Why isn't auto L Canceling an option?

[MegaMissingno]

one thing that should always be noted forever in these conversations: it's not difficult to l-cancel, and that's exactly why "it's an execution barrier git gud etc" shouldn't be an excuse, because the second an average joe finds l/z-cancelling in a smash game that allows it, it's like twenty minutes of casual play AT WORST to do it semi-consistently. is it small enough to where few care? absolutely, but in terms of overall, functional game design, its strange arbitration should be discussed.

If I may play devil's advocate for a minute, it's worth noting that even the best players aren't 100% consistent. There was a recent event where the commentators were talking about how 3.5 now lists your L-Cancel rate in the end of match stats, and then they asked players to pull them up after each round to look at. Turns out on average people were only around 70-80%, with like one outlier at 90%. So it is a tough skill to try and get really consistent with, and there's a notable difference between the guy who's only getting it 70% of the time and the guy who's getting it 90% of the time.

 

[Strong Badam]

For what it's worth, a reasonably high number of "missed L-cancels" displayed at the end of the game by good players are intentional ledge-cancels, which the game counts as missed l-cancels.

 

[W.A.C.]

For what it's worth, a reasonably high number of "missed L-cancels" displayed at the end of the game by good players are intentional ledge-cancels, which the game counts as missed l-cancels.

In a previous thread about this subject, your response as to whether or not auto L cancelling will ever be added to the game was "not gonna happen." Can you explain why it's not going to happen and why you feel this mechanic makes Project M an overall better quality game? Also, what's wrong with giving players the option to have auto L cancels?

 

[standardtoaster]

For what it's worth, a reasonably high number of "missed L-cancels" displayed at the end of the game by good players are intentional ledge-cancels, which the game counts as missed l-cancels.

Hmm, I could try to make it 100% accurate and not count ledge canceled aerials.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

A lot of the counter play people listed doesn't matter, if you L-Cancel on a shorter window you can cover every option your opponent can try to do to mess you up.

It should be axed since it's only purpose is to make the game arbitrarily harder with no meaningful depth added. There is no choice to it, it doesn't add depth, all it does is exclude the low and mid levels of play.

It's there to be another press another button and nothing more.

If people tried to make a smash game from scratch, it would never be added and no other fighter would without a meter.

 

[F. Blue]

I feel like the OP's original question was glossed over. Would it be possible to make auto-L-cancel a toggleable option like input assist, or perhaps incorporate it into debug? It may have some merit as a training tool or simply to mess with casually.

 

[Narpas_sword]

I feel like the OP's original question was glossed over. Would it be possible to make auto-L-cancel a toggleable option like input assist, or perhaps incorporate it into debug? It may have some merit as a training tool or simply to mess with casually.

To do this, something would need to be replaced, i think.

 

[MTGEL33T]

In a previous thread about this subject, your response as to whether or not auto L cancelling will ever be added to the game was Can you explain why it's not going to happen and why you feel this mechanic makes Project M an overall better quality game? Also, what's wrong with giving players the option to have auto L cancels?

It's not going to happen because there is no reason to. It literally would serve no purpose aside from maybe showing a new player how much faster the game is than not l cancelling. Auto cancelling would just be giving a crutch to worse players that would really hinder them in the long run. Also, it would be a bit OP if one person could use it and the opponent didn't, making the worse player seem better than they really are.

EDIT: It adds more skill depth to the game. It isn't pointless, it's pro. It sounds like you just have difficulty doing it and don't like it.

 

[MegaMissingno]

To do this, something would need to be replaced, i think.

It could be made part of the existing input assist option, as I mentioned earlier. Turn on input assist and that'd include auto L-cancels with it.

 

[Bleck]

It sounds like you just have difficulty doing it

grow up, kid

 

[Stryker]

Sounds like OP just dismissing lots of valid arguments because they don't fit what he is perfectly looking for.

