Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
And ruin pretty much all of ICs grab game? No thanks.This could have all been avoided by having her U-throw every time without screwing with D-throw's release point.
**** you and **** this mentality. Ice Climbers grab game would only improve with a better release point on d-throw and the game would only improve with the removal of handoff infinites.And ruin pretty much all of ICs grab game? No thanks.
**** you and **** this mentality. Ice Climbers grab game would only improve with a better release point on dair and the game would only improve with the removal of handoff infinites.
**** you and **** this mentality. Ice Climbers grab game would only improve with a better release point on d-throw and the game would only improve with the removal of handoff infinites.
I'm not understanding why people are getting so upset. The infinite is situational and I seriously doubt the people in this thread complaining have had this happen to them or have seen it applied in a match. I'm also willing to bet they wouldn't be able to execute the infinite at all. Going for the infinite is a risk due to how easy it is to screw up where as you could have gotten a lot of damage + edgeguard opportunity otherwise.
I'd personally like to see some sort of statement from a member of the PMBR regarding their views on this.
Getting gimped isn't really comparable to literal 0-deaths once something's started. People are not against gimps because there is an evident and calculated risk involved in going for them, compared to the nonexistent risk of "Should I continue this infinite or not?"
I'm not even against handoffs as much as I'm against D-throw's release point being changed. If it was, in fact, changed to prevent handoffs, there are ways to go about it that don't so drastically screw with their D-throw Dair links.
I'm not saying it out of anger. It seemed like D-throw's release point, from an outside perspective, was changed to eliminate handoffs. It's a justifiable look at the change, even though it was unintentional.Calm down, Kink. You're making things up and extrapolating from assumptions. Dthrow's release was intended to be close to Melee's and the fact that it's not is a mistake we're working to rectify.
a mistake we're working to rectify.
It wasn't a "change" that we made - I'm pretty sure it was just Brawl's release point.I'm just glad I got an actual reason for the change provided. I really don't mean to nitpick or complain, so I appreciate it greatly when the PMBR is a little more open about providing info on why changes are made, intentional or not. Thanks for letting me know.
Does the PMBR have an official stance on PM original infinites?
Difficulty should almost never be a factor. Japan-I mean a dedicated player always finds a way. You have to manually control the spacing so you could technically do it forever. ICs get out-camped by pretty much anyone with a projectile or on a stage with platforms. Camping, especially near the ledge, would be disadvantageous for ICs.In regards to the IC infinites, Wobbling in Melee and Handoff's in Brawl has one things in common. You can do it anywhere on stage, as opposed to this particular infinite which is strictly situational towards the LEDGE/EDGE. At any point IC's are near the ledge their in a serious risk because, once separated, it's as easy as gimping a lv3 cpu, whether it's you or Nana. (Probably an exaggeration but you get the point)
Imo, I think this infinite should be kept.
If the player chooses to take the risk, and succeeds in doing so. I don't see why anyone should complain since a number of factors to make this infinite succeed is... Pretty difficult, unlike Wobbling or Handoffs. And by the looks of that video, every throw that nana does she inches closer to popo so it's not considered a "perfect infinite"
This is just my opinion and if anyone disagrees PLEASE tell me since I want a way to solve a problem like this.
(If the PMBR decides to remove this then I don't have any problems with it whatsoever, as it's them who decides what makes the game as balanced as possible. Thanks for all your hard work!)
What Nana and Popo are are the King and Queen of Chaingrabs, to take that away is to take away the appeal of the character.People are just fine with gimps that kill at low percent, but everyone freaks out when the Ice Climbers chain grab somebody from low percent to death. I don't even play Ice Climbers and I think that double standard is silly.
But for the sake of making the game of Brawl similar to Melee, will you bring back the wobble if people want it badly enough?I was referring to the release point itself. While I have nothing against this particular infinite, we won't be taking any special measures to preserve it if the release point changes make it impossible.
That doesn't work. Something that can kill a character from 0% will never take the backseat to anything else. There's no reason for it to not be the dominant strategy. Plus, infinites are so cheesy and non interactive. I mean, a lot of characters can zero to death other characters, but the opponent is participating with DI, OoS options, and all other parts of the defensive meta. Any form of infinite on the other hand is just flexing your inputs while the opponent sits, marveling at your ability along with your asshatery.What Nana and Popo are are the King and Queen of Chaingrabs, to take that away is to take away the appeal of the character.
What needs to be done is PM brings ICs chaingrabs back, (Wobbling included) but make them so that their soul and sole purpose doesn't HAVE to be to get the grab. Look at Zelda, you can run a trap based Zelda, or a Farore's Wind based Zelda, or go in between. That is how I believe they should do it.