The removal of the combo system

[SwastikaPyle]

Let me preface this post by saying that I am an RTS player. Starcraft was a staple for me. I made the switch to Warcraft 3, although it was hard. The game felt ludicrously slow. I stuck with it, and I enjoy it just as much now. RTS balance feels like a whole different ballgame from Fighter balance.

You guys grew up with the combo. I can understand that. Even back when Primal Rage was the new hotness, my buddies and I would always pick Armadon to combo the hell out of each other.
However, because I'm an RTS player, the idea of combos would bug me. I was always under the impression that the guy who thought the fastest (not the guy whos fingers slipped first) should be the loser. That's always how you won an RTS game. Even if you lost half a dozen battles, you should still eventually be able to win if you are the smarter player and you keep your micro up.

This is why certain things about the Fighter franchise (SSB in general) bug me.

Watching a video like this from this first game:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouUooMEHqig

Basically, you get hit once and you lose your entire stock. The first person to make a finger slip up loses. That just feels wrong to me. You also don't need to tell me how great of a player Isai is, I just don't think anyone should be able to abuse a system like that.


Here's a video from the second game of the series:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu10gRZ0fH0&feature=related

A brilliant combo, we can all agree. Hell, the crowd agrees. The guy had excellent control, and used the game's system to destroy the other guy without him even having a chance to fight back. But should he have been able to do that? Sure, the Fox player got grabbed. He should have been thrown. But then he gets hit over and over and over again, just because he got grabbed a single time.

This video is pretty telling of why people think Captain Falcon is bottom tier now. He can't combo into his knee anymore. This is why I still see him as a solid character, but others find him to be useless. He's still quick and has strong moves, but original CF users think he is terrible without the combo potential.

Here's another video that makes me think less of the combo system:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqAzaaIADTc

The beginning is the only part I'd really like you to watch. When that Ganon gets Faird out to the end of the screen. That seemed ridiculous. The Marth got a good hit off, I agree. But why was he able to continue hitting that Ganon over and over again to the point where it was impossible for him to recover from it?


I like the fact that the combo system is now no longer the standard. At the same time, I understand why other people are disgusted. You grew up with the combo system. Removing it is like removing the meat of a Fighting game. But I like this new breed of game. I like the way it lasts longer, the way the smarter player will win instead of the quicker one. I like the way the player must, overall, be better and smarter then the other to win. The battles last a long time now, and the player who has the better skills will show. He wins.

I like it without the combos. I like the emphasis placed on individual moves instead of who can chain the moves together the fastest. I like watching Gimpy's Bowser absolutely destroy his opponents. I love watching Darkmusician's Zelda emerge victorious among Toon Links and Snakes.

Some of you will have dissenting opinions (I can't wait for Yuna to see this topic). I can understand that. I wouldn't expect you to let go of something that's been a staple of Fighter games for years. But I like it more this way.

 

[Vro]

I think you presented your argument well, but here are some other factors.

Combos present in Melee weren't just X > Y > Z. There were very situational. You had to read your opponent's DI, respond instantly, and continue your combo, keeping in mind your jumps, move set availability, and opponent responses.

I agree with your Smash 64 argument. One slip and the game was over. The combos in that game were ridiculous, and never-ending. However in Melee, half of the game was about baiting. One excellent post by either AlphaZealot, Scar, or another moderator said that Melee was half approach, half punishment. Half of the game you were trying to get yourself an opening, the other half you were either being punished or punishing. Shouldn't this be the way of the game?

In 64, approach meant nothing. If you got 1 hit in, there was well over a 50% chance you'd get the 2nd, then 3rd, etc. That game was all punishment. Altho technically challenging, not an overall impressive fighter.

In Brawl, punishing means nothing. If you retaliate, your opponent may retaliate even more, with a stronger attack even. There is no reward to fighting back. Rather, it's all baiting. And believe me, you can bait for hours in Brawl. Spam projectiles until the other character approaches, wait, slightly punish, repeat. There's no aspect of the game that rewards players that take risks.

Melee is the balance in between. Mindgames are most prevalent in that series because of the sheer availability you have. Waveland onto a platform, you just went from air moveset to ground moveset. Canceling the lag from attacks requires precision, but is rewarding. Sure, anyone can L-Cancel, but doesn't that just make it even ground for everyone? What about missile canceling? That wasn't the easiest thing, and requires Samus to position herself very meticulously, again REWARD.

