RockmanPM Forums
Other Things => Gaming => Topic started by: Waifu on April 09, 2011, 05:53:14 PM
-
I never notcied that some characters in some fighting games got nerfed until I played them myself. I realized that some games aren't as balanced as I thought and it bothers me. Why some designers feel the need to nerf some characters while upping others? Is it possible to achieve a sort of balance in fighting game swher eit depends on the players ability as well as the characters strength and weaknesses?
-
Probably, there's some Jewario video where this fighting game prick faps about how he loves the balanced games.
His face and way of talking makes him seem like the jerkass nerd, he's also on BlisteredThumbs.
-
Of course it is: No Items, Fox Only, Final Destination.
Variance (read: fun) by its nature disrupts balance, especially so because as the game gets more complex, game developers can't possibly predict every strategy that's going to come around. Even the strictest of traditional fighters run into that as the roster grows.
Ideally I prefer to not see anyone weakened. Sometimes, though, and this isn't even exclusive to the fighting genre, but characters come along who simply need a buff. Nobody knows why they were made such weenies in the first place, but they just were.
-
No because people would complain about how "weak" their cahracter is. >.> if I could do one thing to balance fighting games, it would be to balance out the health in tatsunoko vs capcom and in marvel vs capcom 3. Mostly becAuse Zero needs it.
-
I actually understand why Zero is low on health in TvC. He's a freaking engine of destruction, not to mention he near completely negates any advantage that small-size characters like Roll and Joe are looking for. Can't speak for MvC.
That's the other problem with balance: There really is such a thing as player affinity. It's not JUST personal preference, sometimes a particular character is just a better fit for someone's style.
The personal most hurt I ever was by an "underpowered" character, would be Bowser in SSB Brawl. Flying Slam is great, but beyond that he feels woefully underpowered compared to new heavyweights like Ike, Dedede, and Snake. Damn near every aerial move he has is punished with tremendous lag, and his Final Smash is laughable. Mario can flip it with his cape, for God's sake.
-
I actually understand why Zero is low on health in TvC. He's a freaking engine of destruction, not to mention he near completely negates any advantage that small-size characters like Roll and Joe are looking for. Can't speak for MvC.
I think the person who best fits that description is that frigid overpowered 75% screen range Kaiji no soki. >____> Hate him.
-
Nope. Because what one person thinks is balanced, another will say bull-blam-. My only theory in a balanced game is just one character and for the people to fight with just that character. Of course it will never sell, but oh well.
-
I think the person who best fits that description is that frigid overpowered 75% screen range Kaiji no soki. >____> Hate him.
Yeah I've used Soki, and his range is nuuuuuuuuts. You know, we totally need to play some TatsuCap one day Wanda! XD
-
Yeah I've used Soki, and his range is nuuuuuuuuts. You know, we totally need to play some TatsuCap one day Wanda! XD
Pssh, you're so on. >D
-
Pssh, you're so on. >D
BAH-RING IT! 8)
-
Of course it's possible, balanced games (read: where pretty much everyone has an actual chancce at winning) exist already. Sure, even in those games there are characters that are stronger or weaker, but it's nothing too bad. Now, a perfectly blanced game, where pretty much every match up is a 5-5? Never gonna happen unless every character plays the exact same, and that would be incredibly boring.
-
Solar pretty much hit the nail on the head. David Sirlin (programmer of SSF2THDR) wrote an article (http://www.sirlin.net/articles/balancing-multiplayer-games-part-3-fairness.html) about character balancing, and here's his take on it:
0) God tier (no character should be in this tier, if they are, you are forced to play them to be competitive)
1) Top tier (Being top tier does not necessarily mean any nerfs are needed)
2) Middle tier (pretty good, not quite as good as top)
3) Bottom tier (I can still win with them, but it's hard)
4) Garbage tier (no one should be in this. Not reasonable to play this character at all.)
There are in fact many games where characters all fall between top and bottom tiers. Just because a character may be weaker doesn't mean that you can't win with them, it's just that you have to put in a LOT of work for your victories.
No because people would complain about how "weak" their cahracter is. >.> if I could do one thing to balance fighting games, it would be to balance out the health in tatsunoko vs capcom and in marvel vs capcom 3. Mostly becAuse Zero needs it.
Nah, Zero's health actually needs to be that low. His pressure game is so good that it's very hard to get openings to hit him, let alone keep him off of you. Once you learn those charge shot loops, you can land really damaging combos without having to use meter or anything. Low health keeps him in check because when you finally manage to hit him you can knock him out with 1-2 good combos. If Zero had the health of a tank he'd just be outright broken. TvC's probably the most balanced fighter I've played in a long time, as there's still yet to be an agreed on tier list for that game because everyone can hold their own with enough practice.
The personal most hurt I ever was by an "underpowered" character, would be Bowser in SSB Brawl. Flying Slam is great, but beyond that he feels woefully underpowered compared to new heavyweights like Ike, Dedede, and Snake. Damn near every aerial move he has is punished with tremendous lag, and his Final Smash is laughable. Mario can flip it with his cape, for God's sake.
