What do the Melee Legends think of P:M?

[a vehicle]

I really like this thread.

I also agree with what GHNeko is saying, but M2K isn't completely wrong.
In melee there were heavy technical characters such as fox and falco, which required very high APM count and a lot more speed than others, and they were allegedly above everyone else even though they didn't win most of the important tournaments. We all know why it wasn't easy for them to win, turns out there's a parallel strategy on how to bring them down.
You see that's my favourite thing about heavily technical characters, they're very complicated to use and could be insanely strong, but there's an equally demanding strategy to fight against them. That means that no matter how good you are, there will always be someone good enough to bring you down.
It's as if the greatest boxing champion of all time has a broken rib, it's obviously going to be a difficult fight, but you know what you have to do to win it even when you're in clear disadvantage.

 

[JOE!]

The difference here however, is what if a character was made just as good as fox without being technically demanding? You essentially have a boxer with a broken rib that you have to train for months with, or a new boxer that is 100% healthy and just as world-class as the other that is ready to go in a week. Which is better?

 

[Fortress]

The difference here however, is what if a character was made just as good as fox without being technically demanding? You essentially have a boxer with a broken rib that you have to train for months with, or a new boxer that is 100% healthy and just as world-class as the other that is ready to go in a week. Which is better?

Ganondorf.

 

[Papa+Stone]

I think its fine if characters are balanced around spacies while being less technical, as long as they have the benefit of having no losing matchups. This doesnt mean that theyll be better than everyone else, its just that most of their matchups will be even or near even. High technical characters would still need to be balanced but since they already work so hard with tech practice they shouldnt need to worry about counter picking bad matchups like the less technical characters might need to do. This benefit of only having to learn one character granted its a hard one to learn to play well + showing off skill to peers should be the motivators for playing tough characters like fox falco(wolf?)

 

[ELI-mination]

I like this idea that its oh so demanding to play spacies, as if everyone who plays them is just multishining repeatedly like a level 9 falco

 

[Fortress]

I dunno, I can't play Falco worth a damn. I kill myself a lot. The only thing I can really do with him is shine-cancel.

 

[MetalMan]

Im a Fox player and I dont multi shine

 

[Fortress]

I think what Eli was saying is that there's this negative attitude towards spacies since many players have it in their heads that it takes an insurmountable amount of skill, luck, and montage music to play them properly, and that every spacie player plays like a high-level computer (doing sorts of things that probably can't be done by the average player). I don't think he was saying that it's bad that you can't do that; but that a lot of people seem to think that Spacie players just ooze technical skill moreso than people who main other characters.

 

[Paradoxium]

The only people who really do technical demanding techniques with the spacies are the really good players, the general majority don't do it all that often, yet they still win a lot. And the technically advanced stuff is not required either.

 

[GaretHax]

I like this idea that its oh so demanding to play spacies, as if everyone who plays them is just multishining repeatedly like a level 9 falco

While you raise a good point it's hard to escape the fact that only a handful of players have ever made Fox work, all I can recall are Jman once or twice when he was inarguably the best Fox, M2K when he was the best everything, and Mango because Mango. While super-techskill isn't required for someone of a higher-skill level to run people over with spacies trying to get bye without it gets exponentially more difficult, eventually becoming nigh-impossible, though at this level honestly player intelligence, innovation, basics and skill starts to matter infinitely more since everyone is pretty damn technical or at the very least can do what they want to do, when they want to. But you know this already, its' all common-sence, if spacie's get changed in any significant manner I don't think it would be entirely unreasonable to compensate for it in other areas. Getting rid of Fox's laser and making Falco's less useful or spam-able would be a great start, but you may lose alot of people to changes like that. Really I don't see how any of this is on topic or all that productive, its' already been argued to death a dozen times over the years, and after wolf I honestly trust the pmbr with the other spacies.

 

[a vehicle]

The difference here however, is what if a character was made just as good as fox without being technically demanding? You essentially have a boxer with a broken rib that you have to train for months with, or a new boxer that is 100% healthy and just as world-class as the other that is ready to go in a week. Which is better?

