-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Smash Bros Brawl Dojo Official Update Thread: Goodbye, Cherry-don
- Thread starter ant1532
- Start date
- Status
Iam Canadian
and have the worst user name EVER
Jiggy37 said:Oh, didn't realize it was that time.
*looks at calendar*
NINE MORE DAYS.
OMG!
I'm so excited, I'm using internet acronyms! :O
CreatureX3
Member
Great update. I think this stage looks amazingly fun! Dialga and Palkia look both cool and scary, walking around the stage.
zoukka said:
It's not competent, it's plain boring. I'd even go so far as to compare it to putting up those bumpers in bowling so you can't throw a gutter ball.
MrCheez, i'm not saying there aren't times when I will play without weapons or on a boring stage. I just don't agree that tournaments should be played that way. If they really wanted to be neutral in tournaments, they would just have people play with the default options (all stages, and Items on Medium).
Whoever organizes the second tournament (since I agree with Firestorm that we should do 1 at a time), I hope they make it so we can determine the top SSBB player by having all items on and all stages available and nothing banned (In my opinion, the top SSBB player is one who can win when everything is available, which is how the game by default is).
What a load of BS. Eliminating as much "chance" as possible is somehow bad for tournaments? Go ask Tekken players if they want stages where the ghost of Jinpachi comes to suck your characters dick every now and then...
Items can't be neutral if they drop to your lap.
Now I'm not against items and goofy stages and even some special tournaments would be fun in those conditions, but when Smash players want to test their skills against one another it's FD and no items perioud.
Items can't be neutral if they drop to your lap.
Now I'm not against items and goofy stages and even some special tournaments would be fun in those conditions, but when Smash players want to test their skills against one another it's FD and no items perioud.
I don't hate playing bowling like a larger and more bizarre version of pool. >_>TJ Spyke said:
But the game by default also doesn't have all the characters and stages unlocked. Including this stage, even. >_>
Edit:
Battlefield, Yoshi's Island, Smashville, and some others are perfectly acceptable and should be highly played in fair tournaments as well. There's no way to make things perfectly fair; even Final Destination has a little underside area this time around that characters with diagonal-moving up specials can get caught in, which is a sort of "unfair" advantage to the characters with better mobility. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Battlefield became the stage of choice, even (not necessarily for that reason). I'd certainly like a stage with at least one or two platforms to be the dominant choice, actually.zoukka said:
twilitesparklemotion
Member
Had this one even been leaked? I don't remember seeing it.
Jiggy37 said:
Final Destination was never as balanced as it's said to be. Characters with good horizontal space control or projectiles had an advantage since there was little verticality to the fights.
The trick is that some characters fair worse when presented with a level playing field then they otherwise would.
TJ Spyke said:
Yup cause Fox shooting you and running away for the whole match on Temple is a real great way to play. Or the fact that Rumble Falls randomly speeds and is more about staying alive then even fighting, screwing over slow characters with little vert recovery. Yeah that'll make a great choice for the neutral rotation. Or Shadow Moses which screws any character that doesnt kill off the top of the stage. How about Mario Bros with its crazy boundaries? Lets destroy Ness and Lucas and lightweights by allowing Yoshi's Island Melee playable. You arent going to go to tournies or play by competitve rules, so it makes no difference.
Tathanen
Get Inside Her!
I think banning any stage is pretty ridiculous. Items, I can understand that in 1vs1 fights, due the the spawning of explosive items (I've had enough spawn right between me and an enemy I'm about to attack to support this 100%) and general lack of balance from a random spawn giving someone a large advantage. 1vs1 smash really has a very different optimal balance than free-for-alls have, and benefits quite a bit from item-removal, purely in terms of creating something more "fair." In a free-for-all, someone gaining an advantage from an item is balanced out by the sheer number of opponents. The full power of said item will not be unleashed on a single person. In 1vs1, though, there's only one other target. Not to say that 1vs1 items can't be a fun and good time, just that when you are trying to create a battle based as much as possible on player skill, items and 1vs1 don't really mesh that well. Yes, a person should have the skills to deal with an item-wielding opponent, but the randomness factor cannot be denied.
Stages, though... hazards are not random. Or rather, even if they ARE random, they affect all characters equally and are always telegraphed ahead of time. You can always tell if Karts or F-Zero cars are about to show up, you can always see the bombs being shot from the background, any interfering Pokemon always make an "I'm about to do this" animation before doing anything, etc. If someone's aware of their surroundings, they can always evade a hazard. The only time they should be hit by one is if their opponent directs them into it, which seems entirely fair to me. If you see a hazard, your options become "place opponent in its way" or "make sure opponent doesn't place you in its way." If you get hit by it, it's not because of any unfairness or stage randomness; it's because you either weren't good enough to evade it, or your opponent was good enough to put you in its way. If you don't want to be hit by a hazard, become familiar with a level and don't be in the way when one arrives.
