1. Sheik and Zelda's transformation's intended use (in Melee in Brawl) was to build up damage with Sheik, who had plenty of combo options but lacked killing power, and kill as Zelda, who lacked combo options but possessed numerous killing options.
Remember in high level Melee play where any Sheik player only switched to Zelda to disrespect? I don't think I've ever seen Sheik have a hard time killing or gimping on her own, especially since Zelda doesn't have her chain grabs.
Fair point. Personally speaking as one of the few Olimar players though, I don't really see many people calling his ftilt a movement option. It's utility in this regard is entirely overshadowed by that of the superior dtilt.
This is exactly what I'm suggesting against. Traditionally the two characters we interchangeable and I don't see much reason to remove this for the sake of buffs or for the sake of poor skill resulting in misinputs. Also as player_3 has pointed out, they are given both offensive options and defensive options for acting out of the transformation. What Minus has implemented is the absolute best way to satisfy both sides without the need of creating new unnecessary moves.
First thing that comes to mind is MU variety. Second, is player comfort.
Minus has certain been shown to not be afraid of drastically lowering the skill ceiling of the game in many regards, and revising mechanics to suite those who can't probably handle their characters is just one of those ways. The immediate cancel was a good touch but asking for even more is just shutting out the players who already enjoy the two characters as a hybrid.
I can verify that both of these features are in-game and that your build is either out-dated or bugged if it is missing either of these.
Agreed. As it seems the dev team as a whole doesn't report feedback as often as we like in comparison to say, other notable smash mod dev teams or even dev teams of other titles. It's heavily work noting however that unlike Project M, Brawl Minus is being put together is being pieced together with a much smaller team size. Which only brings the question to my head why don't they hire some more devs?
If dtilt overshadows ftilt in that regard, then why should ftilt still be usable for movement in that case?
If you rly only see that as the sole reasoning I recommend rereading the points I listed, as "poor skill" does not refer to the entirety of my reasons and still doesn't refer to the real reason as to why I see this accidentall happen sweaty palms. Additionally, though you make a fair point that separating the characters shuts out those who like them as a hybrid, conversely, not doing so shuts out those who would like a down-b for each character. As this is a subjective point, I have one as well (as compared to objective points which can't be contested equally unless by an objective counterpoint), and thus should be excluded from this argument for the most part (or seen in equal regard).
MU variety is a reasonable point. However comfort is entirely subjective as where one player is comfortable with things as you describe, others are not.
Saying that Minus lowers the skill ceiling willingly in he same breadth as saying that "poor skill" is the cause of accidental inputs (which is only one of the reasons) contradicts your premise, despite the former being true.
As suggested above, animations which are already present in-game can be used for a new down-b, or simply other "custom" moves which already exist as smash mods can be used and mapped to down-b.
Refer to where I and EpicNonBread speak of my builds being potentially bugged/outdated, which is far more logical than a person being "bad at pressing the A buttons" and effectively accusing me of lying.
btw is there some sort of page where I could learn all the commands usable on this forum, like creating spoilers to limit the amount of space my text walls take-up, or to code for character icons so that names need not be included?
Remember in high level Melee play where any Sheik player only switched to Zelda to disrespect? I don't think I've ever seen Sheik have a hard time killing or gimping on her own, especially since Zelda doesn't have her chain grabs
Quick note on this. I believe Lucis meant that was their intended use. But thanks to Sakurai being really good at making video games, Sheik managed to be a better character on her own in every iteration.
Right. But I don't exactly see the issue this creates. Even if the move had its movement removed (funny wording), ftilt would be a rather useless move for the most part.
Saying that Minus lowers the skill ceiling willingly in he same breadth as saying that "poor skill" is the cause of accidental inputs (which is only one of the reasons) contradicts your premise, despite the former being true.
What...? I'm not contradicting myself. A lower skill ceiling doesn't remove the possibility for bad players to misinput. It's also seriously ridiculous to even use poor skill level as a reason for the removal of a mechanic that may suite other players.
Right. But I don't exactly see the issue this creates. Even if the move had its movement removed (funny wording), ftilt would be a rather useless move for the most part.
What...? I'm not contradicting myself. A lower skill ceiling doesn't remove the possibility for bad players to misinput. It's also seriously ridiculous to even use poor skill level as a reason for the removal of a mechanic that may suite other players.
The issue is redundancy and providing advantages the character may not need (Like Ike having NSM or elfire hitboxes on certain moves, which, as cool as it was, isn't necessary for him and takes away from his personality as a character that requires reads). The move is spammable, displaces Olimar, and semi-spikes. Removing the movement alone wouldn't make the move unspammable, still allowing it to serve as a get-off-me move that can kill. I'll wait for a dev to explain what ftilt's movement is actually useful for, and why he needs it on ftilt as opposed to any other move, as well as if it's considered redundant or not, before discussing it any further though (unless someone directly replies to this or says something in regard to the topic), as otherwise this is just conjecture. The move itself isn't what bothers me, but its relationship with respect to his other moves that makes it seem unecessary. It could very well be deemed necessary if the next patch makes it a move that rounds out his moveset due to certain nerfs in other areas.
