Brawl+ - Official 5.0 RC1 Build is now online! (Re-Use Autoupdater, Snake bug fixed)

[WheelOfFish]

Well, the optimal stale move negation application (lol) wouldn't make the game less easy, it would make combos less generic.

 

[zxeon]

I agree with Doval. Stale moves doesn't force you to make other choices, it takes away your best ones for a situation. Instead of having the desired effect the metagame would form up around spam friendly moves and finishers and matches tanking forever. Instead of seeing the same old combos you used to you'll be seeing new spam safe combos until they themselves get old.

 

[Shadic]

My ideal stale-moves system would be one that strongly lowers DAMAGE on moves, and leaves KB completely alone. That way, spamming out the same move over and over again won't be as effective to build damage, but any KO potential is still there.

 

[timothyung]

But if the stale moves system is not noticeable...there's no point. They will still use the "boring" combos over and over again. But if it's noticeable, it's bad...
If you really want less "boring" combos, stale moves is not the way to go.

 

[Dan_X]

This is a pretty compelling point but I'm not sold. You're not wrong in saying that Stale Moves increases the amount of possible combos (it may or may not introduce new imbalances as well but that's irrelevant to that point.) However, it seems to me that the player can't really take advantage of that fact because of the inherent variability of the system. There is no way to know for sure which combos are possible in the heat of a match when Stale Moves is in effect; so not only is the player unable to capitalize on new combos, he's also uncertain the original ones work any more. And trying to keep track of the state of your different moves is impractical to the point of being impossible, and just becomes an unwelcome distraction and mental burden to the player. In the end, even if "properly" implemented, I highly doubt it would be a pleasant addition to the game.

Very late edit: There's also the fact that combo opportunities aren't equal in Smash. Since combos aren't based on doing a string of attacks against a near-static target, different combos almost invariably start with different attacks. Those different attacks aren't equally viable to land. Stale Moves will inevitably ruin the staple combos - those that start with reliable attacks - while introducing new combos based off less reliable options. That's not an equal trade-off.

I'm also rather wary of your use of the phrase "same boring combos" since this is something that every fighter, even the most celebrated, fun to play and fun to watch ones (Marvel VS Capcom 2, Capcom VS SNK 2, Third Strike, Guilty Gear come to mind) eventually reduce to. Noobs and top players alike will use bread and butter combos. That's never detracted from the worth of the game. The tired old combos are just the most effective means of doing damage - and the most effective means will always prevail (just look at SvC2's A-Groove - lets you do "custom combos" yet there are bread and butter combos for those too.) The real beauty comes from the game's ability to provide the magic that happens between combos - the mix-ups, the mind games, the poke games, the wakeup games, the fakeouts, the pressure strings, and whatever other abstract concepts we've successfully labeled. Likewise the most respected Smash players have never been venerated as much for their ability to execute the bread and butter combos but for every other skill they posses, which is what separates them from those that only have tech skill.

As for projectiles, it seems like a roundabout way to address the issue of projectile spam. I mean, yeah, it's kind of a "kill two birds with one stone" sort of thing - if you were to implement Stale Moves you could address projectile spam too. But since the primary reason for implementing Stale Moves is already questionable, it doesn't seem that sound to use the unrelated issue of projectile spamming to push support for Stale Moves. It seems like something that's better fixed by addressing the problem directly - tweaking the game's movement and defence mechanisms so they provide reasonable ways of dealing with projectiles, or tweaking the projectiles themselves. (Getting back the reflector effect on power shielding would go such a long way towards this, but I imagine coding it is no easy feat since we still don't have it...)

Excellent post Doval! I agree 100%

 

[Shell]

U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt......

There's mah stale-KB combo. Too pro.

 

[Yanoss1313]

i'm gonna have to agree with Doval here, one thing that also comes to mind are characters like Ganon who really only have 3 or 4 really usefull combo moves.

also, i agree that reflective power shielding would go a long way towards dealing with projectile spam, but i think it would have to to much MUCH harder to execute, as it stands it's almost effortless to perfect shield 100% against chars like falco and even pit

 

[WheelOfFish]

U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt......