What's funny is that hackers tend to understand balance better than Nintendo does. Balanced Brawl (http://balancedbrawl.net/characters/bowser/), for example, manages to keep the gameplay the same as SSBB while re-tweaking the characters so that they all have a fighting chance. Some characters still do better than others, but the matchups are closer so you don't have to kill yourself trying to beat MK/Snake/Dedede/etc. Kind of wish Nintendo would take notes. :\
-
1-2 combos? Try 1 super from either Doronjo or Tekaman Blade. One super! No one goes down like that. Shut up Karas >.>
-
Solar and what Aquateam quoted is pretty much the truth.
let's take for example, El Fuerte from SF4, he's def high tier but you have to work to get REALLY good w/ him, and reflexes are a MUST to make his mix up game even more effective. I know this one dude who's the top El Fuerte player of Toronto. His reflexes at mixing up even the strongest Ryu, Sagat, Rufus players are...well...amazing to look at. ( the Fuerte mainer's name is Dan (not 100% sure of his nickname but his name is Dan).
-
1-2 combos? Try 1 super from either Doronjo or Tekaman Blade. One super! No one goes down like that. Shut up Karas >.>
If you mean a Level 3 Super, then yeah, that can definitely knock him out in one shot. Though a fully juiced-up Roll can knock him out without even using meter, which is a scary though in it's own right. However, that's just the kind of payoff you get for playing a character with amazing rushdown capabilities. Zero's not designed to take hits; he needs to be the aggressor at all times or he's just not doing his job. That said, TvC's a game where meter management is super important, and having enough for a Mega Crash can keep the momentum in your favor. Of course, it just so happens that Zero's pretty much the best character in the game for building meter, given that his attacks tend to multi-hit and all that. Really, he's a lot harder to hit than you'd think.
let's take for example, El Fuerte from SF4, he's def high tier but you have to work to get REALLY good w/ him, and reflexes are a MUST to make his mix up game even more effective. I know this one dude who's the top El Fuerte player of Toronto. His reflexes at mixing up even the strongest Ryu, Sagat, Rufus players are...well...amazing to look at. ( the Fuerte mainer's name is Dan (not 100% sure of his nickname but his name is Dan).
I actually did think about El Fuerte when looking through this topic. Though I've never actually played SF4, he's one of those characters that I'd love to try out. Fuerte's damage output and defense are pretty low, and his execution isn't the easiest either. With a lot of practice he's capable of doing quite a bit of damage, as like you said, he has an amazing mix up game. Being able to out-think an opponent goes a long way in being able to win matches, even if you're using a character that's considered low-tier.
-
...matchups are closer so you don't have to kill yourself trying to beat MK/Snake/Dedede/etc. Kind of wish Nintendo would take notes. :\
You know, I *NEVER* was in such a position, and this is why when people talk of "balancing" Brawl, I have a hard time listening to them. Not only do I find none of those three characters particularly overwhelming, but I myself *ROYALLY* suck as MK and Dedede. In general my toughest opponents in Brawl are Toon Link and ROB.
"God Tier" in Brawl only exists to people who try to standardize the environment (no items, no hazards, as plain terrain as possible; I've seen engines of destruction on Final Destination get completely ripped apart in Yoshi's Island Melee because they can't fight on a frikkin slope). IMHO that is not the kind of game that Brawl SHOULD be; but whether you agree with that or not, at the very least one has to admit that the game encompasses much more. The performance of the game's characters varies drastically based on what style you're playing.
-
You know, I *NEVER* was in such a position, and this is why when people talk of "balancing" Brawl, I have a hard time listening to them. Not only do I find none of those three characters particularly overwhelming, but I myself *ROYALLY* suck as MK and Dedede. In general my toughest opponents in Brawl are Toon Link and ROB.
No offense Shelly but that's a really bad way to argue this. For example, I may as well say that I find it harder to deal with X middle tier character in MvC2 and that I even suck at using the god tiers, but does that change that they're horribly broken? No.
True, items and stages change things, but they benefit from them as much as everyone else too.
-
You know, I *NEVER* was in such a position, and this is why when people talk of "balancing" Brawl, I have a hard time listening to them. Not only do I find none of those three characters particularly overwhelming, but I myself *ROYALLY* suck as MK and Dedede. In general my toughest opponents in Brawl are Toon Link and ROB.
Just because a character's top tier in a fighter doesn't mean that they're easy to pick up. Magneto's a boss in MvC2 yet his learning curve is extremely high. When people talk of tiers, they're talking about how that character performs at the highest level of play in the hands of someone who has the character down pat.
"God Tier" in Brawl only exists to people who try to standardize the environment (no items, no hazards, as plain terrain as possible; I've seen engines of destruction on Final Destination get completely ripped apart in Yoshi's Island Melee because they can't fight on a frikkin slope). IMHO that is not the kind of game that Brawl SHOULD be; but whether you agree with that or not, at the very least one has to admit that the game encompasses much more. The performance of the game's characters varies drastically based on what style you're playing.