To add to that, as I refer to in my first parenthesis, character playstyle/personality also matters. Olimar doesn't make sense to me as a projectile spam character (which is a completely safe way to play him as far as I can see), and the potency of each of his Pikmin makes it so that a player is easily forgiven for not knowing the direction in which each Pikmin launches or any of their other properties. I've seen that literally any player can pick him up and win using just about the same tactics, and if you make the mistake of shielding while he's close and you've got a bunch of Pikmin stuck to you, you'd best believe you're going to get utilted until your shield is low enough for ftilt to hit. Would this be near the ledge, you'd get semi-spiked. I understand that for many MUs in Minus, you simply shouldn't be in a certain place at a certain time against a certain character, but I think simple fighting/arena game skill should be required to execute those kinds of things instead of being the go-to. Again, because this is just my perspective, I'd like to hear a dev's opinion, what at least equal commitment to logical reasoning (if only apparently).
You say the game shouldn't be modded to compensate for poor skill (which result in misinputs, as you claim, though you apparently ignore the phenomenon of sweaty palms that all players with sweat glands face at some point in their lives), and then proceed to say "Minus has certain been shown to not be afraid of drastically lowering the skill ceiling of the game in many regards, and revising mechanics to suite those who can't probably handle their characters is just one of those ways." What I wonder is why you don't see the reasoning of the statement which I quoted (the old-fashioned way) and apply it to my point. For one, I'm not saying that "lowering the skill ceiling" (something that happens as a result of other actions, and itself is not something that is modded in like moves and the like) would reduce the likelihood of a misinput, but that reducing the likelihood of a misinput would lower the skill ceiling (in fact, the opposite of what you seem to get from what I'm saying). Moreover, if "poor skill level" is considered, by you, as a ridiculous reason to lower a skill ceiling, then why are skill ceilings lowered to begin with? To that affect, players should just git gud, though I know that in itself is not a reasonable conclusion. With this set of statements I simply hope to show you (and onlookers) that your premise appears to be inconsistent in terms of the points you use it to establish.
If, according to you, devs are willing to lower the skill ceiling of particular characters, and misinputs occur due to lack of skill, why wouldn't devs circumvent this issue, caused by lack of skill, by making it nonexistent? I'm strictly arguing the logic of your claim(s) in this case.
Furthermore, Minus has plenty of controls which may not seem intuitive, and changelists are inconsistent, so something like the ability to attack/shield out of the transformation animation wouldn't necessarily come naturally to someone who normally doesn't play a character. Despite my having read the entirety of the Minus ssbwiki several times for the past few years since I started playing the mod (about 5 yrs ago), I myself never knew of the A-cancel on the move (and suggesting that one needs to be present on the forums to know of this marginalizes those who aren't and practically guarantees that a player who doesn't use the forums will be considerably less effective with a character than a player using the same character who is present on the forum).
Link to Sheik's "change list" in the ssbwiki here (I've included a pic in case anyone decides to suddenly change it and repost the link as if I don't know what I'm talking about): https://www.ssbwiki.com/Brawl-/Character_changes#Sheik
This is but one of the reasons I've added to the previous ones I've stated (which are like 10, I believe, some being subjective though many being objective as well). I assume that a lack of a response to those reasons entails that there is no counterargument and thus merits that such proposed reasoning of mine merits consideration, at least with respect to responding to them directly, should they not be considered for the next actual mod.
On a completely different note, if we need to wait until AWL of this stuff is considered for the next patch before we get accidental c-stick jumping fixed, I would propose fixing that first and uploading it as soon as possible (as a late hotfix maybe), as I am currently abstaining from Minus solely because of said issue. It doesn't make sense for me to have to play "normally" on Minus and then switch back when playing Sm4sh. That's the kind of thing that gets your wires crossed.
Quick note on this. I believe Lucis meant that was their intended use. But thanks to Sakurai being really good at making video games, Sheik managed to be a better character on her own in every iteration.
I would like to see Ganondorf get a float. No only would it seriously help his neutral, but he also does float in a lot of games that he (or ganon) is in.
Sorry if this is already suggested, but this is a long thread.
Quick note on this. I believe Lucis meant that was their intended use. But thanks to Sakurai being really good at making video games, Sheik managed to be a better character on her own in every iteration.
Sheilda is better than Sheik in Brawl - it improves the Pikachu matchup [zero to death CG on Sheik, and while playing neutral as Zelda vs Pikachu is probably miserable, you don't just die if you mess up and can switch to Sheik at higher percents to have a fighting chance in the MU] and a few others [I think it makes her heavy MUs a bit better because she can do tilt combos and then switch to Zelda and kick them in the face].
I would like to see Ganondorf get a float. No only would it seriously help his neutral, but he also does float in a lot of games that he (or ganon) is in.
Sorry if this is already suggested, but this is a long thread.
Not sure what's silly about those two words being together in that order w/in this context. One would say it's "silly" to deliberately misinterpret a person's meaning before ascertaining what their meaning is. After all, you saying that Zelda was used for disrespects doesn't outright contradict what I claimed the "intended use" was, especially with regard to EpicNonBread's clarification of my statement, since in saying "intended" I don't directly indicate whose intention (and I meant the original game developers, whereas you took that to mean the use intended by the player, which is not what I meant, and takes my words out of context). When I say "intended" I mean that when looking at the way both characters work, naturally (and logically) one might surmises that one character has more combo options and the other, more kill options, thus leading anyone observing both characters based on these demarcations, to believe that one is more suited for the first part of a match and the other, the last. Chain grabs, arguably, weren't an "intended" aspect of Melee, much like wave-dashes weren't (that is to say, they weren't deliberately added to the game as a mechanic, but exist due to the interaction of other mechanics, or lack thereof, which I imagine is common within games with physics like those of Smash). Thus they aren't considered in my making said statement. Though Sheik may not necessarily have a problem killing, she generally needs her target to be a higher percent to kill with just about any of her moves considering that none of her moves compare to Zelda's in terms of KO power.