You can't see these combos as end all, be all. Melee combos were nothing more than just great rewards for smart players. They weren't always 0-death, or didn't always end in death. They were just reasonable amounts of hits, requiring the player to win the approach, and execute a punishment.

 

[Dark Sonic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nObA-7mlsls

Melee had mindgames too buddy. And in case you didn't notice, the smarter player does win in melee. The smarter player knows what all of his options are, which options are safe, which options have high reward, ect. This includes what moves combo, how DI affects said combo, what can be done to punish that DI, ect. In fact, that very combo system that you are insulting made you have to think more because making a mistake would cost you more than a single hit. If I make 10 mistakes in brawl, I'm fine. That's like 10 hits. No big deal. In melee, 10 mistakes would probably cost me the match, assuming that my opponent didn't make any mistakes.

BTW, That Marth vs Ganon combo is escapable by DIing away from the Marth's untipped fairs. The Ken combo is also escapable by DIing away if the Marth did not tip the fair leading into the Ken combo.

You people seem to think that combos take no thought. That they are just pressing buttons. Do you know how much reaction and improvisation there really is in those combos you see? You have to react to/predict your opponents DI on just about every hit in the combo, and you have to know which attack you can follow up with, whether or not that will lead to anything, what part of the attack do you have to hit with, ect. Actually, melee is the one that made you focus on individual attacks more, because attacks had more purposes. In brawl attacks are for zoning, dealling damage, or killing. In melee, attacks were for tech chasing and comboing, in addition to everything they do in brawl.

 

[Yuna]

Name one character in Melee who had a combo that guaranteed a stock off one a single hit at 0%. Name that one character who's not, say, Game & Watch against a Fast Faller on a ridiculously huge and flat stage like Final Destination (or, I guess, NTSC-Sheik)... or Wobbling (kinda) or reaaaally situational stuff like wall-shining or shining someone off a walk-off edge.

I'm getting quite tired of people claiming there were rampantly abundant 0-death combos in Melee when there are practically none.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^Game & Watch had a zero to death combo on Fox???!! Why did no one tell me that. Game & Watch is obviously a Fox counter now because combos are an auto win button right?

lol JK.

 

[Taymond]

Oh hey, look, you've got a different opinion. How new.

Anyway, no way to say it better than what Vro, Sonic Wave, and Yuna said.

You think that the better player didn't always win in Melee? Really? And not, say.. Brawl? Brawl, where you can just camp until you're approached, and even if you get hit, you can hit back before the attacker due to inexplicable defender-recovers-first tendencies, or you can shield and do anything you want due to lack of shield drop lag, then retreat and camp again?

 

[SwastikaPyle]

Name one character in Melee who had a combo that guaranteed a stock off one a single hit at 0%. Name that one character who's not, say, Game & Watch against a Fast Faller on a ridiculously huge and flat stage like Final Destination (or, I guess, NTSC-Sheik)... or Wobbling (kinda) or reaaaally situational stuff like wall-shining or shining someone off a walk-off edge.

I'm getting quite tired of people claiming there were rampantly abundant 0-death combos in Melee when there are practically none.

I never, ever said that there was a 0 to death combo in Melee. I see you using strawman arguments against many of the people you disagree with, Yuna, so I am ready for it. Read my post. What I WAS talking about was things such as Falco's pillars, Fox's Drillshines, the constant chainthrows by Marth. These things that typically would add on 50% or more. Here's a pretty good video of the things I'm talking about. Look at the incredible combos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEwOPTOlrs0&feature=related


Also, to several of the posts above, I am not saying that Melee has no mindgames. Right away, you say "You people," indicating that everyone who objects to Melee has the same opinions. I do not think that Melee is a completely unbalanced game. However, I do think that Brawl has much more balance. People who enjoy Brawl more than Melee are not all the same, so try and stop lumping us together.

Melee definitely had mindgames, but it definitely seemed to rely much more on the speed of your fingers than the speed of your mind. I understand that you had predictions to make, but as an RTS player, I feel that strategy, rather than finger quickness, has a much great priority in Brawl than in Melee.