In terms of stages in the Smash series, I personally don't like the ones that are auto-scroll and such. I've played the major Brawl hacks, and the one thing they all have in common is that they try to make all of the major stages viable. This can range from freezing moving/shifting stages like Rainbow Cruise and WarioWare to outright replacing stages like 75m and Rumble falls with some of the more fun SSE stages that you wouldn't normally have access to. Slopes don't really bother me at all, and th only hazards I don't like are the kind that you can't see coming or are over-intrusive. You want to keep the game competitive, but that's hard to do when characters are dying due to something that they didn't really have a lot of control over (see: annoying WarioWare minigames and their boosts).
Items are an interesting case. I'm okay with having certain ones on, but some of them are outright annoying. I honestly don't even like Smash Balls, if anything else because they seem to pop of so often and inadvertently break the flow of the fight. That and some Final Smashes are for all intents and purposes, broken. Landmasters can outright snatch 2 stocks off of you if your opponent knows what they're doing.
Oh, and tripping. Tripping is just the dumbest thing I've ever experienced in a fighter, ever. :|
-
Yanno, SSBB was designed to be silly chaotic fun, not a competitive fighter so...>_>a
Though the broken final smashes do suck. Even if they're fun.
-
Yeah, Super Sonic can go die in a fire >__>
-
I love final smashes, the idea of Nintendo characters having supers pleases me *runs away*.
-
Supers? Nintendo? >0<
Concerning character strength and weakness, how does that factor into balance?
-
Oh, and tripping. Tripping is just the dumbest thing I've ever experienced in a fighter, ever. :|
This is really my only complaint about Brawl. Everything else is fine.
-
This is really my only complaint about Brawl. Everything else is fine.
Thing is, even with Brawl's faults I still don't mind playing it with friends or whatever, but tripping even ruins that. The game outright punishes you for trying to run, which IMO just makes no sense at all. I've literally seen matches turned over just because someone tripped and was punished for it. Of course, I have no problem with using Diddy Kong's bananas to repeatedly trip/frustrate someone, simply because it's not only under someone's control, but because it's pretty hilarious in its own right.
-
Supers? Nintendo? >0<
Concerning character strength and weakness, how does that factor into balance?
*shrugs* just had to say it.
-
Everyone in Arc's Fist of the North star (PS2) is so broken that the game is balanced, in a twisted kind of way.
Except Toki. He's broken broken.
-
Sounds like fun.
You know, I wouldn't underestimate the value of a good imbalance. Who here HASN'T enjoyed a nice broken character, weapon, or feature? I mean, if Godzilla Unleashed were balanced, we wouldn't have Biollante in there, and she's just the most badass giant plant/reptile hybrid ever.
...I know, I know, nobody besides me cares about that game. But to a freakishly nerdy kaiju fan, having a giant mass of razor-toothed tentacles as a playable character is a big deal.
No offense Shelly but that's a really bad way to argue this. For example, I may as well say that I find it harder to deal with X middle tier character in MvC2 and that I even suck at using the god tiers, but does that change that they're horribly broken? No.
And at what point did I say that my experience was the standard for all players? None. The subjective nature was kind of my point. If you re-read my post, I did not say that such characters are not broken; I said that they are only broken in a very specific format which, contrary to popular belief, does not directly carry over to the game as a whole. "Balance", on the other hand, DOES apply to the game as a whole, and therein lies the problem of presuming that the tier list alone indicates a lack of balance. I'm not going to tell you that Brawl's roster is balanced, it isn't. The tier list just isn't the reason why.
Just because a character's top tier in a fighter doesn't mean that they're easy to pick up.
Remember who you're talking to: Mr.-still-not-over-the-exclusion-of-Mewtwo-who-had-one-of-the-highest-learning-curves-of-Melee? I am in NO WAY referring to how easy they are to pick up. I'm referring to how I, personally, handle them after having given the entire game's roster a fair shake through the varying modes and challenges. All I said was that there is such a thing as player affinity, that is how a character best matches one's personal play style, not that any such thing invalidates every other character comparison which the gaming community has established. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.
I love final smashes, the idea of Nintendo characters having supers pleases me *runs away*.
I'll hide you. I never get enough of SUPER DRAGON POWER, after all. 8)
-
For the record, I love Final Smashes. They're awesome, and who cares if they're broken or not! LoL, Toon Link has easily one of the worst Final Smashes in the game, but I still love it! XD
-
The best way to balance a fighting game?
Everyone is Dan.
-
Everyone in Arc's Fist of the North star (PS2) is so broken that the game is balanced, in a twisted kind of way.
Except Toki. He's broken broken.
He's Jesus, he should be.
If you re-read my post, I did not say that such characters are not broken; I said that they are only broken in a very specific format which, contrary to popular belief, does not directly carry over to the game as a whole.
Well, honestly, I just don't see how having items on would make them any less broken than they are.