Perhaps ask for clarification as to what a person means before implicitly scorning what you believe their conclusion to be? Furthermore, since this is a thread about requests for the next version of 4.0BC, it makes sense to post in that regard, instead of simply for the sake of contradicting what you misinterpret to be a person's point. Arguably "intended use" wasn't the right choice of words as it can be interpreted a number of ways, I assumed that the desire to be contrarianistic (adj. form of contrarianism, though itself not an official word, just to be clear) would be outweighed by the drive to actually be reasonable, but I should have known better.
side note: I'm assuming no one rly minds my walls of text since none have suggested how I can use spoilers to make them less apparent? I don't mind that, I just don't want to clutter the forum or receive any warnings for extensive posts.
The issue is redundancy and providing advantages the character may not need (Like Ike having NSM or elfire hitboxes on certain moves, which, as cool as it was, isn't necessary for him and takes away from his personality as a character that requires reads). The move is spammable, displaces Olimar, and semi-spikes. Removing the movement alone wouldn't make the move unspammable, still allowing it to serve as a get-off-me move that can kill. I'll wait for a dev to explain what ftilt's movement is actually useful for, and why he needs it on ftilt as opposed to any other move, as well as if it's considered redundant or not, before discussing it any further though (unless someone directly replies to this or says something in regard to the topic), as otherwise this is just conjecture. The move itself isn't what bothers me, but its relationship with respect to his other moves that makes it seem unecessary. It could very well be deemed necessary if the next patch makes it a move that rounds out his moveset due to certain nerfs in other areas.
My issue with removing the movement option on ftilt is that it would make the move itself useless. Right now it doesn't really have any setups or uses in practice until like ~100%, then it becomes a kill option. I have not seen it semi spike, but its been a while since I used the move much. Even if it were to be spammed it seems like that is currently the only way to even use the move especially if someone is holding onto ledge. Regardless of whether or not you use it, the move doesn't have much usefulness to it. Even if you were facing an olimar that was trigger happy with the move you could easily jump or shield to evade getting hit by the move. I'm okay with the move moving him since it doesn't IASA like dtilt and because it gives him another kill option that he desperately needs. If you look at what he has going for him currently, your best kill option is probably something into upB as it is safe, possible to set up into, and can kill consistently especially close to the blastzone. Also looking at Olimar's overall kit this move is on the lower end of spammable moves. His dtilt, utilt are heavily spammable as well and provide better utility. Most of his specials besides upB are spammable. You could spam pluck as an offensive option and lead into upair or upb or fair, depending on DI and positioning. On stage his smashes are good as well but it seems better to use any other move in his kit in many situations as well. Even though his ftilt is pretty spammable, if you DI properly you shouldn't be dying from it easily and it can be punished well if done properly.
Right now it doesn't really have any setups or uses in practice until like ~100%, then it becomes a kill option. I have not seen it semi spike, but its been a while since I used the move much. Even if it were to be spammed it seems like that is currently the only way to even use the move especially if someone is holding onto ledge. Regardless of whether or not you use it, the move doesn't have much usefulness to it. Even if you were facing an olimar that was trigger happy with the move you could easily jump or shield to evade getting hit by the move. I'm okay with the move moving him since it doesn't IASA like dtilt and because it gives him another kill option that he desperately needs. .
Perhaps it isn't a "semi-spike" in the literal sense, but it launches beyond 180 degrees (with respect to the x-axis, meaning it launches in a slightly downward diagonal horizontal angle. Though spamming may be the move's most reliable utility, I think it makes more sense for it to have IASA frames and NOT be spammable. If you haven't tried, I suggest showering your opponent w/ all your Pikmin and forcing a shield, then wearing it down further with normals, and hitting with ftilt once the shield is reduced. It's not necessarily a common setup, but shielding is an intuitive response to not wanting to be launched offstage and then meteor'd by his Pikmin when at the ledge, so once you get it I find it rather reliable. I can imagine him being able to weakly knock targets back with the move, and potentially following up with a pikmin tether grab. Of course, if given IASA frames, a reduction to the move's kbg would make sense imo. However I do agree that he seems to lack killing options (except for setting someone up offstage who has tons of pikmin stuck to them, which seems to be his go-to).
Perhaps it isn't a "semi-spike" in the literal sense, but it launches beyond 180 degrees (with respect to the x-axis, meaning it launches in a slightly downward diagonal horizontal angle. Though spamming may be the move's most reliable utility, I think it makes more sense for it to have IASA frames and NOT be spammable. If you haven't tried, I suggest showering your opponent w/ all your Pikmin and forcing a shield, then wearing it down further with normals, and hitting with ftilt once the shield is reduced. It's not necessarily a common setup, but shielding is an intuitive response to not wanting to be launched offstage and then meteor'd by his Pikmin when at the ledge, so once you get it I find it rather reliable. I can imagine him being able to weakly knock targets back with the move, and potentially following up with a pikmin tether grab. Of course, if given IASA frames, a reduction to the move's kbg would make sense imo. However I do agree that he seems to lack killing options (except for setting someone up offstage who has tons of pikmin stuck to them, which seems to be his go-to).