I look forward to this thread dying off just like the (what seems like) 100's of others that we've had.
It's like new players get ahold of the game, decide L cancelling is too hard, and then immediately sign up for smashboards thinking "No one could have possibly thought to suggest that this game mechanic isn't perfect in the 14 years this has been out! Let me go enlighten people with my original thought"
And every thread ends the same.
Good riddance.

 

[GP&B]

That's probably because L-canceling is actually a dumb mechanic.

 

[Phaiyte]

Sounds like OP just dismissing lots of valid arguments because they don't fit what he is perfectly looking for.

I look forward to this thread dying off just like the (what seems like) 100's of others that we've had.
It's like new players get ahold of the game, decide L cancelling is too hard, and then immediately sign up for smashboards thinking "No one could have possibly thought to suggest that this game mechanic isn't perfect in the 14 years this has been out! Let me go enlighten people with my original thought"
And every thread ends the same.
Good riddance.

Strawman fallacies are not "good/valid arguments", and never will be at any given point in time, ever.

 

[SSS]

i didn't read any of the replies

but it's because it raises the skill ceiling

it's like saying "why doesn't one grab lead to death every time, there's no reason why you wouldn't want to zero-to-death someone from a grab all the time, so why not just have it be automatic"

 

[W.A.C.]

It's not going to happen because there is no reason to.

There is a reason to change this mechanic because it's bad, unintuitive game design that's part of the game solely to make it less accessible and more difficult. The best excuse I've heard for the current way things are setup is how it benefits Ice Climbers. That's about it. It sounds like there were some legitimate reasons in Melee for this system, but much of that doesn't apply to Project M, which just makes its inclusion more pointless.

Sounds like OP just dismissing lots of valid arguments because they don't fit what he is perfectly looking for.

People who favor this mechanics primarily like it because it makes the game more difficult to play.

I look forward to this thread dying off just like the (what seems like) 100's of others that we've had.
It's like new players get ahold of the game, decide L cancelling is too hard, and then immediately sign up for smashboards thinking "No one could have possibly thought to suggest that this game mechanic isn't perfect in the 14 years this has been out! Let me go enlighten people with my original thought"
And every thread ends the same.
Good riddance.

Oh, I'm well aware some other people have wanted to this mechanic go away for a long time now. I primarily made this thread because I don't understand why the developers won't at least make auto L cancelling an option, even though it should be automatic to begin with. It's especially annoying because the developers of this game seem resistant to explain why it should be part of the game. I used to love Project M because of how fast paced, fluid, and better balanced it felt compared to Brawl. Then learned about wave dashing and L Cancelling, and grew to hate those mechanics. But I can tolerate wave dashing for reasons I explained earlier in the thread. L Cancelling on the other hand, no. Having to do that after every jump just makes the game really annoying to play and unenjoyable at a competitive level. Considering how Project M's popularity is going to hell, you would think the developers would be open minded about how they could make the game more enjoyable for a broader audience. Making L cancelling automatic would make the game more accessible and fun, while still providing a game filled with a lot of depth that appeals greatly to the most hardcore of Smash Bros. fans.

 

[Phaiyte]

i didn't read any of the replies

but it's because it raises the skill ceiling

it's like saying "why doesn't one grab lead to death every time, there's no reason why you wouldn't want to zero-to-death someone from a grab all the time, so why not just have it be automatic"

Anyone remember that time I mentioned something about strawman fallacies? Man that was like, so long ago lol

 

[Narpas_sword]

i didn't read any of the replies

but it's because it raises the skill ceiling

it's like saying "why doesn't one grab lead to death every time, there's no reason why you wouldn't want to zero-to-death someone from a grab all the time, so why not just have it be automatic"

Raises the skill floor, not ceiling.