-
Actually, there's a hack of SSBB called Brawl- (parody of Brawl+). It takes the characters and makes them all super-broken, and the game ends up surprisingly balanced. The cool thing is that it's really accessible to casual players, because really, who doesn't love the joy of running around with characters that are super-powered. Broken features are okay in single-player games where you're just fighting the COM, but it can backfire in a competitive setting unless there's equal distribution. If one character has a "win button" and the others don't, what would make anyone want to choose the other characters, you know?
Remember who you're talking to: Mr.-still-not-over-the-exclusion-of-Mewtwo-who-had-one-of-the-highest-learning-curves-of-Melee? I am in NO WAY referring to how easy they are to pick up. I'm referring to how I, personally, handle them after having given the entire game's roster a fair shake through the varying modes and challenges. All I said was that there is such a thing as player affinity, that is how a character best matches one's personal play style, not that any such thing invalidates every other character comparison which the gaming community has established. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.
Ah, that clarifies your point a bit, sorry about that. Personally I'm a guy who likes to experiment with different playing styles, and I tend to stray towards the balanced types. I do enjoy watching defensive characters play, despite the fact that they have a reputation for being a dull watch. I've been using Mario for some time now, and he's one of those characters that you has to go through blood, sweat, and tears to net KOs, given that he's essentially the Ryu of the game and doesn't really have anything special. Though using the cape to swat recovery moves is a nice touch, so I can't complain in that regard. And as a Melee Kirby user, I feel your pain. Especially when my best friend uses Marth. :'(
As far as Final Smashes go, the same rule of distribution applies. I mean, you've got great ones like Sonic/Space Animals that can net plenty of KOs, but as a Mario/Kirby user you feel gypped. With Mario's it ends up being a very straightforward move that everyone can react to and evade on release, and with Kirby's you can literally spot-dodge at the right moment and avoid damage altogether.
-
I try to use Mario, but my problem is always that I play him like Dr. Mario.
-
I used Dr. Mario over Mario initially in Melee, but then I came to learn that wall-jumping was too cool to miss out on, and I learned to appreciate Mario's superior agility. Times like this are where I wish people didn't slap the label "clone" on characters who happen to have similar fighting styles. You simply cannot play Doc the same way you'd play Mario (pills > fireballs), as those differences that seem small make a world of difference in a real match. I still like Doc, granted, and do miss him dearly.
-
Not just the Pills, but the smashes were different as well!
-
Oh yeah, definitely! Doc's Fsmash had little to no range on it, despite the fact that it would mess someone up if it hit them. Cape was different in size, Uppercut actually did respectable damage and actually KO'ed people, and he was overall a lot more power-focused than his normal counterpart. He felt slightly heavier, though, and it was harder for him to get back to the stage than it was for Mario. I miss all of the "clones", really, as Roy and Pichu were cool in their own right. Mewtwo wasn't even close to anyone else in the game in terms of execution, and he still got axed anyway. How Lucario's supposed to be a replacement is beyond me.
Keeping it on topic, I did like how despite the crude advantage the higher-ups had in Melee, bottom tier guys could still compete. L-Cancelling made Bowser's aerials far safer and kept you from getting whipped too badly, though his weight made him easy combo-fodder. Kirby had his trademark Kirbycides which allowed him to net surprise KOs (at the expense of his own life), and pretty much anyone was useable. I actually don't like Melee's high-execution requirement in higher levels of play, though. L-Cancelling should be automatic (be honest, is there ever any reason to not do it?), and while stuff like Wavedashing is cool, doing it all the time as a means of travel seems pretty cumbersome. I play Street Fighter competitively, and TBPH Melee seems far harder in terms of execution at a high level.
-
I'll hide you. I never get enough of SUPER DRAGON POWER, after all. 8)
Damn you! O:<
I used Dr. Mario over Mario initially in Melee, but then I came to learn that wall-jumping was too cool to miss out on, and I learned to appreciate Mario's superior agility. Times like this are where I wish people didn't slap the label "clone" on characters who happen to have similar fighting styles. You simply cannot play Doc the same way you'd play Mario (pills > fireballs), as those differences that seem small make a world of difference in a real match. I still like Doc, granted, and do miss him dearly.
Having clones is what makes the game have more variety. If your opponent is used to you using a character, and you can't seem to beat him, picking a "clone" often helps in messing him up. An example was that everyone was used to me using Roy and his power hits. So in order to mix it up, I picked Marth. At the cost of some power, suddenly, I was too fast for my opponents to defend. What they were expecting out of your fighting style, suddenly, they can't tell what I was going to do. That is my only complaint about Brawl. All characters are so different from each other that you can't really use many characters with the same style of fighting you would normally use, whether it being a rushdown or a game of keepaway. Sure you can use multiple characters, but you can get the sense of "I totally mastered this guy" in Brawl.
-
I smell ass kicking in brawl to test these theories! >D
-
Sorry Aka, but this is one of the few times I feel the need to call an opinion wrong. How is variety of all things something bad?
Honestly, the more individual characters the better. If you know your fundamentals there's no reason you can't play multiple characters effectively.
-
I smell ass kicking in brawl to test these theories! >D
I agree! It will soon be time for a FREE FOR ALLLLLLLLL!