The issue with that is that my opponents know how to deal with it, also its probably better to p throw into dtilt into moving utilt into pluck x3 if bad di into upb. Also people seem to understand that its not hard to remove pikmin unless he stuns lock you, which is pretty badass when done. Also when my opponents get pikmin on them they use a move to take off the pikmin so its generally not the best option to use pikmin throw, especially against competent opponents.
Sheilda is better than Sheik in Brawl - it improves the Pikachu matchup [zero to death CG on Sheik, and while playing neutral as Zelda vs Pikachu is probably miserable, you don't just die if you mess up and can switch to Sheik at higher percents to have a fighting chance in the MU] and a few others [I think it makes her heavy MUs a bit better because she can do tilt combos and then switch to Zelda and kick them in the face].
The issue is redundancy and providing advantages the character may not need (Like Ike having NSM or elfire hitboxes on certain moves, which, as cool as it was, isn't necessary for him and takes away from his personality as a character that requires reads). The move is spammable, displaces Olimar, and semi-spikes. Removing the movement alone wouldn't make the move unspammable, still allowing it to serve as a get-off-me move that can kill. I'll wait for a dev to explain what ftilt's movement is actually useful for, and why he needs it on ftilt as opposed to any other move, as well as if it's considered redundant or not, before discussing it any further though (unless someone directly replies to this or says something in regard to the topic), as otherwise this is just conjecture. The move itself isn't what bothers me, but its relationship with respect to his other moves that makes it seem unecessary. It could very well be deemed necessary if the next patch makes it a move that rounds out his moveset due to certain nerfs in other areas.
To add to that, as I refer to in my first parenthesis, character playstyle/personality also matters. Olimar doesn't make sense to me as a projectile spam character (which is a completely safe way to play him as far as I can see), and the potency of each of his Pikmin makes it so that a player is easily forgiven for not knowing the direction in which each Pikmin launches or any of their other properties. I've seen that literally any player can pick him up and win using just about the same tactics, and if you make the mistake of shielding while he's close and you've got a bunch of Pikmin stuck to you, you'd best believe you're going to get utilted until your shield is low enough for ftilt to hit. Would this be near the ledge, you'd get semi-spiked. I understand that for many MUs in Minus, you simply shouldn't be in a certain place at a certain time against a certain character, but I think simple fighting/arena game skill should be required to execute those kinds of things instead of being the go-to. Again, because this is just my perspective, I'd like to hear a dev's opinion, what at least equal commitment to logical reasoning (if only apparently).
You say the game shouldn't be modded to compensate for poor skill (which result in misinputs, as you claim, though you apparently ignore the phenomenon of sweaty palms that all players with sweat glands face at some point in their lives), and then proceed to say "Minus has certain been shown to not be afraid of drastically lowering the skill ceiling of the game in many regards, and revising mechanics to suite those who can't probably handle their characters is just one of those ways."
Again, this isn't contradicting at all... I am saying that games shouldn't be reworked because of poor skill, and that despite this, the Minus Dev Team does so anyway.
Furthermore, Minus has plenty of controls which may not seem intuitive, and changelists are inconsistent, so something like the ability to attack/shield out of the transformation animation wouldn't necessarily come naturally to someone who normally doesn't play a character.
I didn't know Minus was being tailored to people who don't know how to sit down and press buttons and learn what changes were made from vBrawl to Minus. craaaaazy thought.
I assume that a lack of a response to those reasons entails that there is no counterargument and thus merits that such proposed reasoning of mine merits consideration, at least with respect to responding to them directly, should they not be considered for the next actual mod.
Jesus christ who the actual fuck are you? No guy, unless you created air or something, the holy blessing that is your (bad) idea for Sheik and Zelda does have very valid counter arguments for it, and does not have some automatic justification to be considered by the dev team, just because no one is willing to toss counter arguments at you because they don't you to type another book report on one of the words they used.
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and assume you're not an experienced Olimar player by any means... This isn't his "go-to", and it's certainly not as good as you make it out to seem.
The issue with that is that my opponents know how to deal with it, also its probably better to p throw into dtilt into moving utilt into pluck x3 if bad di into upb. Also people seem to understand that its not hard to remove pikmin unless he stuns lock you, which is pretty badass when done. Also when my opponents get pikmin on them they use a move to take off the pikmin so its generally not the best option to use pikmin throw, especially against competent opponents.
I would agree for the most part. However not all characters have moves that surround their body, allowing them to effectively shake off Pikmin with a single move. I'm lucky to main Ike in this case bc nair does wonders here. Even a sex kick nair like that of Mario or Fox only shakes them off from the lower body as for as I've seen. When I referred to the setup in my previous post I didn't necessarily mean it's a setup to start with, but a setup to kill. In itself it requires a setup which does make it tedious in execution for Olimar should it be facing a well-versed player. For characters without these full-bodied moves, forcing them to use multiple moves to shake-off Pikmin sounds like it could lead to setup/mindgames in itself.