 

[Grunt]

I love Smash 64 for that very reason D:

 

[Rhubarbo]

See, the player performing the combo has to follow the person that is getting comboed. Are you familar with DI? If I start off one move in a combo, my foe can DI in 8 different directions, and I have to follow them and perform a move that will cover the area in which they are DIing in.

BTW, odds are that you are one of the people that never got into Melee and defend Brawl because it is the newer game.

 

[Taymond]

You may not have specifically stated the claims you denounce, but your premises still revolve around making the point that Melee took less skill in some area, most likely in "mind-gaming."

The fact that Brawl revolves almost completely around mind-games and that Melee revolved around both mind-games and ability honed through practice does not mean that Brawl involves mind-games more than Melee. It's entirely possible that Brawl just revolves, overall, less on skill of any kind, and that even though it relies primarily on mind-games, Melee still required more mind-games for success than Brawl.

If you've got one jar with 2 red balls in it, and other with 3 red balls and 3 green balls, the one with just 2 balls doesn't have more red balls than the other. It just only has red balls. Brawl takes mindgames, yeah. And it doesn't revolve around "technical ability" very much, like Melee did. But Melee still took more mindgames. More.

Brawl has closed off the route that allowed players to advance to an extreme area of technical skill, you might say. You could say they've cut off the "tech skill" side so that the game is all about mindgames, now. But.. they've also cut off a lot of mind-gaming options! Where's dash dance? How could the loss of dash dancing possibly create more mind-gaming potential? Where's the precise control over spacing that MADE Melee about mindgames?

Yeah, Brawl is about mindgames more than it's about anything else. But it's not more about mindgames than Melee was about mindgames.

 

[Rhubarbo]

I never, ever said that there was a 0 to death combo in Melee. I see you using strawman arguments against many of the people you disagree with, Yuna, so I am ready for it. Read my post. What I WAS talking about was things such as Falco's pillars, Fox's Drillshines, the constant chainthrows by Marth. These things that typically would add on 50% or more. Here's a pretty good video of the things I'm talking about. Look at the incredible combos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEwOPTOlrs0&feature=related


Also, to several of the posts above, I am not saying that Melee has no mindgames. Right away, you say "You people," indicating that everyone who objects to Melee has the same opinions. I do not think that Melee is a completely unbalanced game. However, I do think that Brawl has much more balance. People who enjoy Brawl more than Melee are not all the same, so try and stop lumping us together.

Melee definitely had mindgames, but it definitely seemed to rely much more on the speed of your fingers than the speed of your mind. I understand that you had predictions to make, but as an RTS player, I feel that strategy, rather than finger quickness, has a much great priority in Brawl than in Melee.

You my friend are confusing speed with strategy. Melee requires more strategy, you have to think quicker to do it. It's like playing chess with a timer, using it doesn't mean that the game involves less strategy, it means that you have to think quicker. IQ tests incorporate speed and knowledge. With that said, Melee has more options (meaning more strategy). Brawl is slower giving you more time to think...which helps n00bs!

 

[St. Viers]

dude, combos are a part of fighting games (you said this)

However, unlike most fighting games, combos aren't set in melee. Most of the the horrendous combos in melee (including marths CG/ken combo, falcos pillar, etc) could be gotten out of with DI. So your saying it's unfair that people who don't know how to escape something should have an easier time?

Why shouldn't a competitive fighting game rely on speed? Once you get used to the speed, it doesn't become a factor, ans simply serves as another way to differentiate between good and great players. As someone with fairly quick fingers, I can say that someone with slower fingers could still trash me due to "mindgames." It just adds another level, which makes the game competative at yet another level. Which is good.

Brawl relies on one aspect to make it challenging. Melee had two. To me that made melee better. Ican see how people who disliked needing to be adept at both aspects would like the changes, but to me, that's just johning because you couldn't handle the nature of melee.

