoring.

 

[Accelerator]

I actually think that people are just QQing just bacause this is something new.
Most of the Melee pros agree that with perfect DI combos would not exist in Melee and that you can mitigate the combo potential by alot with a good one yet in 15 years even the tip top level players sometimes do some terrible DI and get destroyed for this mistake. 15 years and still players at the top level of the game miss even some basic DI.
You guys are blowing this way out of proportion expecially since 95% of the community still hasn't played the damn game.
I agree with Shaya this is really silly.

VI'ing is a lot more simple than DI'ing, though. If you are trying to live at higher percents in Melee with DI, you have to find the optimal angle that will maximize the amount of space you travel through. The knock back value is the same, no matter if you DI or not.

With VI'ing, if you want to survive at higher percents just point the control stick in the opposite direction your flying to reduce the AMOUNT of knock back you receive. It doesn't influence your trajectory like Melee DI. If you get sent up and you point it northeast, you're not going to fly northeast, you're going to fly up still. No idea why people insist on calling this DI when the goals of each tech and what they're actually doing is completely different.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Option selects are viable IMO.
Let's say the opponent can either kill you upward or off the left side of the stage. You could argue that VIing downward is bad if you get hit left, and VIing inward has no effect on your upward KO percent. A sort-of mixup, where it's not bad to do one thing,
Except you can VI both down and in, covering both scenarios.

Sure, but moves that weren't so great in a normal situation now become more useful. For example, if my Little Mac gets to Jab2, your Down+Forward option select to deal with a U-Smash/D-Smash follow-up sucks you into the Rapid A attack, making it take longer for you to get out. Depending on how effective SDI/VI up/away is against it, you may have just pushed yourself into 19% from the longest Jab combo, which isn't great for you, either. I can always shorten the Rapid Jab part if I don't like what I see, making Jab combo a safe bet either way. Skewed RPS is good for fighting games!

As for throws, between four directions you can be thrown and different positions on the stage to make one more threatening than the others at any given point, it is likely that there will usually be a throw mix-up that allows more than one throw to potentially put opponents in a bad position (like being above the opponent, especially with the nerfed airdodge in Smash 4).

 

[Shaya]

So do you think people are going to start experimenting with the roster and each character's kill moves to discover when a move kills with and withoust using VI?

Someone sit down right now, and without messing up with move decay (make sure the move is fresh by suiciding each time)

Up Smash on Bowser with ... what percent does it kill at [random character: FOX]
Then with Vectoring Down. ^

There's [basically] the maximum disparity of ******** allowed when it comes to kill moves and VI. I have a really large inkling it's going to be noticeably less potent than the mixture of tumble cancelling into fast falls that allowed people to live literally forever in Brawl.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

I think what matters more is how it scales and how it affects low-percent to mid-percent hits.

Though most of you are aware of that by now.

 

[Yoshi Kirishima]

So is there something going on with Smash 4 that's making this not work? If Jigglypuff uses DI and is sent to the left or right after the u-smash, she is flying up a longer path to the blast zone than if she were just sent straight up (I think), so realistically she would have a better chance of surviving. Don't know why I'm asking this, I'm just curious because I think DI in previous Smash games has made a lot of sense to me.

Not sure what you're not understanding so sorry if this isn't what you're asking.

Instead of an attack hitting you for X distance, an attack hits you for X horizontal distance and Y horizontal distance. Instead of trying to "travel" as much distance as possible within the blastzones like in previous smashes to let the knockback end and survive (and you would do this by holding in a direction some degrees from the direction you're being sent), Smash 4 wants you to hold towards the stage. If an attack hits you completely horizontal, holding up to get to the corner of the blastzone doesn't let you live longer, instead you would hold towards the stage to minimize the horizontal distance.

I think we've all been used to the old DI but this new DI is actually really intuitive; simply hold towards the stage, opposite of where you were sent flying.

 

[KingBroly]

yes although this will impact the mid percent range combos more. at least the lower percent ones should still work

I always thought this was a thing. At least...I've always done it. Even in Smash 64. It makes sense to me, at least, because you're trying to come back to the stage.