Huh. Thanks for that insight actually! I knew Pika had the chaingrab but I never knew it worked on Sheik.
I'll be honest, I am just not in the mood to address this novel you're writing for me. I'll be throwing you quick responses.
You're over praising Olimar and his tools. Learn the MU, play it accordingly, and yes, get good.
Again, this isn't contradicting at all... I am saying that games shouldn't be reworked because of poor skill, and that despite this, the Minus Dev Team does so anyway.
Jesus christ who the actual fuck are you? No guy, unless you created air or something, the holy blessing that is your (bad) idea for Sheik and Zelda does have very valid counter arguments for it, and does not have some automatic justification to be considered by the dev team, just because no one is willing to toss counter arguments at you because they don't you to type another book report on one of the words they used.
I still think you don't know what you're talking about.
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and assume you're not an experienced Olimar player by any means... This isn't his "go-to", and it's certainly not as good as you make it out to seem.
The quick responses may explain the holes in your argument. Rome wasn't built in a day (referring to the amount of commitment required to properly structure anything that requires structure, like, say, an argument. It's plain to see that you're not in the mood to address the points accordingly based on your mood, as ppl generally behave with regard to how they feel. However one would never willingly admit to ignoring a point because they have nothing to contest it, as such would be admitting defeat (people tend to view discussions as competitions for some reason).
I'd say I'm praising Olimar and his tools for what they are. The implementation of sarcasm and vulgarity into your argument further invalidates your lack of points against mine, at least based on the general guidelines of debate. I'm only explicit with my statements for the sake of consistency within my own argument. Me saying something like the fact that I assume you don't have a point against the points of mine which you don't respond to isn't meant to garner a response, but establish my own position. Your implication assumption that I was an Olimar player throughout this conversation (since it seems you're just now assuming that I'm not) shows how your position in regard to mine is founded primarily in your assumptions based on what may be inferred, but hasn't been explicitly stated. By now you should have realized not to make assumptions about someone who so carefully explicates what they believe, to avoid making false assumptions. However, it seems like you care more about coaxing someone to believe that you're right and having your reasoning unquestioned than actual dialogue discussing the legitimacy of said reasoning. I actually don't play Olimar and have no trouble playing against him, but I feel that his ftilt doesn't make sense with the rest of his toolkit, which, if adjusted, buffs in other areas would be merited (again, just because I haven't explicitly stated this doesn't mean I myself don't believe it; as much as I try to be explicit, inconsistencies are sure to exist in an argument between a dialectical-type person and a non-dialectical one, and the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence).
It's contradicting if you understand how you're using the same premise to prove opposing points.
If the counterarguments exist, present them. You don't need to be as detailed as I am, it just helps because it establishes your position from the beginning instead of giving you wiggle room to alter your arguments and somehow use a premise to simultaneously establish opposing points (whether you see it or not).
[u mad?] Who the hell do you think I am? I am neither Goku nor Vegeta, I am the one who will destroy you! (since vulgarity and sarcasm are fair-game, then transparent attempts at trolling should be too, I guess) I didn't create air, but it seems I've created salt within you, which hasn't been my intention, but is apparently supereffective against your type.
If you don't think I know what I'm talking about, try avoiding assumptions about what I'm talking about and simply look at what I'm literally saying. For one, I never claimed that I was referring to Olimar exclusively in the with respect to 1v1; the things I've stated are much more apparent in FFA and team battles than in singles, because picking the right character aids you in this regard.
Perhaps it's not as good as you're assuming that I'm making it out to seem, but there's no demarcation of efficacy with regard to what I've said since I've mainly been arguing in contrast to you, so anything based in assumption is ultimately baseless.
At this point, however, it seems you've given up on actually attempting to make your point. It definitely didn't help that you ignored some of mine and then seemed to assume that I held points which I didn't state, but that you relied on textual implications for (with at least 50% of communication being lost in said form because tone and body language cannot be interpreted, leaving a person to interpret something according to their mood, as you yourself have stated affects your willingness to support entertaining another person's claims). Therefore, this discussion between you and I, and other potential ones (until you learn how to discuss in a Socratic manner, or until I decide to be the kind of person who submits to arguments that don't add up within themselves), is/are effectively over. I am still willing to discuss this with anyone actually willing to support a dialogue and that knows how to discuss things in a civilized manner, however a discussion is unnecessary at this point unless new information is to be introduced, or old info re-evaluated, or if a dev is finally to respond (even then justification would be necessary, bc even though a dev may have the final say, it helps to understand why they feel the way they do thoroughly, so that there may be no persistent/future disagreements among those in the forum).
Enjoy your experiences to come, EpicNonBread. May life treat you justly.
I usually like long arguments and stuff (assuming it doesn't devolve into gish gallop, which can happen, and it seems like it did get bean-counter-y here), but it's late in the morning so I'll just say this one thing because I read it and neither person seemed to say much, but it seemed kinda important to me:
Olimar sticking tons of Pikmin on people and sending them offstage is fine in some MUs, but some characters have excellent Pikmin evisceration strategies that makes this highly ineffective (Marth can literally let one get stuck to him then jump at or away from Olimar and use counter - offensively it gives him some invulnerability frames and a fast attack, and defensively it's an extremely effective way to clear them off... as other exxamples, Sheik can spam nair, Pikachu can aerial thunder -> DJ away -> thunder hits body to clean off all non-yellows while thunder wall helps protect from Olimar (or just bair probably), Meta Knight can tornado, and the list goes on...).