 

[GP&B]

i didn't read any of the replies

but it's because it raises the skill ceiling

it's like saying "why doesn't one grab lead to death every time, there's no reason why you wouldn't want to zero-to-death someone from a grab all the time, so why not just have it be automatic"

I'm not even arguing for or against it here besides stating that it's a dumb mechanic, but this is a hilariously bad comparison.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Sounds like OP just dismissing lots of valid arguments because they don't fit what he is perfectly looking for.

I look forward to this thread dying off just like the (what seems like) 100's of others that we've had.
It's like new players get ahold of the game, decide L cancelling is too hard, and then immediately sign up for smashboards thinking "No one could have possibly thought to suggest that this game mechanic isn't perfect in the 14 years this has been out! Let me go enlighten people with my original thought"
And every thread ends the same.
Good riddance.

http://www.cpgaming.gg/guest-blog/esports-blog/negative-aspects-of-ssbm/

What if someone who can do it and performs well thinks it's a bad mechanic?

 

[trash?]

it's very odd that people sincerely believe nobody that loves a game can criticize it

I adore melee, I adore project m. I spend hours on end grinding techskill at random, because it's so damn satisfying to do. most importantly when I adore something to absurd levels, I pay close attention to everything wrong with it, regardless of its size.

l-cancelling is boring. it's a button that you have to hit just because, and there's no real precision or timing to it. if you parade around l-cancelling as a difficult thing to do (and, ergo, assume all critics to be "scrubs"), I'm going to just honestly assume you're not a very good player, because there's no way, in a game with DACUSes and aura sphere cancels and movement tricks, someone could genuinely see l-cancelling as an interesting mechanic.

 

[Bleck]

i didn't read any of the replies

I didn't read this post

 

[KayB]

More importantly, if we got rid of L-Cancelling, we'd have to rename SHFFLing to SHFFing and that just sounds awkward.

 

[CyberZixx]

L cancel is kind needless. Only thing it does it make you feel accomplished for improving at it and seeing the benefits to your punish game.

But when people are really good at the game they hardly miss them so it becomes moot. For this reason it don't bother me.

What does bother me is Crouch canceling. No need for that. It is silly to be able to hold down and punish people for attacking. Can be a better alt to shielding. For this reason it makes grabs a stronger option. The main gamplay issue with smash for me is how important grabbing is in the meta. It is often your best bet as a punish.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

I thought of another weird anology to illustrate L-Cancelling: Opening a door in your house that immediately leads to a door that opens your bathroom.

 

[Kidneyjoe]

I've always wondered what Sakurai/HAL were thinking when they implemented z and l cancelling. Why would people so invested in the idea of making an experience that anyone can enjoy put such an arbitrary skill barrier in their game? The only thing I can think of is that they didn't want people who hadn't yet learned about defensive options like DI, SDI, and teching to be able to easily 0-death one another but still wanted lower endlag aerials to be available to anyone who really dedicated themselves to learning the intricacies of the game. Now that basically everyone that is remotely invested in competitive smash knows how to l-cancel consistently there's really no point in the mechanic existing at all. Maybe when we were 8 years old and thought that holding towards the stage during knockback would let us live longer it had a purpose but I'd be hard pressed to find any benefit or depth in it now outside of really situational stuff like an ICs desync or shield tilting.

 

[Foo]

I was going to save my sanity and avoid this thread, but... I lurked and saw some... well... UNBEARABLE posts and had to reply.

Because if you miss an L-cancel, it allows an opportunity to punish in higher level play. If you miss an L-cancel, you might drop a combo. It's one of the easiest things from a technical standpoint. It allows the players who've invested more time to have an edge, and it increases the skill cap.

The only argument people seem to have against L-canceling is "it's harder." I used to find these things hard too, and I'm still really new to the game from a competitive standpoint (coming up on two and a half months). But I practice my butt off and can L-cancel around 80-95% of the time most games now (you can see on the results screen). Not as good as top players, but it's something - getting better at the game feels good. It gives you something to strive towards. Maybe you should stop complaining and start practicing?