Thats why I said he isn't completely wrong... wrong to a certain extent
IMO melee would pretty balanced if only you were to consider the top tiers

 

[Papa+Stone]

Oh someone earlier said that there would be no point to learning fox if he was more technical yet on even grounds as the other characters

 

[1MachGO]

I think people need to realize that Fox and Falco are not the bane of smash's metagame development. When compared to characters like Sheik or Brawl MK, they don't go nearly as far as to make certain low tiers practically unviable.

 

[PMS | LEVEL 100 MAGIKARP]

I think people need to realize that Fox and Falco are not the bane of smash's metagame development. When compared to characters like Sheik or Brawl MK, they don't go nearly as far as to make certain low tiers practically unviable.

Falco's lasers are toxic and can make a character like DK in melee (or P:M) almost unviable.

 

[1MachGO]

Definitely not as much the case in P:M, but in Melee, yes, Falco seemed to be built for his destruction.

With that said, most characters gain much more viable punishing tools vs. the spacies than many other characters.

 

[PMS | LEVEL 100 MAGIKARP]

Also falco's lasers are not fun to play against as DDD

 

[1MachGO]

Sure, but do you think DDD is worse than any Melee mid tier in terms of tools and punishing capabilities?

 

[GaretHax]

Uhm there are other reasons DK struggles with that matchup Magikarp, if you want to see why most low tiers are unviable in melee go watch some shiek videos.

 

[ELI-mination]

What? The argument isn't that "Fox and Falco are the bane of the smash metagame", its that there is an obvious double standard when it comes to them that shouldn't apply. Why should all these other characters get constant changes, buffs, nerfs, etc. while spacies are untouchable and if you even analyze them or discuss any potential balancing, you're suddenly a "scrub" who is all "biased" against them just because you don't necessarily hold to the belief that melee always = spacies and that they are perfectly designed characters.
I don't even have to say anything about how people exaggerate the importance of spacies tech skill or whatever. Just look at the extremely miniscule change about invincibilty being removed from the (STILL) best move in the game and the reaction, then compare it to any other change made to other characters. Case closed.

 

[GaretHax]

If that was directed at me, I don't see what you are getting at. I agree with you and wouldn't mind spacies being changed at all. If it seems otherwise I'm afraid I have been misinterpreted, but we have been at this same impasse probably ten times now lol.

 

[ELI-mination]

If that was directed at me, I don't see what you are getting at. I agree with you and wouldn't mind spacies being changed at all. If it seems otherwise I'm afraid I have been misinterpreted, but we have been at this same impasse probably ten times now lol.

Wasn't responding to you

 

[PMS | LEVEL 100 MAGIKARP]

Sure, but do you think DDD is worse than any Melee mid tier in terms of tools and punishing capabilities?

well, not really, ddd is better than melee midtiers, but in the context of P:M he's relatively worse off. However, DDD, simply because of his large range and strong knockback (fully charged fsmash can kill at 0 percent lol) has more potential than most tier lists give him credit for.

Uhm there are other reasons DK struggles with that matchup Magikarp, if you want to see why most low tiers are unviable in melee go watch some shiek videos.

Well, 1machgo was referring to the fact that fox and falco are not a bane to the metagame like sheik, and I said that they are just as toxic and used lasers as an example. I mean theoretically, in melee they're the most toxic as after a point the only way to beat a spacie is to play that spacie but have more precision and apm.

 

[MetalMan]

All I can say is that theres an extra skill needed to keep Fox from suiciding, just saying.

Also, I really think Fox(dont know about Falco, dont play him as often) needs readjustments, my top priority would be making F-tilt usable D:

 

[1MachGO]

What? The argument isn't that "Fox and Falco are the bane of the smash metagame", its that there is an obvious double standard when it comes to them that shouldn't apply. Why should all these other characters get constant changes, buffs, nerfs, etc. while spacies are untouchable and if you even analyze them or discuss any potential balancing, you're suddenly a "scrub" who is all "biased" against them just because you don't necessarily hold to the belief that melee always = spacies and that they are perfectly designed characters.
I don't even have to say anything about how people exaggerate the importance of spacies tech skill or whatever. Just look at the extremely miniscule change about invincibilty being removed from the (STILL) best move in the game and the reaction, then compare it to any other change made to other characters. Case closed.