If you manage to land a combo starter, then do like stick with pikmin -> extend combo several times this could maybe work, but calling it a go-to seems... unlikely, given what I know about Olimar and his tools/counterplay to them.
Not sure what's silly about those two words being together in that order w/in this context. One would say it's "silly" to deliberately misinterpret a person's meaning before ascertaining what their meaning is. After all, you saying that Zelda was used for disrespects doesn't outright contradict what I claimed the "intended use" was, especially with regard to EpicNonBread's clarification of my statement, since in saying "intended" I don't directly indicate whose intention (and I meant the original game developers, whereas you took that to mean the use intended by the player, which is not what I meant, and takes my words out of context). When I say "intended" I mean that when looking at the way both characters work, naturally (and logically) one might surmises that one character has more combo options and the other, more kill options, thus leading anyone observing both characters based on these demarcations, to believe that one is more suited for the first part of a match and the other, the last. Chain grabs, arguably, weren't an "intended" aspect of Melee, much like wave-dashes weren't (that is to say, they weren't deliberately added to the game as a mechanic, but exist due to the interaction of other mechanics, or lack thereof, which I imagine is common within games with physics like those of Smash). Thus they aren't considered in my making said statement. Though Sheik may not necessarily have a problem killing, she generally needs her target to be a higher percent to kill with just about any of her moves considering that none of her moves compare to Zelda's in terms of KO power.
Perhaps ask for clarification as to what a person means before implicitly scorning what you believe their conclusion to be? Furthermore, since this is a thread about requests for the next version of 4.0BC, it makes sense to post in that regard, instead of simply for the sake of contradicting what you misinterpret to be a person's point. Arguably "intended use" wasn't the right choice of words as it can be interpreted a number of ways, I assumed that the desire to be contrarianistic (adj. form of contrarianism, though itself not an official word, just to be clear) would be outweighed by the drive to actually be reasonable, but I should have known better.
side note: I'm assuming no one rly minds my walls of text since none have suggested how I can use spoilers to make them less apparent? I don't mind that, I just don't want to clutter the forum or receive any warnings for extensive posts.
I think you can put the thesaurus away now, for one. Two, I knew what you meant when you said it, and nothing was taken out of context. You brought up Melee, you brought up their intended use, and I got a chuckle out of it. Intentions =/= good design. This is doubly so when the game mechanics are taken into account, which you actually cannot ignore for your analysis, since those mechanics are freely accessible to the characters, and are integral to how they play in the pro meta. Practice > Paper
Sheik outclasses Zelda in every way, so the only reason you pick Zelda is to disrespect during the match. And no, Sheik doesn't need anyone to be high % to kill. She just needs to get them offstage and camp guard the ledge. Just because Zelda has raw power doesn't mean she can safely set up into any of those moves, or keep anyone from destroying her in her attempt to do so. She is not fast, she is not safe, her recovery is bad, and she doesn't have a chain grab. Again, you never change to Zelda mid match unless you're aiming to show how much better you are than someone else, I.E. disrespecting them, as M2K has done on occasion.
Sheilda is better than Sheik in Brawl - it improves the Pikachu matchup [zero to death CG on Sheik, and while playing neutral as Zelda vs Pikachu is probably miserable, you don't just die if you mess up and can switch to Sheik at higher percents to have a fighting chance in the MU] and a few others [I think it makes her heavy MUs a bit better because she can do tilt combos and then switch to Zelda and kick them in the face].
I think you can put the thesaurus away now, for one. Two, I knew what you meant when you said it, and nothing was taken out of context. You brought up Melee, you brought up their intended use, and I got a chuckle out of it. Intentions =/= good design. This is doubly so when the game mechanics are taken into account, which you actually cannot ignore for your analysis, since those mechanics are freely accessible to the characters, and are integral to how they play in the pro meta. Practice > Paper
Sheik outclasses Zelda in every way, so the only reason you pick Zelda is to disrespect during the match. And no, Sheik doesn't need anyone to be high % to kill. She just needs to get them offstage and camp guard the ledge. Just because Zelda has raw power doesn't mean she can safely set up into any of those moves, or keep anyone from destroying her in her attempt to do so. She is not fast, she is not safe, her recovery is bad, and she doesn't have a chain grab. Again, you never change to Zelda mid match unless you're aiming to show how much better you are than someone else, I.E. disrespecting them, as M2K has done on occasion.