No, that's not something that happens because L-cancelling isn't that hard. Good players don't miss L-cancels anywhere near often for it to be relevant, but even if they did, it'd still be stupid. Every input in smash is as simple as it can be, except L-canceling. You don't have to hit shield and then A+down to spotdodge, you don't have to hit b+direction to get up of ledge, and you don't have to hit L to access the iasa of a move, though all of these things would be punishable if you mess up.

There are SO many arguments against L-cancelling, and the least used ones is "It's harder." I have mastered L-cancelling and only mess it up if I'm rusty and I still think it's a pointless mechanic.

If you throw a ball to a quarterback in the endzone and it touches him but he drops it, do we give him the points because "Well catching the ball is a pointless technicality. Why would you ever not want to catch the ball?"
No. he doesn't get the point because one of the expectational barriers to playing football is catching the football. If you mess that up, you get punished cause you can't catch the ball.

Yeah, that wouldn't change the depth of football at ALL. Players wouldn't just bat the ball down to have it count as a catch, throwing the balance of the CB and the WR. It also messes up the risk reward of a corner back going for an interception vs going for a bat away. Batting the ball down and catching, and also the different ways in which you can catch the ball has lots of depths. There is no way you could make catching a ball simpler without throwing off the depth of a game or cheating, the same way you can't make waveshining easier without removing depth or cheating (which usually removes depth anyway. The key element is choice. If there's no reasonable level of choice involved in L-cancelling, there's no real point. You want the game to be as streamlined as possible, and have the difficulty be unforced and natural.

Sounds like OP just dismissing lots of valid arguments because they don't fit what he is perfectly looking for.

I look forward to this thread dying off just like the (what seems like) 100's of others that we've had.
It's like new players get ahold of the game, decide L cancelling is too hard, and then immediately sign up for smashboards thinking "No one could have possibly thought to suggest that this game mechanic isn't perfect in the 14 years this has been out! Let me go enlighten people with my original thought"
And every thread ends the same.
Good riddance.

Nice strawman bro, mind if I burn it? Yeah, new players DO get the game and see how L-cancelling is hard and that's a problem BECAUSE L-CANCELLING IS POINTLESS. You don't want to negatively impact new players with a mechanic, unless the game needs it. At some point, I wished pretty much every tech in PM wasn't in the game, and I wound up being glad they are in the game once I mastered them, because of the added depth. I hated how wavedashing gave my opponent an advantage and I was frustrated trying to learn it. Hell, I was really frustrated with shorthopping at a point. However, L-cancelling is the only one that I DO still wish was gone, and believe me, I don't struggle with it. Like strongbad said, pretty much all my missed L-cancels at high level play are edgecancels and (in my case at least) moves that you don't need to L-cancel (like ending a combo with shorthop fair for a kill)

Only point you have is about people making a new thread for this over and over, but that's not really relevant to the points made.

Also, to everyone saying light shields and shield tilting provided depth, that's not true. It that were relevant (which it's not) you could just mash z, L or R to get L cancels every time no matter what since it's not like teching, there's no cooldown if you miss time it. Also, if your fingers are hurting from L-cancels, using the z button helps with that too.

 

[FireBall Stars]

You will never get a defining conclusion about L-cancel should be in or not, because game design is not an exact science. Even if something makes the perfect sense, including or excluding a mechanic will always make the game more fun to some people and less fun to others. A game might run on a computer but we're ultimately talking about subjective matters, fun, and people.

Defining the path of progression that players have to go through to improve and reach higher heights and he or she trains is important, and many techniques and aspects of the game contribute to that. And L-cancel's contribution to that process is undeniable, even if it just means that you're gonna spend some more time playing until you get it down, integrate in your gameplay while you learn other, harder, more important things that need time to learn and are the actual objective. Risking throwing your players into the abstract realm of gameplay where "fundamentals matter the most" too early, and it might be like throwing the final boss in the first stage. L-cancelling is just one of the small mechanics that help it to not fall in that trap.