TBH, it seemed like the general consensus on the invincibility removal was primarily positive/indifferent. All negative reactions were in response to people proposing more drastic overhauls of the characters. Also, you cannot compare changes made to Fox, Falco, Shiek, etc. to those of Sonic or Ike. The Melee top and high tiers have years of meta and developed fanbases behind them, Sonic does not. The expectations of change and reactions to change should be different given the circumstances.

And I'll give you that people may exaggerate, but Fox and Falco being harder to play, from a technical standpoint, has merits. It is an actual dilemma to consider when thinking about how they are "balanced".

EDIT:

well, not really, ddd is better than melee midtiers, but in the context of P:M he's relatively worse off. However, DDD, simply because of his large range and strong knockback (fully charged fsmash can kill at 0 percent lol) has more potential than most tier lists give him credit for.

I honestly don't know too much about DDD, but if he would be relatively worse off in P:M than in Melee, I would guess that means DDD has a lot more problems than his MU vs space animals?

 

[ELI-mination]

TBH, it seemed like the general consensus on the invincibility removal was primarily positive/indifferent. All negative reactions were in response to people proposing more drastic overhauls of the characters. Also, you cannot compare changes made to Fox, Falco, Shiek, etc. to those of Sonic or Ike. The Melee top and high tiers have years of meta and developed fanbases behind them, Sonic does not. The expectations of change and reactions to change should be different given the circumstances.

And I'll give you that people may exaggerate, but Fox and Falco being harder to play, from a technical standpoint, has merits. It is an actual dilemma to consider when thinking about how they are "balanced".

First of all, it is not true that the consensus was positive/indifferent. That's only what you see here on the P:M boards because people who actually are P:M fans were finally asked for their opinions on the matter, rather than trying to cater to melee players specifically.
About the "more drastic overhauls", that's not only relative but its also subjective, and I don't see anything specific to point to so idk what to tell you about that one.

Second of all, other characters in melee also have years of meta behind them. As do brawl characters. As do 64 characters. And while Project M incarnations of these characters are relatively fresh/new, they are still based on smash's metagame in general (with the exception of a few terrible decisions that make me shudder in disgust). There's no particular reason to stretch your logic into a position where these characters in particular deserve special treatment, other than *gasp* bias, just as I've ironically been accused of.

Its one thing to say that spacies are "harder to play", and another to claim that playing them requires you to play like a TAS match or like Dark. Guaranteed somebody like Dark would get wrecked by people who are more intelligent in their play like DJ Nintendo for example. So its a slippery slope and a LOT less relevant than you seem to suggest in terms of character design or balance.

tl;dr -> stop claiming special treatment for something just because "10 years of metagame" as if that's supposed to be the absolute knockdown argument that makes you immune to criticism or further analysis.

 

[Papa+Stone]

spacies will forever be the hardest characters to play because they get punished hard for mistakes and need more button presses than anyone. this is indisputable. if it wasnt for spacies being so prominent in melee most of mid and low tiers would plummet since decent spacies matchups is literally the biggest reason some characters like pikachu are as high as they are. They dont destroy low tiers like sheik or marth do. I dont really play them but I respect how hard they are to use and how fun they are to play against and it makes me cry when you guys complain about them so much, especially when people demean them for being mindless scrub chars or w/e.

 

[PMS | LEVEL 100 MAGIKARP]

I honestly don't know too much about DDD, but if he would be relatively worse off in P:M than in Melee, I would guess that means DDD has a lot more problems than his MU vs space animals?

Well yes you could say that. Mainly DDD in his current metagame is just slightly outclassed by another character at almost everything. Also because of his size and weight, his weaknesses are a bit greater than everyone else's.

He also lost his chaingrab

 

[ELI-mination]

Other characters get punished for mistakes just as hard and even harder. Other characters are also more likely to get into those situations where they can be punished because they have significantly less tools. Other characters have a lot more stress to figure out how to approach correctly and must be a lot more intelligent with their much more limited options. Two can play this little game.

Point is, there is no justification in having issues with any of these "janky" "gimmicks" and stuff about other characters being "anti-spacies" when in the same breath spacies are seen as "hard to play" -> everything they have is automatically justified. Everything should be under equal criticism and analysis, NO EXCEPTIONS. More popular characters? Too bad. Same deal. More metagame behind them? Too bad. Same deal. You have to press lots of buttons? Too bad. Same deal.