There's mah stale-KB combo. Too pro.

That's assuming we use Brawl's SMN... which is obviously not the smart one to use. Brawl did it wrong, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. Like Shadic said, making SMN so damage stales, but not knockback would be optimal.

Timothyung, the OPTIMAL application of it would be pretty subtle, like Melee's. Subtle is probably a better word than unnoticeable. I should've clarified. What stale moves allows for is for the player to mix their combos up once in a while.

Yanoss1313, I TOTALLY felt the same way at first, because I play as Ganon a lot too, but then I thought about it , and SMN would help heavies a lot too. For example, with SMN, occasionally, Ganon's f-air or b-air might be able to combo... each character would have SO much more combo potential than just the same combo potential at the same percents.

 

[Shell]

Yeah, that's why I specified stale-KB combo.

Any amount it would help heavies would be more than made up for by them getting demolished via U-tilt spam combos, sadly.

 

[kupo15]

You guys are totally missing the point and I can't wait to post my rebuttal after class :3

 

[Yanoss1313]

You guys are totally missing the point and I can't wait to post my rebuttal after class :3

and I can't wait to read it! hehe

 

[goodoldganon]

I can't believe people want a stale move system back... There is absolutely nothing wrong with bread and butter combos. But I might be missing a point so I'll wait till Kupo posts.

 

[SketchHurricane]

I can't believe people want a stale move system back... There is absolutely nothing wrong with bread and butter combos. But I might be missing a point so I'll wait till Kupo posts.

Stale moves doesn't necessarily suggest that there is something wrong with BnB as a whole. It's simply an attempt to nerf BnB in order to encourage creativity and risk taking. BnB combos will still be used and abused because it's the wide applicability of a tactic that ultimately makes it BnB, not it's damage or knockback (those are just a bonus in particular cases). Even if your BnB is stale to the max (via damage), you can still abuse it for the purpose of shutting down the opponents options.

Where stale moves shine is in preventing a BnB tactic from becoming the end all solution, where it can shut down, damage, and also kill. Stale damage prevents the damage dealing while retaining the shut down or kill property. Stale KB prevents a damage dealer or shutdown move from also being a reliable kill. Because stale KB has such far reaching effects on the combo system, it's not preferred. Stale damage is a lot safer to implement, which is why it's being considered.

I still think it's much better to focus on characters for this type of balance rather than a stale system. We all know applying universal rules always upsets certain things, so why not just continue to focus on individual character balance like we have been? I don't really see the need for a stale system at this point.

 

[Mattnumbers]

You guys gotta remember that a stale moves system affect some types of moves much more than others.

For example, I main Lucas, and I don't exactly miss VBrawl where my PK Fire would start to only do 3% late into a stock. This also affects Pit, Falco, DDD, Snake, TL, and other characters that use their projectiles regularly as a spacing move/ a damage racker.

 

[Dan_X]

I still think it's much better to focus on characters for this type of balance rather than a stale system. We all know applying universal rules always upsets certain things, so why not just continue to focus on individual character balance like we have been? I don't really see the need for a stale system at this point.

that's exactly the point I made in my masssive post a few pages back.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Little bug here. When I use squirtle's watergun on lucario while he's recovering after he's used his upB, he gets his upB back. Dunno if that works with all water/wind hitboxes, if it's just lucario, etc...

 

[zxeon]

That shouldn't be.

 

[JCaesar]

It's known. The cape does it too, and I think it works on pretty much any up-B that doesn't put you in general stun, such as Snake's.

 

[Doval]

also, i agree that reflective power shielding would go a long way towards dealing with projectile spam, but i think it would have to to much MUCH harder to execute, as it stands it's almost effortless to perfect shield 100% against chars like falco and even pit

The problem isn't just the timing (in my opinion the timing is fine) but more the fact that you can power shield with the whole shield in Brawl, whereas in Melee, the outer edge of the shield didn't count for that.