Could achieving these small positives L-cancel adds to the game be done the same way with a better mechanic, certainly yes. But would I ask Project M to remove L-cancel? I wouldn't ask Street Fighter to remove motions, it's part of the identity of that gameplay, even though they're much bigger and intrusive artificial barriers for new players.

To blindly defend or attack L-cancelling is a clear showing of bias towards one or more games. There's no problem for supporters to admit that L-cancel's existence is arbitrary, as it is, and there's no problem for it to be that way. Videogame are arbitrary.

Automatic L-cancel or its removal would make the competitive aspect of the game more accessible, a negligible amount though. Not enough to justfify modifying (and possibly risk ruining through an unexpected error) a key part of what constitutes player's muscle memory in the game, gameplay identity and player progression process.

We'd see no problem to provide a toggle for auto L-cancel in the future however, more options are great to have, and also great to keep having these thought provoking discussions here with actual concrete data. But the manual one would not leave its place as the default option.

Cheers, and keep discussing. That can only contribute to the development of the community.

 

[MegaMissingno]

We'd see no problem to provide a toggle for auto L-cancel in the future however, more options are great to have, and also great to keep having these thought provoking discussions here with actual concrete data. But the manual one would not leave its place as the default option.

Good enough for me.

 

[Pwii]

I've always wondered what Sakurai/HAL were thinking when they implemented z and l cancelling.

If some random youtube comment is to be trusted, it's because players instinctively wanted to shield to protect themselves after landing an aerial during playtesting. So Sakurai didn't see at as canceling lag, but rather making shielding after aerials faster and smoother than other options. This is just something I heard though.

L-canceling makes aggressive SHFFL timing mixups harder. Super-late aerials require a different L-cancel timing on the part of the attacker, so it makes them harder to perform, just as they're harder to defend.

If someone is too lazy to learn how to L-cancel, they're never going to be any good. L-canceling is not even necessary to play at a bottom level. I learned to L-cancel way before I learned to how to beat people who couldn't.

L-cancelling is not a necessity. It is an area that you can choose to invest in if you want to improve your game. It's not part of the skill floor, it's a tool to get past the apparent skill ceiling.

 

[Bleck]

Even if something makes the perfect sense, including or excluding a mechanic will always make the game more fun to some people and less fun to others.

literally all I'm hearing is "because Melee"

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

You will never get a defining conclusion about L-cancel should be in or not, because game design is not an exact science. Even if something makes the perfect sense, including or excluding a mechanic will always make the game more fun to some people and less fun to others. A game might run on a computer but we're ultimately talking about subjective matters, fun, and people.

Designing in general isn't an exact science and everyone has their own styles, but when the body of the design can live without certain elements it's always a good idea to cut the fat. That's evident since the mechanic has been removed since Brawl (but they added more dumb stuff cuz Sakurai is so whimsical).

Defining the path of progression that players have to go through to improve and reach higher heights and he or she trains is important, and many techniques and aspects of the game contribute to that. And L-cancel's contribution to that process is undeniable, even if it just means that you're gonna spend some more time playing until you get it down, integrate in your gameplay while you learn other, harder, more important things that need time to learn and are the actual objective. Risking throwing your players into the abstract realm of gameplay where "fundamentals matter the most" too early, and it might be like throwing the final boss in the first stage. L-cancelling is just one of the small mechanics that help it to not fall in that trap.

The bolded is true. This occurs w/o L-Cancelling being a thing. "Learning funadmentals too early" is not a trap. They're things you need to know and understand at the bottom level that you keep during your journey in getting better playing any game easier and potentially more fun.

I wouldn't ask Street Fighter to remove motions, it's part of the identity of that gameplay, even though they're much bigger and intrusive artificial barriers for new players.