If you're only good enough at the game to evade what your opponent throws at you, and are somehow incapable of evading what the level throws at you, I don't think it's entirely fair to call yourself that great at the game. It's an important skill to develop, just like any other.
Stages, though... hazards are not random. Or rather, even if they ARE random, they affect all characters equally and are always telegraphed ahead of time. You can always tell if Karts or F-Zero cars are about to show up, you can always see the bombs being shot from the background, any interfering Pokemon always make an "I'm about to do this" animation before doing anything, etc. If someone's aware of their surroundings, they can always evade a hazard. The only time they should be hit by one is if their opponent directs them into it, which seems entirely fair to me. If you see a hazard, your options become "place opponent in its way" or "make sure opponent doesn't place you in its way." If you get hit by it, it's not because of any unfairness or stage randomness; it's because you either weren't good enough to evade it, or your opponent was good enough to put you in its way. If you don't want to be hit by a hazard, become familiar with a level and don't be in the way when one arrives.
If you're only good enough at the game to evade what your opponent throws at you, and are somehow incapable of evading what the level throws at you, I don't think it's entirely fair to call yourself that great at the game. It's an important skill to develop, just like any other.
Tathanen said:
Some stages, yeah, all this is true, but there's also other issues:
On some stages certain tactics dominate (Fast characters on temple, for instance, not just because of the but because there's a circular path through the level large enough to ensure 100% chase. Walk-off edges with Fox also was the issue in the last one because of waveshining)
On other stages, there are situations which are just unfair to one player or the other. In Mushroomy Kingdom, whoever is player one has a disadvantage of being easy to knock off right at the start. Plus there are places on Mushroomy Kingdom where infinite wall A's are inescapable, even though they're escapable in most levels.
Mario Bros is just too disruptive to the regular playstyle, since you more or less have to use the stage hazards to even get a KO
Iam Canadian
and have the worst user name EVER
I tend to prefer that items not be on. I mean, I play with items on sometimes, of course, but in general, I prefer that they be off. Things like Assist Trophies and Poke Balls are fun, but throwing projectiles items and things like that place less emphasis on your character's unique abilities and more on what items you can acquire. I mean, you give a close-range fighter like Marth or Ike a Ray Gun and he becomes a projectile-based character for a few shots all of a sudden. That kind of shifting of battle tactics can be fun, but as a rule, I prefer the items be off.
In my mind, though, stages are fair game. The stage effects are fairly neutral and they add an extra layer of tension and challenge to the match. That's not to say that there aren't horrible levels. Icicle Mountain is just an Everest-sized pile of failed level design, we all know this. Brinstar Depths has Kraid, the world's most annoying stage hazard. Flat Zone is too stupidly tiny to be fun and that's not even mentioning its propensity towards dropping heavily-damaging wrenches on your head. I have my doubts about Spear Pillar, as well.
But in general, stage hazards are "fair" and can even be incorporated into one's tactics. Besides, the game tends to warn you when hazards are approaching, anyway. Just look at the cars in Onett or Mute City. Other hazards are too minor to even be an issue, like Whispy Woods in Kirby stages. I very rarely see a stage hazard significantly turn the tide of a match the way a well-placed Starman or a poorly-placed Bob-omb can. Stage hazards add variety and tension to a match. As for myself, I play on every stage, barring a select few, like Icicle Mountain.
I'm not saying we have Rumble Falls replace Final Destination as the standard tourney stage or anything, but I feel that stage variety is good.
In my mind, though, stages are fair game. The stage effects are fairly neutral and they add an extra layer of tension and challenge to the match. That's not to say that there aren't horrible levels. Icicle Mountain is just an Everest-sized pile of failed level design, we all know this. Brinstar Depths has Kraid, the world's most annoying stage hazard. Flat Zone is too stupidly tiny to be fun and that's not even mentioning its propensity towards dropping heavily-damaging wrenches on your head. I have my doubts about Spear Pillar, as well.
But in general, stage hazards are "fair" and can even be incorporated into one's tactics. Besides, the game tends to warn you when hazards are approaching, anyway. Just look at the cars in Onett or Mute City. Other hazards are too minor to even be an issue, like Whispy Woods in Kirby stages. I very rarely see a stage hazard significantly turn the tide of a match the way a well-placed Starman or a poorly-placed Bob-omb can. Stage hazards add variety and tension to a match. As for myself, I play on every stage, barring a select few, like Icicle Mountain.