 

[kupo15]

and I can't wait to read it! hehe

Oh boy, the pressure of living up to the hype :/

However, it seems to me that the player can't really take advantage of that fact because of the inherent variability of the system. There is no way to know for sure which combos are possible in the heat of a match when Stale Moves is in effect; so not only is the player unable to capitalize on new combos, he's also uncertain the original ones work any more.

I disagree. Being flexible to the situation at hand is what makes a player good and its not something that inhumanly possible to do. At the moment, without stale moves, you are doing this adaptation. There is no possible way that you can get your opponent at the exact percent to perform the combo you want. You can not focus your game on getting your opponent to 73% every stock in order to attempt this combo you want to do. There is flexibility in the system that allows for a range of %s where the combo will work and you adapt to the subtle changes in % to make it work not to mention DI which is a major factor to how you go about executing a combo.

Even without a stale system in place, you don't really know for sure which combos are going to be possible, maybe to a less degree than that of the stale system but I'm not sure. The point is, there is nothing wrong with not knowing what will happen because if you are skilled enough, when the combo opens up that you weren't expecting, you will be able to recognize it and perform it. But having a stale system doesn't automatically mean the removal of staple combos. That is just ludicrous.

I don't believe for a minute that you can say that it is impossible to be able to adapt to new situations if a stale system is in place when there was one in melee and players could adapt to new situations in an inherently much faster, thinking on your feet game.

And trying to keep track of the state of your different moves is impractical to the point of being impossible, and just becomes an unwelcome distraction and mental burden to the player. In the end, even if "properly" implemented, I highly doubt it would be a pleasant addition to the game.

I never ever, ever, not once kept track of my "state" when I play melee. Ever. I did during Vbrawl but that is because the system was OP and done incorrectly.

Very late edit: There's also the fact that combo opportunities aren't equal in Smash. Since combos aren't based on doing a string of attacks against a near-static target, different combos almost invariably start with different attacks. Those different attacks aren't equally viable to land. Stale Moves will inevitably ruin the staple combos - those that start with reliable attacks - while introducing new combos based off less reliable options. That's not an equal trade-off.

One of the great things about smash is the fact how you read people, not books. There shouldn't be an overemphasis on knowing what will happen before it happens because adaptability is also an important part skill that separates players. A stale system done right will not remove staple cookie cutter combos. You won't suddenly lose your stomp to knee combos with a small stale system. Did the stale system ruin staple combos in melee? What is your basis on claiming that a proper stale moves system will ruin staple combos?

I'm also rather wary of your use of the phrase "same boring combos" since this is something that every fighter, even the most celebrated, fun to play and fun to watch ones (Marvel VS Capcom 2, Capcom VS SNK 2, Third Strike, Guilty Gear come to mind) eventually reduce to. Noobs and top players alike will use bread and butter combos. That's never detracted from the worth of the game. The tired old combos are just the most effective means of doing damage - and the most effective means will always prevail (just look at SvC2's A-Groove - lets you do "custom combos" yet there are bread and butter combos for those too.)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with have bread and butter combos...combos that will always work at the right time. This is actually very healthy for the game. The problem is that you don't see that much variety in the combos in Brawl+ compared to Melee. If you compare the two games, you will notice the vast differences in combo diversity.

As for projectiles, it seems like a roundabout way to address the issue of projectile spam. I mean, yeah, it's kind of a "kill two birds with one stone" sort of thing - if you were to implement Stale Moves you could address projectile spam too. But since the primary reason for implementing Stale Moves is already questionable, it doesn't seem that sound to use the unrelated issue of projectile spamming to push support for Stale Moves. It seems like something that's better fixed by addressing the problem directly - tweaking the game's movement and defence mechanisms so they provide reasonable ways of dealing with projectiles, or tweaking the projectiles themselves. (Getting back the reflector effect on power shielding would go such a long way towards this, but I imagine coding it is no easy feat since we still don't have it...)

Well, if you look at melee, it has the defense mechanics in place to combat projectile spam already, yet it also has a more powerful stale system for the projectiles as well. Do you have any explanation as to why that is? Did it made the game terrible for having it and if so, why?