Motions have their place and they justified them within the realm of Street Fighter at a fundamental level. It's their thing to own and it's a part of their identity now. Even SF throughout the years have cut out mechanics (even certain motions are being slowly phased out) they saw unecessary when developing new systems for their games. I doubt you'll see Focus Attacks in SFV.

To blindly defend or attack L-cancelling is a clear showing of bias towards one or more games. There's no problem for supporters to admit that L-cancel's existence is arbitrary, as it is, and there's no problem for it to be that way. Videogame are arbitrary.

Nah, I'm not buying that.

Automatic L-cancel or its removal would make the competitive aspect of the game more accessible, a negligible amount though.

No, it won't make you any better than you were before immediately. Why should it?

 

[FireBall Stars]

Learning fundamentals early is not a trap, forcing players to do so is one for the developer. Fundamentals, the actual elements of the intrincate mental combat are something most players learn the last in a fighting game, because it is the most difficult, complex and abstract part of a fighting game. If a new player is forced to go straight into it very early, when he fails, he won't understand why, because he just didn't play the game long enough to understand what fundamentals are, more likely then to drop the game. Fighting game fundamentals are not learned at the bottom level, they are at the top of fighting game strategy ladder, as noted by FGC's Jchensor.

Guiding that process is important, but I not once said that L-cancel is needed for it to happen, only so that it does make part of the contribution to mold that process.

I also did not say that auto L-cancel would make anyone better, only lower the technical requirements for the competitive scene, that is, more accessible. No one will automatically become better at the game with such a thing.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Learning fundamentals early is not a trap, forcing players to do so is one for the developer. Fundamentals, the actual elements of the intrincate mental combat are something most players learn the last in a fighting game, because it is the most difficult, complex and abstract part of a fighting game. If a new player is forced to go straight into it very early, when he fails, he won't understand why, because he just didn't play the game long enough to understand what fundamentals are, more likely then to drop the game. Fighting game fundamentals are not learned at the bottom level, they are at the top of fighting game strategy ladder, as noted by FGC's Jchensor.

Guiding that process is important, but I not once said that L-cancel is needed for it to happen, only so that it does make part of the contribution to mold that process.

I also did not say that auto L-cancel would make anyone better, only lower the technical requirements for the competitive scene, that is, more accessible. No one will automatically become better at the game with such a thing.

People will get better at the game when they aren't suffering from additional lag so they get punished for missing an L-Cancel.

It's a barrier that doesn't let them play the real game.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

Learning fundamentals early is not a trap, forcing players to do so is one for the developer. Fundamentals, the actual elements of the intrincate mental combat are something most players learn the last in a fighting game, because it is the most difficult, complex and abstract part of a fighting game. If a new player is forced to go straight into it very early, when he fails, he won't understand why, because he just didn't play the game long enough to understand what fundamentals are, more likely then to drop the game. Fighting game fundamentals are not learned at the bottom level, they are at the top of fighting game strategy ladder, as noted by FGC's Jchensor.

I'm having trouble understanding you. Why would it be a problem from the developer to describe and explain fundamentals of his/her game to new players? Sakurai (the developer) can teach you (the player) about all the tools and mechanics provided to you in Smash because he has the influence over his team's decisions on creating them and their purpose. What he can't do is tell you how you're going to use them. That's up to the player(s).
The fundamental meta game is the hardest and last part of the game to grasp because it's constantly changing. We don't disagree here.

Now back to L-Cancelling. What importance is its relationship to the other system mechanics that justifies keeping it around? Its purpose can easily be overshadowed by just cutting landing lag in half, an easier solution.