 

[da K.I.D.]

i have to agree with vro slightly, even tho i love siding with the guy that goes against what the majority of SWF says. only because, in melee, if you were playing a scrub, yes, you could basically get off a 0-death everytime. but when you were playing someone who knew the intracacies of the game, it was just as easy for them to get out of the combo or lessen the damage done as it would have been for you to continue the combo. Whether it be, DI, smash DI (which is slighty different but much more difficult) or teching( on the wall, ceiling, ground, edge, or even the midair platforms.)

many people complain about Brawl, because it took out some of the offensive options, while adding to the defensive options (via faster rolls, and multiple air dodges) which makes for something that we are not used to. a game where we have to punish many more mistakes to get the same number of kills. we are not quite used to that. some are adapting as i am and some are regressing back to melee, and i dont think anyone should be criticised for either. ppl should be free to choose whatever game they like, and not be punished

 

[Zankoku]

Melee definitely had mindgames, but it definitely seemed to rely much more on the speed of your fingers than the speed of your mind. I understand that you had predictions to make, but as an RTS player, I feel that strategy, rather than finger quickness, has a much great priority in Brawl than in Melee.

Actually, patience has the greatest priority in Brawl.

The two rules that have almost no exceptions in Brawl are "never attack a shield" and "shield if they're about to attack."

 

[Dark Sonic]

Melee definitely had mindgames, but it definitely seemed to rely much more on the speed of your fingers than the speed of your mind. I understand that you had predictions to make, but as an RTS player, I feel that strategy, rather than finger quickness, has a much great priority in Brawl than in Melee.

You see, this is exactly where you are wrong. In melee, you had to make dozens of decisions in milliseconds, sort out which options are the best for different scenerios, all while predicting your opponents DI on every single hit. In brawl your job is done after you've landed one hit, and you are litterally back to square one. You have gained no more of an advantage than just a little bit of damage and maybe a more advantageos field position. You succesfully tore down your opponents defenses (which are just about broken in this game BTW) and your reward is 10%. GG

The reason that you were lumped with all the others is...because that's exactly how they think. They think that because brawl is slower and has less combos that it somehow requires more strategy when it doesn't.

Get past the quick fingers for a second (just assume it's part of learning the game. Nothing "advanced). Melee was a very deep game. You had many approach options (dash dance, wavedashing, JC grabs, L-canceled aerials) that would pressure a defensive opponent, while at the same time you had plenty of defensive options to ward off the offensive ones (light shielding, waveshielding, out of shield aerials, crouch canceling, ect.) The game engine itself was actually very, very balanced. What wasn't balanced was the characters. That is a big difference. There are some characters that are great at pretty much everything (Fox, Marth, Shiek, ect) while others are mediocore in all areas (Pichu, Mewtwo, Kirby). That isn't a game engine problem, just character stats that need tweeking. Take some hitstun off of Marth's fair, take some stun off of the shine, make Shiek's d-throw send them farther foward (like in Pal) ect.

Now when you look at brawl's engine you will actually find more problems than melee's engine. 90% of the characters in brawl lack a safe approach method because there is too little shield stun and shield drop lag. Grabs going through attacks makes shield pressuring even less viable, but at the same time most characters have bad grabs, making it completely useless for punishing someone who shields too much. Powershielding no longer reflects projectiles meaning that the one with the worse projectile has to approach, but at the same time powershielding attacks is easier, making it easier to punish that approach that they are forced to do. Tripping only adds to the problems, as now you risk randomly falling on your face when you try to take advantage of an opening in that powered up defense. The game engine does not favor specific characters per say, but it favors one playstyle above all others. That doesn't seem balanced to me, nor does it require much more thought. If you want to win, just make sure that you spam safe approaches or don't approach at all. That's pretty one dimensional.

 

[kamogawa]

Excuse me if I'm just talking out my ***, but you people say that in Melee (I wasn't a part of the melee community), you can DI out of combos to lessen or even destroy the combo...

How is that any different in Brawl? People complain that it's "easy" to get out of a "combo" in brawl, but you just said the same thing about melee. There are combos in brawl, they just don't exist in 5-6 hit combos, but rather 2-3 hits. For example, Fox's up-tilt spam or chain grabs. They are different, but they are combos.

To continue a chain of hits in Melee, you solely had to predict DI (this is what you guys claim). However, to continue a "chain of hits" in brawl, you have to predict dodging, jumping, and DIing. Which one takes more skill?

P.S. I know I used the term "chain of hits." It's been said many times that a combo is a "inescapable series of hits," but according to you guys, Melee's was escapable by use of DI.