-
Sorry Aka, but this is one of the few times I feel the need to call an opinion wrong. How is variety of all things something bad?
Honestly, the more individual characters the better. If you know your fundamentals there's no reason you can't play multiple characters effectively.
Maybe I wrote it wrong or something, but to summarize: Variety is good in clones. No variety clones made Brawl a bit weak in that regard.
Meh, totally true. Like I said though, unless you keep on using the guy, sometimes I don't feel like I have mastered him at all.
-
I agree! It will soon be time for a FREE FOR ALLLLLLLLL!
[parasitic bomb] I better get brawl soon
-
Well, honestly, I just don't see how having items on would make them any less broken than they are.
Sonic, Yoshi, and Jigglypuff need a word with you. High ground or air speed can be a tremendous boon depending on which items are active. It's also a whole new batch of strategy and evasion to contend with when you're on the wrong side of an item battle.
It's not just items, either. It's also terrain, it's also stage hazards, it's also free-for-alls over one-on-ones, it could be team battles, and occasionally it's even the 2.0 damage ratio. These are all things that the tier list ignores, and which otherwise play a large part to your average Smash gamer, and they can RADICALLY alter the game's balance.
Bowser, for example, has a "Win Button" in 2.0 Damage, that being his Flying Slam, which will guarantee a KO in all but the largest stages (being a grab attack, it's also unblockable). He generally blows otherwise. Larger characters in general (Snake and Dedede) also have a harder time in 3-or-4-players matchups due to being easier targets, doubly so when somebody's aiming a throwing item at you.
Yoshi is great around slopes, seeings how his eggs, roll, and drop moves allow him to easily attack at odd angles. He's also good for maneuvering around platforms thanks to his high air speed. And the flinch-resistance of his second jump helps him to escape hectic areas.
Also, going into Final Smashes, the Landmaster's effectiveness varies GREATLY depending on terrain. In Final Destination, Battlefield, and the like, it's pretty much guaranteed KOs. In Yoshi's Island Melee, or Spear Pillar, it can easily be laughable.
As far as Final Smashes go, the same rule of distribution applies. I mean, you've got great ones like Sonic/Space Animals that can net plenty of KOs, but as a Mario/Kirby user you feel gypped. With Mario's it ends up being a very straightforward move that everyone can react to and evade on release, and with Kirby's you can literally spot-dodge at the right moment and avoid damage altogether.
Super Sonic I see as compensating for Sonic's generally low power otherwise; there's a reason not every character has it. It's also one of those moves that the user has to know what they're doing; sensitive controls makes for easy spot-dodging if you don't think to attempt hovering. Most other Final Smashes are devastating but avoidable if you're good enough. I've already used the Yoshi Bomb to dodge Marth's Critical Hit, and damn that felt good. 8) They are SUPPOSED to be overwhelming, but they're usually (not always) not outright impossible. ROB's pisses me off, though.
There are some that really feel underpowered, and I agree that Mario is one of them. Bowser, which I often rant about, is another, and Pit's leaves him pretty open as well. Seems like the early characters got jiped and the more off-the-wall late additions got the crazy power.
Mewtwo wasn't even close to anyone else in the game in terms of execution, and he still got axed anyway. How Lucario's supposed to be a replacement is beyond me.
They're loner semi-humanoid Pokemon, they have chargeable projectiles, a similar forward smash, and command some glowy supernatural power. They're pretty much it. The general "fighting style" of Mewtwo is NOTHING like Lucario's. If anything I think Zelda is closer to Mewtwo in terms of play style, but there truly is no substitute for him.
Keeping it on topic, I did like how despite the crude advantage the higher-ups had in Melee, bottom tier guys could still compete. L-Cancelling made Bowser's aerials far safer and kept you from getting whipped too badly, though his weight made him easy combo-fodder. Kirby had his trademark Kirbycides which allowed him to net surprise KOs (at the expense of his own life), and pretty much anyone was useable. I actually don't like Melee's high-execution requirement in higher levels of play, though. L-Cancelling should be automatic (be honest, is there ever any reason to not do it?), and while stuff like Wavedashing is cool, doing it all the time as a means of travel seems pretty cumbersome. I play Street Fighter competitively, and TBPH Melee seems far harder in terms of execution at a high level.
Wave-dashing was an accident, like the Minus World of NES days. Agreed on L-Canceling; there's no point in having a manual switch to recover from your own moves. If it's depending on when somebody hits you (catching yourself on the ground after you're sent flying), then that's a whole other story.
Damn you! O:<
I missed you, too, 'maru. 8)
-
Sonic, Yoshi, and Jigglypuff need a word with you. High ground or air speed can be a tremendous boon depending on which items are active. It's also a whole new batch of strategy and evasion to contend with when you're on the wrong side of an item battle. Some of them aren't as guaranteed-win as the tournament community seems to think; I for one seem to be subject to some kind of curse when handling the rocket launcher.