I'm not saying we have Rumble Falls replace Final Destination as the standard tourney stage or anything, but I feel that stage variety is good.
Tathanen
Get Inside Her!
webrunner said:
I have to admit, I've never understood why anyone would just.. run away for an entire match. I mean, okay, I know why some complete idiot would do it during a timed match, but I'd rather limit all matches to stock to dissuade any "stalling" in any circumstance whatsoever than ban stages where people can stall. If there's no time limit, I can't imagine why someone would do it. Don't people play smash... to fight each other? I may simply lack the mental faculties to comprehend why someone would run away for any significant amount of time. If you have to use timed matches, though, I guess I can understand banning stages where someone could run perpetually.
Mushroomy Kingdom.. still, if someone knows where the tricky parts of the level are, I'd imagine they'd be able to prepare themselves and not find themselves screwed over in those situations.
Mario Bros, it's basically an items match without the randomness, as there are plenty of enemies to grab at any time. Build someone's percentage up then kill them with any of the readily available goons. Provides a rare 1vs1 items-off opportunity for people to take advantage of item catching, too.
Now.. I'm not going to try and tell someone that they shouldn't "ban" a stage if they just don't like it. There are a few stages I'll likely turn off in the random stage select this time around, just like I did in Melee. If no one wants to play there cause it's just not fun, so be it. But in terms of actual fairness... I think all stages can be pretty competently played if you know what you're getting in to from the start.
A Link to the Past
Banned
I'd rather see something like Pokémon Field (Saffron City upgrades) than this, IMO.
Oh well.
EDIT: Also, in relation to the Pokégender discussion, wouldn't it be cool if they included a female Pikachu design?
Oh well.
EDIT: Also, in relation to the Pokégender discussion, wouldn't it be cool if they included a female Pikachu design?
perfectchaos007
Member
Just reserved the game at Best Buy. I was going to preorder it at EBgamestop, but fuck that you know what i mean? DOWN WITH EBgamestop
yankeeforever2
Member
Fuck I just remembered I have to buy a Wii.
TJ Spyke said:
Dedede's forward B throw can randomly throw items too, even if items are set to OFF.
Even more hilarious? He has a random chance to throw a SMASH BALL.
When that came out during a no items match my friend and I were like "!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Iam Canadian
and have the worst user name EVER
MrCheez said:
:O
:lol
Yet another reason why King Dedede is awesome.
As far as items are concerned, aren't you able to turn explosive items (and even explosive containers) off in Brawl? I think items add to the strategy and the fun, even in 1vs1, although I admit there are items I don't like (actually, the only items I don't like are the mushrooms, they're the only items that induce lag when you get them without replacing your action).
I would think items would be treated the same as stages in this case. Work out which ones do not destroy the balance of play, and allow those. Obviously, all explosive, healing, and invincible items would go. But I'd think beam sabers, soccer ball and laser gun would stay (but not the super scope, since that can OHKO). Plus, you'd probably want to turn item frequency to low.
As far as stages go, I agree with Tathanen that most stage hazards are avoidable and don't really favor one character over another. But that's certainly not true of all stages, and I can understand why some stages are just not playable in tournaments.
I would think items would be treated the same as stages in this case. Work out which ones do not destroy the balance of play, and allow those. Obviously, all explosive, healing, and invincible items would go. But I'd think beam sabers, soccer ball and laser gun would stay (but not the super scope, since that can OHKO). Plus, you'd probably want to turn item frequency to low.
As far as stages go, I agree with Tathanen that most stage hazards are avoidable and don't really favor one character over another. But that's certainly not true of all stages, and I can understand why some stages are just not playable in tournaments.
Oh wow. :lol Awesome!!MrCheez said:
Man, I just can't get how anyone can have the '100% Correct' mentality of the game. Each has legitimate merits to show off one's skills! And most importantly either method brings about fun, which IS the correct way to play Brawl eh. (/cheesy statement)
And I guess to throw it out there, personally I enjoy having all items on to kick things up a little.
viewtiful_dru
Member
What's the problem with banned stages/no items for 1v1 tournament setting?
(In any other occasion I think it's dumb to limit what to play with)
BTW Crushed, the walls on Shadow Moses take many hits to destroy, ESPECIALLY in a 1v1 match where you will be hitting your opponent more than the... stage. IMO (in a tournament setting), I wouldn't ban that stage, but it sure as hell wouldn't be neutral.
(In any other occasion I think it's dumb to limit what to play with)
BTW Crushed, the walls on Shadow Moses take many hits to destroy, ESPECIALLY in a 1v1 match where you will be hitting your opponent more than the... stage. IMO (in a tournament setting), I wouldn't ban that stage, but it sure as hell wouldn't be neutral.