I find it curious that the one you're telling to calm down is the one who has abstained from vulgarity and being outright condescending/patronizing (even if I may be interpreted that way, text-based encounters, as I've previously stated, leave people to assume tone based on their own presuppositions), though it makes sense considering you seem to have no issue behaving in said manner as well. I however, will stick to my principles. Have you considered that there are individuals in existence that simply use the bulk of their vocabulary for the sake of using words and their denotations precisely? I assume we're all adults here, or mostly adults, so we can actually have a dialogue unless someone chooses to disrespect another person directly (as you and ENB have shown, though it took a lot for ENB, whereas, from the beginning you seemed to be perfectly fine with undermining someone that you disagree with). It was taken out of context in the sense that you assumed my meaning where I didn't explicate it. For one, I meant outright killing with a move from center-stage in comparison to Zelda. I'm well aware of the reasons as to why Sheik outclasses Zelda in Melee for the reasons you explain. Simply because I wasn't explicit about every facet of my analysis (to avoid creating even larger walls of text) doesn't mean that there was more to what I was saying than what I've said. The only way that Sheik doesn't outclass Zelda, as I said, is in raw killing potential. I wouldn't consider gimping to be "raw" in this sense, but rather refined. It's like comparing Marth and Ike in the following respect: though Ike, on paper, has more KO potential on more moves, Marth may very well kill earlier (either sooner in the match, or at lower percents) with a tipper @ the ledge or offstage. The statement "Zelda can kill earlier than Sheik" doesn't contradict the statement "Sheik can kill earlier than Zelda," because both statements apply potentiality and not absolution. I recommend you (re)introduce yourself to the Socratic method and simple logic (if p, then q =/= if p, then not r, unless if q, not r). Though I suspect you are well-versed in logic and may simply be the type to stigmatize people based on arbitrary parameters, since you find it hard to believe that my verbosity is an aspect of who I am.
I fully agree with the "practice>paper" statement, however my point in this regard is that Minus has the ability to make "paper = practice"
Please refrain from making any further assumptions about my position in this discussion unless seeking clarification in doing so. I've never disrespected anyone on this forum, so I don't see a legitimate reason for a person to attempt to disrespect me, though your doing so without direct provocation speaks volumes of your personality based on context. Since this conversation has gotten out-of-hand, and you seem to be the type to enjoy getting the last word, reasonably or not, you can message me privately so that we may continue this discussion and perhaps understand where the real conflict lay (which I believe to be, as I've said numerous times, your assumptions of what the crux of my claim(s) are).
Any additional response from you or ENB (who seems to have understood my meaning, or simply has yet to reply any further) that doesn't at least give the one-to-reply the benefit of the doubt is simply antagonizing and adds to how off-topic this discussion has become (which was on-topic until the belittlement occurred).
I hope that you as well, Gold, enjoy your experiences to come, and are treated fairly by life.
I usually like long arguments and stuff (assuming it doesn't devolve into gish gallop, which can happen, and it seems like it did get bean-counter-y here), but it's late in the morning so I'll just say this one thing because I read it and neither person seemed to say much, but it seemed kinda important to me:
If you manage to land a combo starter, then do like stick with pikmin -> extend combo several times this could maybe work, but calling it a go-to seems... unlikely, given what I know about Olimar and his tools/counterplay to them.
I personally prefer to keep them only as long as necessary. This conversation between myself and ENB could have been about half as long had (from what I can tell) he chosen to give me the same respect I had shown him, that is, the respect to fully address one another thoroughly without making assumptions about one another or each other's arguments.
I agree that the Pikmin Toss is MU-dependent, and can see how I may have been unclear. However in MUs where Olimar is not up against a character with a reliable full-bodied hitbox move or counter, I would call it a go-to (and I could still be wrong in that regard, as my knowledge isn't absolute, considering naturally human physical/mental limitations) since it forces the character to use more than one move, theoretically allowing Olimar more time to force his opponent into particular positions. I suppose with this limitation it isn't a "go-to" in the literal sense, so my word choice may have been unwise. I appreciate your dialectical response nonetheless.
Lucis, you seem to be acting quite immature with your reactions to what people say to you, and how it's said. I already have to read novels when Thor posts, so I don't necessarily enjoy seeing more of it, especially when it isn't necessary. You seem to believe people on this forum are unintelligent, and thus believe it necessary to talk like you're far more educated than the rest of us (which actually has the opposite effect, given the effort you're using). I know quite a few intelligent people with much higher education than I have, and not one of them talks like you do. What you're doing is artificially lengthening your posts for no reason whatsoever, and acting defensive when someone calls you out on it. (Keep in mind that I am simply calling this as it appears to me. Whether or not you're actually like this, I don't know, since we don't know each other)
What I did was make a small comment in regards to a small thing you said in the form of creating humor for the irony behind intended design vs practical use, and you took MY post out of context and thusly turned it into an argument of "I'm right you're wrong." I had no intentions of getting so deep into this Zelda debate, but you insisted in pulling out your thesaurus and attempted to belittle me in a subtle way (spoilers, didn't work). You present yourself as a stuck up individual that believes he is in the right no matter what someone says, and seems to seek out reasons to debate or argue, regardless of how trivial it is. (Again, appearances in text on a forum)
Also, I must ask that you please not make false reports about vulgarity when nobody has insulted you outright, especially since you yourself could be reported for the same under your own beliefs as such. Everyone here should be able to get along, and take what people say with a grain of salt, if they are proper adults, and not fall into petty arguments and debates over complete nonsense. I don't care what you propose for Zelda, or what you feel would be best for her, I really don't. You can give the devs as many ideas as you can think of to help her as a character, but be mindful of any counterarguments people give you. They may very well know what they're saying.
Nobody is insulting you, and like with the "got off on the wrong foot" situation I had with ENB, you're probably an alright dude, but the way you talk to others speaks volumes in how they interpret you, especially on the Internet.
If you wanna fight me in some smash 4, I'd be more than happy to trade blows.