It's not just items, though. It's also terrain, it's also stage hazards, it's also free-for-alls over one-on-ones, and occasionally it's even the 2.0 damage ratio. These are all things that the tier list ignores, and which otherwise play a large part to your average Smash gamer.
Bowser, for example, has a "Win Button" in 2.0 Damage, that being his Flying Slam, which will guarantee a KO in all but the largest stages. He generally blows otherwise. Larger characters also have a harder time in 3-or-4-players matchups due to being easier targets.
Yoshi is great around slopes and platforms, seeings how his eggs, roll, and drop moves allow him to easily attack at odd angles. He's also good for maneuvering around platforms thanks to his high air speed.
I'm not questioning items and that stuff affect things, I'm just saying that I don't see how it makes the supposed god tiers less broken than they already are. Also, I'm pretty sure they don't ignore terrain, considering the whole stage counter-picking thing, and honestly I don't think stage hazards are worth considering seeing how they affect everyone equally, I'd consider it in the same category as mobility and similar.
Tier lists are for the way the game is played anyways. The usual tier list for Smash is for the whole "no items and stages banned" way of playing, if you want you can make an "everything allowed" tier list or a "2.0 damage" tier list or "Invisible Lighting Super Spicy Curry" tier list or whatever and it'd still be equally as valid as long as you know what you're talking about since it's another thing entirely. Don't forget the whole "tiers don't even matter at all at a casual level unless the game is horribly broken" thing too.
-
Speaking of Brawl,
I never really played much with RPM, didn I? At least not to the extend that I got actually good.
-
Brawl's old enough that most of us are a bit rusty by now, I think.
Tier lists are for the way the game is played anyways. The usual tier list for Smash is for the whole "no items and stages banned" way of playing
That, sir, was my whole point.
-
Yes, but I was asking how items make Brawl's god tiers any less broken, hell explain to me how it wouldn't make them even more broken.
-
I believe I already tackled two points on that issue.
1. Traveling speed is more important.
2. Large character size is more of a liability.
Third, though I don't think this needs to be stated, is that all characters have mostly equal access and effectiveness with them (some exceptions with clobbering items).
Fourth, Meta Knight and Dedede don't really have the best Final Smashes. MK's is one of those high-precision moves, by all means good, but there are better, and it's easily wasted. Dedede's is comparable to Pit's.
The "Standard God Tier" characters are still strong characters, their strengths in a particular niche still exist in the rest of the game. They're just not as overwhelming when there are more variables at work, and Smash is a game which was built to be played with a great many variables in place, merely allowing their removal as an option.
Also, on environments, I'm aware that Brawl's tournament style allows for some more stage flexability than Melee's did, but there's still a large variety of environments that don't get safely tucked behind a "banned curtain" in general play. Also, much of the stage selection of Brawl's tournament play is a result of Brawl's unimaginative level selection and over-use of large flat aeras (Smashville, Yoshi's Island Brawl, etc.). There are a few more varied levels that are considered permissible, but for every Pokemon Stadium Melee that's allowed, there's plenty more banned Green Hill Zones where it came from. It's a wider niche than the Melee tournaments of yester-year, but still a niche, and one which the gaming populace as a whole is in no way bound by.
-
I believe I already tackled two points on that issue.
1. Traveling speed is more important.
2. Large character size is more of a liability.
Third, though I don't think this needs to be stated, is that all characters have mostly equal access and effectiveness with them (some exceptions with clobbering items).
Fourth, Meta Knight and Dedede don't really have the best Final Smashes. MK's is one of those high-precision moves, by all means good, but there are better, and it's easily wasted. Dedede's is comparable to Pit's.
Speaking more specifically of MK
1-Which he has
2-Which he doesn't
3-I'd say that depends more on luck than anything, one moment the item will spawn right next to you, the other it'll be all the way across the stage =/
4-It's irrelevant if MK grabs the Smash Ball since his oponents don't get to use their superior FS in that case, which I assume being him it shouldn't be that much of a problem.
Last I checked D3 wasn't one of the gods anyways btw (top 3 are MK, Snake and Diddy supposedly, and if we really do mean god tiers, then only MK).
-
I smell ass kicking in brawl to test these theories! >D
It has been 2 years since I have considered myself good with Marth. 2.
This summer, I become godly again. Just for this. Also, I really miss smacking folks around with my random menagerie of Mario/Lucas/Samus (New Technology)/Fox/C. Falcon/Ganondorf and Pit.
[parasitic bomb] this post makes me realize that I just miss playing and being in the mix with RPM. ;__;
Posted on: April 14, 2011, 06:44:46 PM
On another note, this topic comes at a very good time for myself. What's everyone's thoughts on comeback mechanics like X-Factor in MvC3? Also, if you guys really want to see balanced in the manner that most people talk up nowadays, play SSFIV. Then pay attention to how people come out of the woodwork claiming that it's boring to watch or footsies/spacing fundamentals/mind games are boring to watch. The different opinions I've seen between people talking down and hyping SSSIV when Marvel was up and coming and now Arcade Edition looming in the future lead me to believe that true balance is impossible and developers should just try their hardest to make fighting games and competitive games in general where everything is as viable and flexible as possible.
