Super smash bros brawl info

MuffinMan, get off the 3D glasses chat. You too, Soushirei. You guys can argue about how movies relate to games somewhere else, but don't start arguing about the relevance of ****ing 3D glasses in a SSBB thread.

3D glasses totally = relevant, amirite?

 

That's an insinuation you're making, not a fact. Not every wavedasher looks down upon someone who doesn't. I, for one, don't. But I hate it when the opposite happens, and people say wavedashers, don't have any skill and are 'cheating'. Regardless if there is wavedashing or not, there will always be people looking down upon people who aren't as good as they are (aka, "they're 'noobs"), so accusing wavedashes, etc, for causing a rift in social attitudes is flawed.

Bou: It's an analogy. It's a way people effectively communicate to make a point. Get used to it. It happens. Your failure to make the connection between our comparisons to the relevance of this thread warrants a sincere apology from you.

 

This is why we need Megaman!

Think of the secks!

 

The secks? XD

I can't see Megaman being out of this game. Another 3rd party character I'd like to see has got to be Jiminy Cricket and his journal.

 

Though it's not the case in every instance, even though you can say "Just learn to do it!" doesn't change that a Wavedash/L-Cancel user is the one with the Advantage because of exploiting something in the game, even if both players are equally skilled, the one doing the exploiting gets the advantage

And I'm not saying this because I can't do it, I play SSB64 and Melee at a competitive level and can L/Z-cancel and Wavedash just fine, but when I'm playing with friends and they can't commit time and practice towards Wavedashing and the like...they're not going to be having an enjoyable time playing against someone who does.

So, even though I use them, I don't think I rely on them, and I personally think SSB's experience would benefit from it being taken out, making it so that people like my friends can have more fun with the game even if playing against someone who puts more effort into the game like me. You can accept that you lose to someone because you messed up or you acknowledge that the person you're playing is better than you, it's harder to do that when it seems like you lost because he's exploiting something to get an advantage that you're not

 

Muffin hit the nail on the head. That's all I have to say lol.

It's no fun to play Mario Kart DS online because of snakers, unless you're a snaker yourself.
Don't let this happen to the Smash community. XD

 

So, I'm placing bets on Megaman being announced on October 18th

 

Both players can't be equally skilled if there's one person who can wavedash and another who can't. Since you seem well-versed in the mechanic, you should know that there's a difference between technical skill and mindgames. Two people can have equal mindgames, but the person with the higher technical skill (person who can wavedash, etc) has a better chance of coming out on top. It's not exploitive if both people had an equally opportunity to learn the same techniques. It just so happened that one person didn't learn it, and the other did. This doesn't make the wavedasher a cheater or an exploiter, it just means he/she has taken time to improve their game. You can hammer down on a wavedash for it being a glitch--even if everyone has the ability to pull it off--but I simply don't consider it exploitive as much as it is just one person putting more effort into their game.

That's why you Sandbag, first of all. And once again, to me it's illegitimate to say "I don't have the time to learn a wavedash", because at some point in time, you're playing the game. Why not try playing the game while trying to implement those moves (L-cancel is *not* a technically demanding skill, neither is shorthopping), instead of just staying where you are, if you truly want to improve? If the reason becomes being "It's too hard" or "I shouldn't have to learn that" or "That's cheating", then the reason becomes clear.

Well, that there is then a difference in opinion.

I look at wavedashing, L-cancelling, etc, as a display of skill, not an exploitation. It takes quite the hand coordination and nimbleness to pull off some of the combos, and that to me, is skill. And I wished to get to that level so I could compete at that level, and I did. No, I didn't spend endless days and nights trying to master them, nor did I commit myself to being a hermit until I learned all of them.

All it takes is just experimenting every time you play, try new things, hit the damn L/R button when landing from a short-hop aerial. Do things that you weren't previously doing, but learned what you could be doing to be better. This doesn't demand you to increase the amount of time you spend playing the game as it is *how* you play the game.

You make it seem like wavedashing can't be accomplished by everyone, but it can be. And once again, don't blame it on a lack of time, because each time you find yourself playing the game, know that you *could* be learning/practicing how to wavedash, how to L-cancel, how to short-hop, only if you make the effort to when playing.