And since this is what started this, lemme clear this up. This was not an insult to you. This was a general statement made about the idea of intended use not being used as intended. More or less, it was a shot at Sakurai being amazing at designing and balancing characters.
I still don't think I fully understand how this thread works as far as if you're reading through all the suggestions or if Bent is? Not sure, but there's still a good amount of requests and ideas that have been left unaddressed.
Lucis, you seem to be acting quite immature with your reactions to what people say to you, and how it's said. I already have to read novels when Thor posts, so I don't necessarily enjoy seeing more of it, especially when it isn't necessary. You seem to believe people on this forum are unintelligent, and thus believe it necessary to talk like you're far more educated than the rest of us (which actually has the opposite effect, given the effort you're using). I know quite a few intelligent people with much higher education than I have, and not one of them talks like you do. What you're doing is artificially lengthening your posts for no reason whatsoever, and acting defensive when someone calls you out on it. (Keep in mind that I am simply calling this as it appears to me. Whether or not you're actually like this, I don't know, since we don't know each other)
What I did was make a small comment in regards to a small thing you said in the form of creating humor for the irony behind intended design vs practical use, and you took MY post out of context and thusly turned it into an argument of "I'm right you're wrong." I had no intentions of getting so deep into this Zelda debate, but you insisted in pulling out your thesaurus and attempted to belittle me in a subtle way (spoilers, didn't work). You present yourself as a stuck up individual that believes he is in the right no matter what someone says, and seems to seek out reasons to debate or argue, regardless of how trivial it is. (Again, appearances in text on a forum)
Also, I must ask that you please not make false reports about vulgarity when nobody has insulted you outright, especially since you yourself could be reported for the same under your own beliefs as such. Everyone here should be able to get along, and take what people say with a grain of salt, if they are proper adults, and not fall into petty arguments and debates over complete nonsense. I don't care what you propose for Zelda, or what you feel would be best for her, I really don't. You can give the devs as many ideas as you can think of to help her as a character, but be mindful of any counterarguments people give you. They may very well know what they're saying.
Nobody is insulting you, and like with the "got off on the wrong foot" situation I had with ENB, you're probably an alright dude, but the way you talk to others speaks volumes in how they interpret you, especially on the Internet.
If you wanna fight me in some smash 4, I'd be more than happy to trade blows.
And since this is what started this, lemme clear this up. This was not an insult to you. This was a general statement made about the idea of intended use not being used as intended. More or less, it was a shot at Sakurai being amazing at designing and balancing characters.
I would like to know your criteria for evaluating immaturity since apparently it's more mature to downplay a person's position and attack them with vulgarity (referring to ENB) than to try to have a dialogue about it. I would consider feminizing someone's onscreen name (from "lucis" to "lucy") when he/she believes you to be against them to be a form of taking a jab at someone, as well as ENB's unwarranted sarcasm. jbc you deem my manner of speech unnecessary simply shows you may not see what I see in speaking in such a way, and that's precision, since otherwise things can be taken out-of-context more easily. Additionally, jbc the ppl you deem intelligent don't speak this way doesn't mean intelligent ppl can't speak in this way, but I feel like you get this and are simply using an argument I've encountered far too many times. The continued reference to a thesaurus which you believe me to be using remains unnecessary. I don't see where I directly suggested that I think anyone on this forum is dumb, though I can see why you would believe it. People tend to stick others into inflexible archetypes based on how they behave, though I don't entirely agree with the concept. I'm well aware of how internet interpretations work, and that's why I hold out hope for those individuals who don't jump to conclusions based on internet encounters. You'll see that the way that I've spoken to anyone else who has addressed me in this forum is different from the way I've spoken to you and ENB, that's because they themselves have not tried to condescend or patronize. It is because we're all adults that I feel we should be capable of setting our personal salt aside, so that we won't have to assume that salt is present (i.e. taking things with a grain of salt; in this case I'm being more literal). It's that very philosophy that may have led ENB to believe that I was being salty in my responses. At the very least I admire that you've tried to level with me at least 90% with your last reply, despite that I still detect an air of condescension/patronization. That last statement merited being cleared up far earlier in this convo imo to avoid all this misunderstanding (in said case, a few more descriptive words would have clarified the context; I couldn't have taken it out-of-context if the context itself was clear). Furthermore, if you didn't actually care about my proposals, then I don't think you would have been replying in regard to them. The only person I accused of being vulgar was ENB, not yourself. I did however accuse you of unwarranted disrespect with regard to your own sarcasm, esp. the implication that I'm using a thesaurus. If what I'm saying is considered vulgar, I'd also like to know your criteria for considering something vulgar, since to my understanding, it generally requires some form of profanity.
However, since Pin has finally showed up, I won't be partaking in any further discussions on this thread. Like I've said, we can discuss matters privately. Any attempts at doing so publicly shows some sort of desire to make a scene imo, and would be perpetuating the situation as-is rather than allowing it to stop (at this point I'm responding in the thread to practice the use of spoilers and because of your own response despite my attempt to dismiss the conversation).
My first post in this thread contains my requests, or at least things I think should be considered. I wish this conversation wouldn't have gone the way that it did, and I don't think it would have if communication was executed in a less ambiguous manner by all parties involved. I'll refrain from being off-topic any further provided the topic is publicly dropped by all other parties involved.