Edit: Totally random, but Diddy is top 3 now? Wat?
-
http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Tier_list
*shrugs*
I don't mind X-factor that much other than lv3 needing a nerf and how unfair it is (to the characters, not players). I mean, in X-factor characters like Sent become walking machines of death (well, Sentinel an even bigger one) either in power or speed, yet Ammy's might as well just make her glow, wouldn't make much difference >__>
-
I find Baroque to be a far better comeback mechanic than X-Factor TBPH. Granted, I haven't actually played MvC3 yet, but I do know a lot about the mechanic via what I've read on the web as well as stuff I've heard from my friends. I'm not really a fan of the comeback mechanic being an "on switch", so to speak. With stuff like Baroque, you had to actually plan what you were going to do ahead of time, and there's more of a risk to it. With X-Factor it's more of a signal for your opponent to play keep-away until it runs out, though it can be cancelled into for big damage. Really the whole X-Factor thing just doesn't seem necessary as a whole, and to boot it doesn't even seem fresh or interesting.
In a fighter there's less of a need of a comeback mechanism than in other genres, because both players have access to the same tools no matter how much of a life lead there is, though without teammates in the Vs. series you obviously lack assists and the like. Of course, Phoenix would be the odd exception to the rule as she actually grows in power when she's on the losing end.
Also, on environments, I'm aware that Brawl's tournament style allows for some more stage flexability than Melee's did, but there's still a large variety of environments that don't get safely tucked behind a "banned curtain" in general play. Also, much of the stage selection of Brawl's tournament play is a result of Brawl's unimaginative level selection and over-use of large flat aeras (Smashville, Yoshi's Island Brawl, etc.). There are a few more varied levels that are considered permissible, but for every Pokemon Stadium Melee that's allowed, there's plenty more banned Green Hill Zones where it came from. It's a wider niche than the Melee tournaments of yester-year, but still a niche, and one which the gaming populace as a whole is in no way bound by.
Really, I kind of wish Nintendo was a little better at designing stages that are both fun while at the same time being innovative and balanced. A lot stages on the banned list I don't really like in the first place. Green Hill, for example, just feels really cramped to me, and you can pretty much just camp in front of the bumpers all day if you really want to. I think Smash 64 had the best designs, as while the number was small, they all felt unique and fun yet remained balanced as well. Hyrule Temple 64 is still one of my favorite stages in the series, as it had a varied terrain, that fun little tunnel, and those tornadoes to shake things up a bit (bad pun, sorry).
Thankfully, with Brawl you can replace the stages you don't like with downloadable ones that are often more interesting. Obviously this isn't a tourney move, but when playing with friends it allows a wider variety of stages to be used since you no longer have to deal with the stages that everyone in your group hates (that means you, Rumble Falls). It wouldn't be a bad idea for tourneys to simply overwite the banned stages with better versions, as there's a lot of creative and useful stuff out there (http://forums.kc-mm.com/Gallery/BrawlView.php).
-
Speaking more specifically of MK
1-Which he has
2-Which he doesn't
3-I'd say that depends more on luck than anything, one moment the item will spawn right next to you, the other it'll be all the way across the stage =/
4-It's irrelevant if MK grabs the Smash Ball since his oponents don't get to use their superior FS in that case, which I assume being him it shouldn't be that much of a problem.
I'd say you're grossly overestimating MK's mobility. The fastest attackers aren't always the fastest travelers. Meta Knight is the 5th-worst air traveler in the game (when not gliding, which demands a wind-up time and is difficult to control). That's a bit of a crutch to overcome when scrambling for a Smash Ball, but it means jack [parasitic bomb] with no items in Battlefield.
And for the record I seriously disagree with your earlier notion that difficulty in combat doesn't reflect the brokenness of the character. How does that make any sense? A character is deemed "broken" because they have a significant and disproportionate advantage compared to other characters. Every sense of logic says that should be reflected in the difficulty of overcoming such a character. If they present no significantly greater challenge to defeat, they are not broken. Meta Knight is broken in the tournament metagame, not in all of Brawl.
Edit: Totally random, but Diddy is top 3 now? Wat?
Yeah, it's been a while since I checked. Didn't see that one coming either. Dedede WAS a pretty high-ranked character in earlier years, IIRC.
-
And for the record I seriously disagree with your earlier notion that difficulty in combat doesn't reflect the brokenness of the character.
I don't think I'm following you there.
To clarify, all I'm saying is that I don't think items would bridge the difficulty gap of beating the god tier that much to take them down from there.
Anyways, I think this is going nowhere, so lets leave at opinions etc etc.
-
Your attempt to "clarify" was worded as speculation, so there's not much for me to say anyway. But on where I lost you:
No offense Shelly but that's a really bad way to argue this. For example, I may as well say that I find it harder to deal with X middle tier character in MvC2 and that I even suck at using the god tiers, but does that change that they're horribly broken? No.