But if the stale moves system is not noticeable...there's no point. They will still use the "boring" combos over and over again. But if it's noticeable, it's bad...
If you really want less "boring" combos, stale moves is not the way to go.

My fault Not "unnoticeable" but rather subtle. Melee's stale system was like this but the combo system was very vast. Even when I compared Brawl+ with and without a stale system, the stale system felt a lot better and felt as if the combo system opened up more. I still had my staple combos, but I could also try new things and combo off of things that I couldn't before if I was good enough.

U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt U-tilt......

There's mah stale-KB combo. Too pro.

The ignorance is starting because I already explained how this is not true. What you are doing is thinking back to when we had hitstun added with the Vbrawl stale system and somehow trying to use that to prove why stale system is bad in the current brawl+ and that isn't going to fly.

Hitstun back then was around +13% combined with a very strong stale system which allowed for bad utilt combos. Hitstun also gets stale as well which means you are stunned for less than normal. In a poor stale system like Vbrawl, it is so powerful that utilits will hit a wall where they won't send any farther really quickly before the queue is filled despite the damage being high. In a good stale system, the kb will probably still hit a wall but well after the queue if filled up so it won't cause a problem with utilt locks. Here is a simplistic example:

The move deals 10% and sends a 10 mph per 10% (top speed)

No stale-----Good (1/10)--Bad(1/2)
0%- 10mph-----10 mph----------10 mph
10%- 20mph----19 mph---------15 mph
20%- 30 mph----27.1 mph--------17.5 mph
30%- 40 mph----34.39 mph--------18.75 mph
40%- 50 mph----40.951 mph--------19.375 mph
50%- 60 mph----46.8559 mph--------19.6875 mph
60%- 70 mph----52.17031 mph-------19.84375 mph
70% -80 mph----56.953279 mph-------19.921875 mph
80%-90 mph----61.2579511 mph--------19.960937 mph
90%-100 mph---65.13215599 mph--------19.98046875 mph
100%-110 mph-68.618940391 mph--------19.990234375 mph

Look at the difference between the two systems. This chart should show you how a powerful stale system creates utilt locks but a good system doesn't, yet you see how it can makes a subtle difference from that of the No stale system if you decide to cut off the queue early instead of Vbrawl's 9 spots. Also given the fact that hitstun also gets less the more stale the move is, you will be able to escape pretty early and not have massive utilt combos, unless your telling me that melee had this as well. IIRC, when I play melee and get utitled enough, I think the hitstun gets so low that I automatically get out of tumble almost instantaneously as if there wasn't enough stun to go through a complete tumble stun animation. Brawl may or may not have this but I am not entirely sure why this happens in melee. Its a little confusing.

i'm gonna have to agree with Doval here, one thing that also comes to mind are characters like Ganon who really only have 3 or 4 really usefull combo moves.

What aren't you guys getting? You will retain your staple combos, but you will also have more opportunities to mix up and expand your combo potential if you are good enough. Sounds terrible, I know >_<

also, i agree that reflective power shielding would go a long way towards dealing with projectile spam, but i think it would have to to much MUCH harder to execute, as it stands it's almost effortless to perfect shield 100% against chars like falco and even pit

agreed

I can't believe people want a stale move system back... There is absolutely nothing wrong with bread and butter combos. But I might be missing a point so I'll wait till Kupo posts.

Who ever said that bringing back a good stale system would remove bread and butter system? You did. Not me because it won't. Melee obviously had 0 bread and butter combos and staple combos obviously didn't exist because of a stale system. You're making it up in your head.

I still think it's much better to focus on characters for this type of balance rather than a stale system. We all know applying universal rules always upsets certain things, so why not just continue to focus on individual character balance like we have been? I don't really see the need for a stale system at this point.