Furthermore, I am neither anti-melee or pro-brawl. I do not attend tournaments. I am a casual brawler, who simply does not like the competitive scene. Flame me if you must.

 

[Rhubarbo]

You see, this is exactly where you are wrong. In melee, you had to make dozens of decisions in milliseconds, sort out which options are the best for different scenerios, all while predicting your opponents DI on every single hit. In brawl your job is done after you've landed one hit, and you are litterally back to square one. You have gained no more of an advantage than just a little bit of damage. You succesfully tore down your opponents defenses (which are just about broken in this game BTW) and your reward is 10%. GG

The reason that you were lumped with all the others is...because that's exactly how they think. They think that because brawl is slower and has less combos that it somehow requires more strategy when it doesn't.

Get past the quick fingers for a second (just assume it's part of learning the game. Nothing "advanced). Melee was a very deep game. You had many approach options (dash dance, wavedashing, JC grabs, L-canceled aerials) that would pressure a defensive opponent, while at the same time you had plenty of defensive options to ward off the offensive ones (light shielding, waveshielding, out of shield aerials, crouch canceling, ect.) The game engine itself was actually very, very balanced. What wasn't balanced was the characters. That is a big difference. There are some characters that are great at pretty much everything (Fox, Marth, Shiek, ect) while others are mediocore in all areas (Pichu, Mewtwo, Kirby). That isn't a game engine problem, just character stats that need tweeking. Take some hitstun off of Marth's fair, take some stun off of the shine, make Shiek's d-throw send them farther foward (like in Pal) ect.

Now when you look at brawl's engine you will actually find more problems than melee's engine. 90% of the characters in brawl lack a safe approach method because there is too little shield stun and shield drop lag. Grabs going through attacks makes shield pressuring even less viable, but at the same time most characters have bad grabs, making it completely useless for punishing someone who shields too much. Powershielding no longer reflects projectiles meaning that the one with the worse projectile has to approach, but at the same time powershielding attacks is easier, making it easier to punish that approach that they are forced to do. Tripping only adds to the problems, as now you risk randomly falling on your face when you try to take advantage of an opening in that powered up defense. The game engine does not favor specific characters per say, but it favors one playstyle above all others. That doesn't seem balanced to me, nor does it require much more thought. If you want to win, just make sure that you spam safe approaches or don't approach at all. That's pretty one dimensional.

What you said. I just was too lazy to type it all. God, we have to keep educating the newbies here...**sigh**

 

[Rhubarbo]

Excuse me if I'm just talking out my ***, but you people say that in Melee (I wasn't a part of the melee community), you can DI out of combos to lessen or even destroy the combo...

How is that any different in Brawl? People complain that it's "easy" to get out of a "combo" in brawl, but you just said the same thing about melee. There are combos in brawl, they just don't exist in 5-6 hit combos, but rather 2-3 hits. For example, Fox's up-tilt spam or chain grabs. They are different, but they are combos.

To continue a chain of hits in Melee, you solely had to predict DI (this is what you guys claim). However, to continue a "chain of hits" in brawl, you have to predict dodging, jumping, and DIing. Which one takes more skill?

P.S. I know I used the term "chain of hits." It's been said many times that a combo is a "inescapable series of hits," but according to you guys, Melee's was escapable by use of DI.

Furthermore, I am neither anti-melee or pro-brawl. I do not attend tournaments. I am a casual brawler, who simply does not like the competitive scene. Flame me if you must.

**Flames**

Well, to properly respond, with so many defensive options, it's very rare that you will ever get two straight hits. Those combo videos you watch on Youtue...most of them are chalk full of avoidable chains.

 

[kamogawa]

Okay, you say that they are chalk full of avoidable chains; however, you (the pro-melee combo guys) also say Melee combos can be escaped by DI. How does that make it any different?

Edit: Not meant to sound like a flame, just moreso curious as to why the contradictions come about.

 

[-Aether]

At high level of play, it's not even like technical skill is that big of a deal. Everyone has it; theyre all fighting on relatively equal game. Mind games in melee always were the largest factor. With brawl, so many options have been removed, and thus your ability to mix it up and make creative choices (AKA, mind games) has been reduced.