 

[1MachGO]

First of all, it is not true that the consensus was positive/indifferent. That's only what you see here on the P:M boards because people who actually are P:M fans were finally asked for their opinions on the matter, rather than trying to cater to melee players specifically.
About the "more drastic overhauls", that's not only relative but its also subjective, and I don't see anything specific to point to so idk what to tell you about that one.

Second of all, other characters in melee also have years of meta behind them. As do brawl characters. As do 64 characters. And while Project M incarnations of these characters are relatively fresh/new, they are still based on smash's metagame in general (with the exception of a few terrible decisions that make me shudder in disgust). There's no particular reason to stretch your logic into a position where these characters in particular deserve special treatment, other than *gasp* bias, just as I've ironically been accused of.

Its one thing to say that spacies are "harder to play", and another to claim that playing them requires you to play like a TAS match or like Dark. Guaranteed somebody like Dark would get wrecked by people who are more intelligent in their play like DJ Nintendo for example. So its a slippery slope and a LOT less relevant than you seem to suggest in terms of character design or balance.

tl;dr -> stop claiming special treatment for something just because "10 years of metagame" as if that's supposed to be the absolute knockdown argument that makes you immune to criticism or further analysis.

I am not suggesting that the logic is correct, I am saying that a change to Fox and Falco being perceived differently than a change to other characters shouldn't come as a surprise. If, right out the gate, the PMBR declared no character sacred, then reactions would probably be more equal. However, since the melee top and high tiers WERE given special treatment, a different expectation has been created for them. I am not saying you should adhere to, or even agree with the reasoning, but you should at very least understand that different expectations have been made for these characters and the reactions are only natural.

And technical difficulty does have a major impact on balance. Hypothetically, lets say they added Dr. Mario back into P:M. However, the only difference he had with P:M Mario was that all of his hitboxes are 50% bigger. Now, is there any incentive to play Mario who is now more difficult to use? What if they then made all of Mario's attacks better/more useful, now is there an incentive to play Dr. Mario? This is the problem.

 

[ELI-mination]

I am not suggesting that the logic is correct, I am saying that a change to Fox and Falco being perceived differently than a change to other characters shouldn't come as a surprise. If, right out the gate, the PMBR declared no character sacred, then reactions would probably be more equal. However, since the melee top and high tiers WERE given special treatment, a different expectation has been created for them. I am not saying you should adhere to, or even agree with the reasoning, but you should at very least understand that different expectations have been made for these characters and the reactions are only natural.

And technical difficulty does have a major impact on balance. Hypothetically, lets say they added Dr. Mario back into P:M. However, the only difference he had with P:M Mario was that all of his hitboxes are 50% bigger. Now, is there any incentive to play Mario who is now more difficult to use? What if they then made all of Mario's attacks better/more useful, now is there an incentive to play Dr. Mario? This is the problem.

1st paragraph: Okay, so the logic isn't correct. I never was surprised, just irritated.
2nd paragraph: Agreed. There is a lot more to it than tech skill though, so why is that always the thing that's brought up along with "10 years" that makes spacies untouchable?

 

[Papa+Stone]

lol okay I play doc luigi mario falcon so I probably dont know as well about how hard the rest of the cast gets punished by spacies since my characters bar falcon dont get punished so bad. i just dont see why spacies are such a big deal to handle for so many people that they get treated so badly by the pm community and I love playing them more than anyone. But this is probably just me knowing nothing except the characters that I frequently play as or against, so my bad man.

But all those gimmicks and auto combos things that the melee players say that you guys dwell on, which admittedly, are wrong/have a double standard, and I agree that the things said are dumb and not in the right. But melee players really dont have as much drive to get excited for pm as much as the low tier mains-turned pm players do, since melee has a good number of well balanced matchups amongst the top tiers that the people who have been playing that long probably enjoy a lot. Melee also has the pure virgin melee sfx and graphics(opinion), a metagame that the best players have learned to perfection to the point where they begin noticing the margins for reads and thresholds for punishes. Admittedly pm does feel a little different, which may not matter to people who are ready for a game to win tournaments with link, but to melee players who still have fun playing melee or just recently got into melee, a slight but worse(opinion) feel matters more when you just dont have that drive to get a fresh experience. All of these factors contribute to the melee community being blunt about their preferences towards pm.