The neat thing about stale moves is that it is always different. It changes depending on how the player plays and two players won't ever have the exact same stale system even if they use the same character which will create subtlety in the game. You waste a lot of time trying to solve things through characters instead of through game mechanics. Game mechanic changes are a much better way to go about global problems instead of changing the character so everyone can play the same way. Character changes should be made when global mechanics don't solve the issue. Like if you have a good stale move system, but 1 or 2 moves are a little too good at utilting, then they should be dealt with via kb increase or small frame speed changes.

 

[Plum]

Yeah, water/cape refreshing Up B's happens when you don't go into special fall after an Up B.
In vBrawl it would refresh Snake, Sonic, and G&W's Up B's, and now it also does it with Lucario too. I would imagine it does the same for Pit who lost the special fall on Up B as well, but considering how his Up B works it wouldn't surprise me if he didn't regain his Up B.

It's just another one of those stupid things that's been in the game since vBrawl... One item on that huge list of "How the hell did that make it into the game? Did they even play test? I would have rather waited another month to have all this crap gone than to see a release date."

The ignorance is starting because I already explained how this is not true. What you are doing is thinking back to when we had hitstun added with the Vbrawl stale system and somehow trying to use that to prove why stale system is bad in the current brawl+ and that isn't going to fly.

Hitstun back then was around +13% combined with a very strong stale system which allowed for bad utilt combos. Hitstun also gets stale as well which means you are stunned for less than normal. In a poor stale system like Vbrawl, it is so powerful that utilits will hit a wall where they won't send any farther really quickly before the queue is filled despite the damage being high. In a good stale system, the kb will probably still hit a wall but well after the queue if filled up so it won't cause a problem with utilt locks. Here is a simplistic example:

(example)

I don't want to jump into the argument, but I'll point out that it was completely true in vBrawl as well. The stale move system made all of those things worse even in vBrawl's lack of hitstun.
Just look at Sheik's Ftilt for example. It starts off keeping you in the lock; without stale moves you would be out of it MUCH sooner, but instead the KB got lower and lower and kept you in the lock longer. Doesn't matter if its the early extreme high hitstun versions of B+ back when people were first discussing an official direction or vBrawl, stale moves made Utilt, Utilt, Utilt, Utilt, Utilt and Ftilt, Ftilt, Ftilt, Ftilt, Ftilt, Ftilt worse in both.

I understand that a stale move system like that isn't what you want, or what anybody wants though. And like Shell said, his post did say stale KB combo to be specific.

I am really excited to see a move towards more perfected game mechanics, but quite frankly stale moves is something I can do without. Stale damage without KB just feels unnecessary to me because it adds little to the game and doesn't even really effect your thought process at all (see Melee). Stale moves with KB stale is obviously a poor mechanic as shown by vBrawl; even if you go with much less harsh KB loss it still seems like a poor mechanic to me.

 

[kupo15]

It came to my attention that I did something wrong in my chart which I just fixed for those who saw the first draft.

 

[Mattnumbers]

kupo, stale moves didn't affect combos in Melee at all, the KB of moves never went down from it. There was only damage staling Melee.

And adding damage staling in Brawl+ just means that your staple moves/combos do less damage, but you still do them repeatedly. It just makes it take longer to die without actually changing combos at all, the only positive thing is that it gives people an incentive to use different combos (which is ok, but not necessary because people will probably go for the same thing they would have anyways)

 

[shanus]

Its as simple as this:

If you stale only damage with moves, the combo system will not change, period. I'm not going to worry about conserving an extra utilt because odds are, the staled damage from the tilt will exceed the damage i would gain from saving it.

Basically, nothing will change except characters with less variable movesets suffer in damage output.

In melee, I didn't think twice about staling my damage (unless it was with a special as they had staling KB, but rarely had to worry about that).

So yeah, whats the point of this huge argument again?

 

[Mattnumbers]

So that we have something to talk about in the nightly thread?

 

[kupo15]

kupo, stale moves didn't affect combos in Melee at all, the KB of moves never went down from it. There was only damage staling Melee.