 

[Exodo]

cuz this would make newbies life easier, and the game less fun, and more simple for more simple minded people and i would hate and so would everyone who likes competitive play and because bowser

 

[Bleck]

more simple for more simple minded people

see when you say this what you're saying is "I think that other people having fun is less important than my ability to define my self-worth through my ability to play this video game"

I think it's pretty unreasonable to keep a bad mechanic in a game because some people have social problems

 

[KayB]

literally all I'm hearing is "because 64"

FTFY

 

[FireBall Stars]

It seems to be a miscommunication here AuraMaudeGone, fighting game fundamentals are not specific to one game, every fighting game share them, and their base is the psychological combat between players, not directly related to the meta game. People tend to be confused due to the name, but fighting game fundamentals mean the core of every fighting game, and by that, it means fighting a human mind. You won't find many people out there who are able to properly define and explain what it is exactly because it is difficult to grasp. You can see James Chen explaining the concept here. In a game without many things to learn, you depend much more on your fundamentals to win even at a low level, it gets hard to improve because you have no tangible way of knowing how to get better, and inevitably fundamentals take a really long time to be learned. That is why scrubs often accuse wavedashing and other techniques to be overpowered, they just do not have enough knowledge to understand the core elements of the game, that is, what really made them lose. They were beaten badly and saw the guy sliding around, "it must have been that".

To be honest with you, like I said before, the contribution of L-cancel is small, most of the things it helps players to learn is achievable through other means. One is integrating landing detection into your muscle memory, another one is a rough notion for frame data, both can be learned and assisted by a variety of other elements in the game. But the most important for me is the feeling of progression that it gives to new players, it is artificial, but it can help motivate the player to continue learning more important things and the time invested will inevitably make the player learn more about the game. But overall it is just an arbitrary part of a well-functioning whole. One that works best with feelings than it does with logic.

When the player, while learning, training, gets to a level of understanding of the game that he starts to question the legitimacy of techniques, I believe that L-cancelling and other techniques have then succeeded in their role.

To be clear, I'm not actively defending L-cancelling as a mechanic, we all know that it could have been better and its main objective behind it could be reached through other ways. I'm only explaining that even though small, the benefits of the technique do exist.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

It seems to be a miscommunication here AuraMaudeGone, fighting game fundamentals are not specific to one game, every fighting game share them, and their base is the psychological combat between players, not directly related to the meta game. People tend to be confused due to the name, but fighting game fundamentals mean the core of every fighting game, and by that, it means fighting a human mind. You won't find many people out there who are able to properly define and explain what it is exactly because it is difficult to grasp. You can see James Chen explaining the concept here. In a game without many things to learn, you depend much more on your fundamentals to win even at a low level, it gets hard to improve because you have no tangible way of knowing how to get better, and inevitably fundamentals take a really long time to be learned. That is why scrubs often accuse wavedashing and other techniques to be overpowered, they just do not have enough knowledge to understand the core elements of the game, that is, what really made them lose. They were beaten badly and saw the guy sliding around, "it must have been that".

I agree with you to a certain point. The miscommunication is what you (and by extension James Chen) call fundamentals is what I call a meta game. At that point you're looking beyond what's literally in front of you and thinking about your opponent's actions in relation to yours. It's not hard to define. To me, learning the mechanics & tech and what they're used for are fundamentals. They're always going to be there. (unless patched out)

To be honest with you, like I said before, the contribution of L-cancel is small, most of the things it helps players to learn is achievable through other means. One is integrating landing detection into your muscle memory, another one is a rough notion for frame data, both can be learned and assisted by a variety of other elements in the game. But the most important for me is the feeling of progression that it gives to new players, it is artificial, but it can help motivate the player to continue learning more important things and the time invested will inevitably make the player learn more about the game. But overall it is just an arbitrary part of a well-functioning whole. One that works best with feelings than it does with logic.

When the player, while learning, training, gets to a level of understanding of the game that he starts to question the legitimacy of techniques, I believe that L-cancelling and other techniques have then succeeded in their role.

Mhm, mhm. My point still stands. The relationship L-Cancelling has to the rest of the mechanics is very weak.

 

[FireBall Stars]

No problem, you have strong points about your conclusion. Supported by many as well. For me for example that relationship is quite relevant, but for others not so much.