I was referring to this. You merged two thoughts into the same sentence there. My skill in using a broken character by no means indicates whether or not they are broken (that was not the point of my mentioning my ability with them, as further explained in "learning curve/personal affinity" discussions with Aqua).
My difficulty in overcoming said allegedly broken characters, however, is an entirely different story. That is very much relevant in calling a character broken or not, because if the character does not produce a notably increased challenge over the others, it suggests that whatever advantage the character has is being balanced out somewhere along the line. Meta Knight is small, nimble, and has a variety of recovery moves, all true. He is a strong character, but 3 years of Brawling against humans hasn't left him so memorable as to leave him in a rank of his own in my eyes. I have no doubt that he is a horribly broken character in the controlled environments of tournament play, but that's not what Super Smash Bros. Brawl is about. The core issue here is that the tier list, being based on a niche play style, is not an absolute indicator of the game's balance as a whole.
-
My difficulty in overcoming said allegedly broken characters, however, is an entirely different story. That is very much relevant in calling a character broken or not,
Indeed, HOWEVER, the actual ability of the one using them against you is of bigger importance. THAT was my point. Simply saying that a character is or isn't broken because you don't have trouble with it is about as valid as saying "because I say so", it needs more backing up than that. Who are the people using him and how good are they? What exactly are his flaws? That kind of stuff.
-
Kinda like how a certain tourney player talked [parasitic bomb] about Adon, till an Adon player beats him 8D
I kid I kid lol.
-
Indeed, HOWEVER, the actual ability of the one using them against you is of bigger importance. THAT was my point. Simply saying that a character is or isn't broken because you don't have trouble with it is about as valid as saying "because I say so", it needs more backing up than that. Who are the people using him and how good are they? What exactly are his flaws? That kind of stuff.
You're one to talk about "backing up", that entire post was based on one gigantic assumption. You're under the presupposition that I am referring to one or two people who like myself happen to not mesh with a god-tier character as a matter of personal preference. I'm not.
I'm referring to three years of cumulative online experience, friend and random, free-for-all and team, the whole works. I, as well as most any other seasoned Brawl player, am well aware that Meta Knight has dominated the Brawl tier list pretty much since it's conception. That's not news, not to me, not to anyone else who gives a damn and knows how to work Google. You, and you alone, are insisting that Meta Knight's "god tier" tournament status of a single metagame applies proportionately to all possible metagames which Brawl entails. That's a very naive bit of speculation. Every post you make is a collection of "would" or "wouldn't"s demanding detailed explanations and examples while failing to provide any of your own. Next time, drop the assumptions, and pick up some of the burden of proof for yourself. If you're going to tell somebody that everything they know is wrong, you're going to have to do your own work sooner or later.
-
I'll make this short because I don't like typing on ipods.
-I'm not claiming that all you know is wrong nor that MK dominates all metagames, I just don't see why he wouldn't do as well.
-My point was never about MK, the conversation just went that way.
-I don't doubt either your knowledge or skills, all I ever meant in the beginning was that "I don't have a problem with X" is never a good argument by itself, much less when it's all based on playing randoms online, even less with Brawl's online being the mess it is.
Now can we just forget about this? =/
-
-I'm not claiming ... that MK dominates all metagames, I just don't see why he wouldn't do as well.
I'm reading that as contradictory. "As well" *IS* dominating, because in tournaments, that's what Meta Knight does. He exclusively holds the "god tier", and he is literally considered to have absolutely no counters or disadvantages in character matchups, at all. He "dominates" tournament play, and he is not "as well" in Brawl as a whole in that he does not outperform the entire rest of the cast to so radical a degree as he does in tournament play. Whether he's weaker or the others are stronger, call it what you like, but the core issue is a matter of comparison and not of absolute.
And believe me, Solar, when a random wifi game is imbalanced, you notice. You run into PLENTY of idiots who will try to exploit that imbalance without understanding how to do so properly, but you still notice. I've seen it in Pokemon, Mario Kart, and Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom, to name a few. Hell, disregarding characters, I even see it in Brawl's stage selection (there is a reason that, no matter how flexible tournament rules become, Final Destination remains as infamous as it does).
-
I'm reading that as contradictory. "As well" *IS* dominating, because in tournaments, that's what Meta Knight does.
Heh, I guess that's true. ^^;
And believe me, Solar, when a random wifi game is imbalanced, you notice.
True true, but a horrible online (like Brawl's) also makes it so that no one can play to its full potential, making some chars/strategies appear much more powerful/weaker than they'd usually be.
Anyways, I'll just get out of this conversation about MK by saying that I wasn't necessarily against what you were arguing (I honestly couldn't care less, but like I said, the conversation just kinda went there), just the how.
-
Brawl's online is far from seamless, but its instability is exaggerated IMHO. As a "stick-and-move" fighter, as OBJECTION MAN once put it, lag is considerably less intrusive to the battle than it is in traditional fighters such as TvC, where it renders the proper input of special attack commands nigh impossible.
Further it's not THAT unusual to get a clean connection in Brawl, particularly in 2-3 player matchups. 4 players may hold for a while but are destined to get shot to hell within a few rounds.