And adding damage staling in Brawl+ just means that your staple moves/combos do less damage, but you still do them repeatedly. It just makes it take longer to die without actually changing combos at all, the only positive thing is that it gives people an incentive to use different combos (which is ok, but not necessary because people will probably go for the same thing they would have anyways)

Its as simple as this:

If you stale only damage with moves, the combo system will not change, period. I'm not going to worry about conserving an extra utilt because odds are, the staled damage from the tilt will exceed the damage i would gain from saving it.

Basically, nothing will change except characters with less variable movesets suffer in damage output.

In melee, I didn't think twice about staling my damage (unless it was with a special as they had staling KB, but rarely had to worry about that).

So yeah, whats the point of this huge argument again?

But stale damage does result in less kb because its dealing less damage. I can't imagine stale damage would have zero affect on combos though. What is your reasoning behind it having zero affect on it?

 

[Shell]

Kupo, you mock me for my ignorance and then base a large portion of your argument on the (erroneous) basis that Melee's KB had any kind of staling (other than B-moves) and was good -- Melee KB was not DMG dependent as SSB and Brawl are.

The real problem with the system is that while it might encourage you to think about diversifying your attacks in general, it encourages using the same moves repeatedly in combos. These new combos might not be cookie-cutter X->Y->Z from match to match, but they won't exactly be new and exciting, either.

But you say that it'll be a subtle difference and won't encourage spamming the same moves? Then it won't really discourage using the same move, either, and therefore won't really accomplish much beneficial net change.

Furthermore, stale moves can only really aid cookie-cutters, which are typically limited by too much KB more frequently than too little. In order to counter this, you'd have to drastically decrease hitstun to the point that you must rely on staling your moves to reach the equivalent old KB, which just promotes spamming those select combo moves. vBrawl, anyone?

I hope that makes sense.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

It's known. The cape does it too, and I think it works on pretty much any up-B that doesn't put you in general stun, such as Snake's.

Can it be fixed/is there a fix intended? It's a pain in the ***.

 

[IC3R]

ignoreNo vBrawl plz kthxbai.

 

[Team Giza]

I'm going to agree with Kupo on this one. Adding dmg scaling will mess with the combo system because it does lead to moves giving less knockback when getting the hit at the same percent. Its not a big difference, it would be the same effect that stale moves had in melee. Its very slight but it is there.

 

[Nybb]

I think we can mostly agree that staling would add to the combo game; the problem that the anti-stale side doesn't like is that of repeated move (u-tilt) combos that would likely ensue. And this is a valid complaint. So I'm just gonna throw out an idea:

Fresh: 100%

Stale 1: 100%
Stale 2: 95%
Stale 3: 90%
Stale 4: 80%
Stale 5: 70%
Stale 6: 70%

And then the rest would stay at 70%, or the queue would only be 6 items long.The idea being, for one thing, to not stale down to half power like in vBrawl, because that was too much. The other idea being to keep the first couple moves you just used pretty much fresh (position 1 and 2 in the list), making it so you can't abuse the system to combo a move into itself.

 

[Perfect Chaos]

Melee KB was not DMG dependent as SSB and Brawl are.

What? Since the distance that one is hit was calculated with the damage that one has AFTER the attack hits, the staling of the move would, indirectly, reduce the knockback, since they would have less damage after that attack if it was staled than if it wasn't.
So, even if it's not directly affect, it is still dependent on it. The other games, on the other hand, had both the damage stale and the direct knockback stale, causing a much greater affect.

 

[kupo15]

Kupo, you mock me for my ignorance and then base a large portion of your argument on the (erroneous) basis that Melee's KB had any kind of staling (other than B-moves) and was good -- Melee KB was not DMG dependent as SSB and Brawl are.

No. I am fully aware that Melee's stale move system is different than brawl's stale moves system. I am fully aware that Melee's melee attacks had stale damage but brawl's has stale damage and stale kb as well just like 64. But seeing how kb in melee (and all the games) is calculated after damage, this means that if you hit someone at 100% with a fully stale move (as in, fully stale damage only), they will have less knockback than a non staled move in melee.