You guys probably hear these things a lot and get tired of it most likely which is ok, but you guys get really upset over it and blow it out of proportion. There was a thread on the melee boards that I read when I lurked here when at one point someone asked what it would take to convert melee players, and since they all said they would rather just play the game they put years into and were familiar with everyone got mad and now we have guys here getting support for 'bcuz melee' inside jokes/maymays. i think im literally the only guy that likes your game that doesnt hate spacies or get mad when people say theyd rather play melee.

 

[ELI-mination]

I want to like that post because I agree but its all one goddamn sentence

 

[1MachGO]

2nd paragraph: Agreed. There is a lot more to it than tech skill though, so why is that always the thing that's brought up along with "10 years" that makes spacies untouchable?

Its brought up because its the defense for their attributes. If a character is harder to play, then they have more options to compensate for their difficulty. However, the problem is the compensation makes them "easier" to play at a higher level when difficulty becomes less of an issue. Its a balancing dilemma

Check out this video where this guy talks about a similar issue in Dota 2. I personally know nothing about MOBAs, but this analysis about how balancing an execution oriented characters is a lose-lose situation is highly applicable to Fox and Falco, watch until 22:08 (I also highly recommend any PMBR member/aspiring designers to watch this) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=m2ouNlfLPjs#t=1211

 

[MagnesD3]

Well yes you could say that. Mainly DDD in his current metagame is just slightly outclassed by another character at almost everything. Also because of his size and weight, his weaknesses are a bit greater than everyone else's.

He also lost his chaingrab

I'm hoping he gets overbuffed in 3.0 :-s

 

[DrinkingFood]

Personally, I hope that when Project: Project:M is designed for SSB4, that the devs decide to be a little more lenient in their conversion of melee vets. I would like a new take on Melee Falco that captures all the coolness with half the stupid or less.

 

[JOE!]

Its brought up because its the defense for their attributes. If a character is harder to play, then they have more options to compensate for their difficulty. However, the problem is the compensation makes them "easier" to play at a higher level when difficulty becomes less of an issue. Its a balancing dilemma

Check out this video where this guy talks about a similar issue in Dota 2. I personally know nothing about MOBAs, but this analysis about how balancing an execution oriented characters is a lose-lose situation is highly applicable to Fox and Falco, watch until 22:08 (I also highly recommend any PMBR member/aspiring designers to watch this) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=m2ouNlfLPjs#t=1211

Right, the issue with designing for execution is: what do you do about the cases where execution isn't an issue?

 

[DrinkingFood]

Haven't you people seen Perfect Dark? Execution/technical difficulty isn't an issue lol

 

[1MachGO]

DrinkingFood, who are you responding to? If you read my post/JOE!'s/watch the video, you would see that technical difficulty becoming nullified at top level is the exact issue we are discussing.

Also, Dark is a bad example in so many ways.

 

[DrinkingFood]

Well that was half a joke
and honestly don't know who I was reponding to
why do I even post here anymore I don't know

 

[ItalianStallion]

spacies will forever be the hardest characters to play because they get punished hard for mistakes and need more button presses than anyone. this is indisputable. if it wasnt for spacies being so prominent in melee most of mid and low tiers would plummet since decent spacies matchups is literally the biggest reason some characters like pikachu are as high as they are. They dont destroy low tiers like sheik or marth do. I dont really play them but I respect how hard they are to use and how fun they are to play against and it makes me cry when you guys complain about them so much, especially when people demean them for being mindless scrub chars or w/e.

Whoa! What is this logic?!

Like others have said, spacies don't need to be played like a TAS match in order to be in a good position. It's actually very easy not to get punished for mistakes when you have the tools that they have. I guarantee you that DDD, or Ganon, or Pm's version of Mewtwo are MUCH harder characters to play than spacies. Just because you can play all technical and wild with spacies doesn't mean you need to in order to win. Someone playing a safe spacie who camps and waits for their opportunities is going to be very hard to beat with a character like DDD or Ganon. The strong punish game DDD and Ganon have is a good strength, but it kind of relies on your opponent making mistakes with spacing, or just significantly outplaying them.