EDIT: As for snaking.. *frown* I'm a snaker, but what's the defense there? It's not like *that* move's a glitch. People naturally find innovative ways to use a system given to them.

 

It caters to you because you've already bothered to learn it, so it's understandable why taking out something you bothered to learn and get into the habit of doing would make the game seem less than what it was before, but I think overall it enhances the experience for the better.

I honestly don't think that eliminating 100% of all lag from an aerial attack upon landing is something we should let slide by and bring back into the game. It wasn't supposed to be there, it in some ways just breaks the play of the game IMO, I don't think it should be back

Also, Snaking can go to hell.

 

I am part of the Smash audience.

And the L-cancel itself isn't what's important, it's the fact that it expands combo-ability by quite a large margin that makes it important. The move itself isn't as beneficial as what it allows you to do. That's why people do it in the first place.

Umm.. L-cancels have been around since the original SSB, and carried over to Melee. It was supposed to be in there. The wavedash wasn't.

 

Z-Canceling wasn't as vastly important in SSB64 as it was in Melee, yet SSB64 was still an extremely combo-viable game. Lag was meant to be there, the lag from attacks balances the games, and was programmed to be there to offset attacks. Eliminating Lag from aerials breaks the balance that the Developers intended, which is a reason why the Tiers have such a marginal difference in power most of the time, because you're exploiting out things that the Developers programmed in to balance things

 

Can someone please explain the L-cancel and wavedash techniques?

 

Actually, because of the lack of wavedash in SSB64, the L-cancel was *far* more important in competitive play than it was in Melee. SHFFLs governed pro SSB gameplay. The wavedash actually lessened its impact in Melee.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0fJycz5jJa0

All L-cancelled combos by Isai. Impossible to do without.

Actually, if you compare a L-cancelled Bowser BAir to let's say a Fox L-cancelled BAir, there's still a great difference in response time. There are still viable differences in character speeds even after taking L-cancelling into account.

 

L-canceling was more important for Practice Mode combo challenges which involved precision and memorization of how things react, but in actual play it could be done without religiously and you could still combo effectively

Ignoring the point

 

Yes, but not as effectively if *didn't* use it. The game in itself has combo-ability, but it's enhanced dramatically if you include L-cancels.

No, I negated it. You were saying differences in lag animation in character aerials were intended because the tier was supposed to be shaped a certain way. Bowser is *supposed* to be slower than Fox. This *still* holds true even after you compare L-cancels. L-cancels don't readily 'break the balance' that you're trying to imply.

 

And without L-canceling, the Combo ability was still there.

The different between Bowser and Fox's moves when L-canceled may be a matter of but 2 frames of animation, when originally intended for the gap to be much larger. No matter what, L-canceling is deforming the support set by the Developers to make characters balanced, it's exploiting something that changes how the game is played unfavorably simply because it benefits a niche' audience, it shouldn't be back simply for the sake of tradition

 

But could be better.

But still there.

As far as I can tell, all these techs have done is enhance the structure, not break it.

 

It's more like the average player is going into a battle with a sword expecting a battle of blades, and you bring a gun because you intended to win. Now, I had the capability to bring a gun, but that wasn't my intention going into the fight, was it? I was expecting a simple fun Sword spar, and you bring in the arsenal for the sake of winning.

Removing them puts everyone on the same field. If we were in a gun-less arena with a Sword shop at the entrance, everyone's going into it with the same heat. Throwing in Guns may benefit you for the sake of winning and may make the battle more 'intense' and 'skilled', but the Arena was set up for Sword fights ;)

I like analogies, they make me feel fuzzy inside

 

No, if some opponent came at me with a sword, yet I have a gun, I'd keep the bullets in the weapon and use the gun as if it were a sword. But if someone else came at me with a gun, with the sole intention of firing bullets, I'd respond with the bullets in my own gun.

However, everyone is equally capable of bringing in a gun, but either chose not to buy one, or wasn't ready to use one yet.

 

See; Now, I had the capability to bring a gun, but that wasn't my intention going into the fight, was it? I was expecting a simple fun Sword spar, and you bring in the arsenal for the sake of winning.