Sorry for the mocking. Got a little too excited

The real problem with the system is that while it might encourage you to think about diversifying your attacks in general, it encourages using the same moves repeatedly in combos. These new combos might not be cookie-cutter X->Y->Z from match to match, but they won't exactly be new and exciting, either.

I never think about the stale moves system in melee when I play and because of this, I never think about diversifying my moves because of it. I don't feel that it encourages using the same moves repeatedly either so I am not arguing that the point of a stale move system is too encourage diversification of your moves.

But you say that it'll be a subtle difference and won't encourage spamming the same moves? Then it won't really discourage using the same move, either, and therefore won't really accomplish much beneficial net change.

True but I do feel that it will have some affect on the game. A few % differences from combos here and there are enough to change the outcome of a match.

Furthermore, stale moves can only really aid cookie-cutters, which are typically limited by too much KB more frequently than too little. In order to counter this, you'd have to drastically decrease hitstun to the point that you must rely on staling your moves to reach the equivalent old KB, which just promotes spamming those select combo moves. vBrawl, anyone?

I hope that makes sense.

How do they aid cookie cutters? I'm sorry, I don't quite follow this last point

I think we can mostly agree that staling would add to the combo game; the problem that the anti-stale side doesn't like is that of repeated move (u-tilt) combos that would likely ensue. And this is a valid complaint.

I'm trying to prove that a staling system won't add utilt combos like the anti side thinks will ensue.

Btw, I think your proposal is still too drastic.

 

[CountKaiser]

So let me get this straight Kupo.

A very small, almost nonexistent damage staling system will add diversity by messing with damage output in very small amounts, and thus lead to the possibility of different combos and more inventive gameplay?

I just want to be sure before I say anything else. I wish to know, in layman's terms, why you want the damage stale system.

 

[CloneHat]

More diverse? What?

First of all, staling is meant to discourage spamming. Not to create works of art out of combos, not to cripple character's options, and not to give Mario guaranteed 50% utilt combos.

Secondly, reducing KB does not make combos more interesting, because a move with low KB is EASIER to combo off of, and you could just create big chains of the same move, then finish off with a "fresh" one.

 

[zxeon]

stale moves has never been good. It's just a handicap for the guy who hits the most.

If you want to design a system that can actually reward players instead of stealing damage output be my guest. But stale moves is no "Super Meter" it's the exact opposite.

 

[shanus]

But stale damage does result in less kb because its dealing less damage. I can't imagine stale damage would have zero affect on combos though. What is your reasoning behind it having zero affect on it?

Because to make the melee system it would have to be knockback compensated? So yes, subsequent actions in a string would be effected, but it wouldn't change my marginal use of a move which is the effect I *thought* we were aiming to instate with SMN.

 

[WheelOfFish]

kupo, stale moves didn't affect combos in Melee at all, the KB of moves never went down from it. There was only damage staling Melee.

Common misconception here. It's true that Melee's stale system only staled damage, not knockback. It DID affect combos though. Stale moves = less damage = less knockback (exclusively from the damage percent, not from knockback itself staling) = more opportunities diversity in combos. At least it worked in Melee.

Sorry to use you as an example Matt, it's a mistake I've seen a lot of people make.

But what people REALLY need to do is stop looking at stale move negation as punishment for using the staple combos, and start seeing it as a chance to mix up those staple combos.

Nobody wants to see ridiculous same move combos, but if we can get it right, it would really enhance the metagame... it's not a huge change, and no, staple combos wouldn't go out the window by any means.

And of course this is all assuming SMN is applied to Brawl+ correctly. Brawl's SMN was obviously very detrimental to certain characters and I think that's what's scaring a lot of people away from it.

Edit: Oops, Kupo beat me to the less damage = less knockback point.

 

[zxeon]

Stale damage was never a strong enough deterrent. If a combo worked it worked and if it didn't it did not. No one ever changed their combos due to stale moves, staleness just happened and you learned to work around it.

 

[JCaesar]

Stale moves just makes the game take longer. 4-stock Brawl+ matches already take way too long as is. Leave it alone.