Keru_Shiri
Member
This actually reflects my sentiments on items very closely. Personally, I've always leaned towards "all items off," and I have many memorable and fun matches going head to head with a couple of my more skilled friends on a neutral stage. But I would like to see items making a comeback in competitive smash. I think some of them could add some depth to the metagame, and might actually help with game balance some.justchris said:
Keru_Shiri
Member
Not if your Ike.viewtiful_dru said:
Rancid Mildew
Banned
I just got my NA copy. Is it safe to go inside the spoilers thread? I'd love to post a picture.
Keru_Shiri
Member
So far, only the roster and stages have been spoiled. SSE stuff is spoiler tagged.Rancid Mildew said:
You'd have to find a move with almost straight horizontal knockback, since having a hint of diagonal knockback (or the opponent using directional influence to move diagonal) would allow the opponent to use ukemi on the ceilings.DavidDayton said:
(Blah, I still prefer the term "teching." >_>)
Iam Canadian
and have the worst user name EVER
Jiggy37 said:
I actually disagree with you on this. :/ "Teching" was a really generic and non-descriptive term. While I had discovered the move for myself in the original Smash, it took me forever to figure out what the term "teching" was supposed to refer to.
"Ukemi" is more unique and it also makes more sense if you've played other games where the word is used to describe a similar technique; Viewtiful Joe, for example.
careksims said:
Official thread is finished and will be up on Saturday March 8th. Talked with sp0rsk and it's probably best to just keep it until then. Most of what we are discussing involve spoilers anyway so it'll stay in the Spoilers thread. I have set March 23rd as the day that we can post unlockable spoilers (not SSE), is that okay with those staying away from spoilers?
TJ Spyke said:
You seem to be under the impression that a game ships with the best settings on for competitive play. They usually are not. Especially Nintendo games. Some rules have to be altered to play for skill. You can't compare items to putting in bumpers for Bowling because if the ball goes into the gutter, it's your own fault. You did not bowl correctly. A better analogy would be if there were bumpers across the late that popped up randomly and stopped the ball.
And Time Mode sucks =( I'm not speaking out of competitive, I really hate Time.
Tathanen said:
Tournaments are done with 4 stock and 6 minute time limit in Melee. I assume it'll be 3 stock with 6 minute time limit in Brawl due to how longer battles take. This is mostly because of time constraints while running a tournament.
In general about stages, I think stage bans are justified. A lot of them are because of broken tactics by certain characters that's unbeatable. Many of which involved Fox in Melee. It's more accepted to ban a stage than a character, especially when many of the stages weren't all that fun in the first place. Some stages just favoured certain characters way more than others, even for a counter-pick, so I like that they're banned but some may disagree. A good example is Icicle Mountain.
abstract alien
Member
ok, im pretty new to smash. at first i didnt like it(n64), then the gc version was ok but i still didnt really care for it.
for some reason, ive really gotten into it(melee) for the past 3 or 4 months and its just really alot of fun. im a pretty hardcore fighting game player(tekken and sf3 mainly) and im into all the advaced techniques and such(buffering, cancels, kara, frame advantages, wave, etc). now here is my problem, im still not really familiar with smash and ive been wondering...why is marth so much better than roy? i have an interest in playing with marth, but i always thought they were the same. what makes marth so much better? And while im newbin here, are there any advanced techniques that are unique to smash?
happy smashing, this game cant come soon enough
for some reason, ive really gotten into it(melee) for the past 3 or 4 months and its just really alot of fun. im a pretty hardcore fighting game player(tekken and sf3 mainly) and im into all the advaced techniques and such(buffering, cancels, kara, frame advantages, wave, etc). now here is my problem, im still not really familiar with smash and ive been wondering...why is marth so much better than roy? i have an interest in playing with marth, but i always thought they were the same. what makes marth so much better? And while im newbin here, are there any advanced techniques that are unique to smash?
happy smashing, this game cant come soon enough
abstract alien said:
Marth and Roy both have sweetspots where they do the most damage and knockback. For Marth, it's at the tip of the sword. For Roy it's at the middle. So Marth has more range when using him effectively than Roy who has to get up close. Also, Marth does more damage and knockback with all his useful moves when compared to Roy. Marth is also faster and has a better recovery iirc. Basically, Marth outclasses Roy in every way =/
There are a ton of little things that are unique to Smash when it comes to advanced techniques. Lots of techniques involve cancelling like other games, but there's some stuff that's unique. For Brawl, look into Directional Influence (same as in Melee) and Teching/Ukemi for a start. Both are very important and a good starting point. http://www.smashboards.com is where you'll want to check. There's a stickied topic in the Brawl Discussion Forum.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked