Topic: Is possible to achieve Balance in fighting games?

[AquaTeamV3]

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.

[Hypershell]

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.

[Solar]

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.

[Hypershell]

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.

[Solar]

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.

[The Drunken Dishwasher]

Kinda like how a certain tourney player talked [parasitic bomb] about Adon, till an Adon player beats him 

I kid I kid lol.

[Hypershell]

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.

[Solar]

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? =/

[Hypershell]

-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).

[Solar]

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.

[Hypershell]

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.