There never were zero-death unexcapable combos in melee. There were dangerous situations (marth chainthrowing Falco/fox on FD anyone?) but even then, only when the marth outplayed the falco/fox would they result in a zero-death combo.

 

[Zankoku]

Because in Melee, your DI made people have to play dynamically in order to continue a combo. In Brawl, your DI, lack of hitstun, and ability to airdodge quickly limits "chains of hits" against good people to a very restricted set of "safe" moves that can punish a wide range of responses.

 

[Rhubarbo]

Okay, you say that they are chalk full of avoidable chains; however, you (the pro-melee combo guys) also say Melee combos can be escaped by DI. How does that make it any different?

Edit: Not meant to sound like a flame, just moreso curious as to why the contradictions come about.

K, see, in Brawl, the second hit never happens. In Melee, you can avoid SOME hits, you can dodge some hits, and you can DI out of some hits. However, in Melee, when DIing out of hits, you could be chased by the attacker and get hit again.

 

[CKaiser]

I don't see how the combos in that marth vs bombsoldier proves your point about combos. The amount of punishment received by either character was proportional to the mistakes they made. Both Marth and Falco broke out of the other persons combos and the flow of the game reversed because the player who had started the combo all of a sudden wound up in a vulnerable situation. That video just kinda demonstrates how well the combo system worked out and kept the game up to a good speed. Also you can see the long streaks of droughts where each player is baiting the other trying to get a mistake out of him. If that's not strategy, I don't know what is. The difference between a fighter and an RTS IMO is the speed. A fighting game, like smash takes like 4 minutes and the strategy is a lot more situational an RTS takes upwards of 20 minutes. Maybe you just miss the micro. The thing about brawl strategy is that you have very little options for implementation, baiting is boring and makes the game slow.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Excuse me if I'm just talking out my ***, but you people say that in Melee (I wasn't a part of the melee community), you can DI out of combos to lessen or even destroy the combo...

How is that any different in Brawl? People complain that it's "easy" to get out of a "combo" in brawl, but you just said the same thing about melee.

In melee even with good DI you would eat about 30-40%, which is a reasonable amount of damage for making a mistake in the first place. Another important thing to note is that sometimes the opponent can even move before you can.

Another important thing is that if you predicted your opponent's DI in melee then you could often follow them, but in brawl I can litterally not catch you in time even if I am 100% sure you will DI away from me.

There are combos in brawl, they just don't exist in 5-6 hit combos, but rather 2-3 hits. For example, Fox's up-tilt spam or chain grabs. They are different, but they are combos.

Uptilt spam can be DI'd out of on the first hit, and most people don't like chaingrabs because they don't require you to predict your opponent's DI, but instead react to it.

To continue a chain of hits in Melee, you solely had to predict DI (this is what you guys claim). However, to continue a "chain of hits" in brawl, you have to predict dodging, jumping, and DIing. Which one takes more skill?

Only problem is that "dodging while DIing away" does not have a counter. There is nothing that you can do about it because you can't reach them in time. So it doesn't matter how well you predicted them, because you are still incapable of punishing them.

It's like if Rock beat scissors and paper. Rock would always be the best option wouldn't it?

 

[Evolution1988]

It's funny how people have responded to this. I agree with some aspects of killing the combo system, and agree with others.

As a Falcon mainer in melee, the inability to combo into the knee hurts majorly. To Yuna... you want a guaranteed 0% ko? Falcon knee combo... i've done it plenty of times. As I was saying though, combos require a perfect hand/eye/mind whatever coordination to implement and to defend. The "faster" player won because they were able to translate electrical signals in the brain into ko after ko on-screen with their fingers.

But I don't think the combo system is dead, rather its different. Brawl as a game has almost completely different physics from its predecessors. The fact is, almost all combos were based on mind-gamey tactics and L-canceling... the mindgames are different and l-cancel is dead, so people say you can't combo anymore.

The truth of the matter is that brawl came out 2 months ago. With melee we had 6 YEARS to abuse the battle system... do you see the discrepancy? Players are just finding tactics to allow for a new combo system. The people who whine about not being able to play their old mains (such as myself), are really just afraid of re-learning their fav. characters.

It will take some time to learn the new system, but i'll guarantee that someone in the next year will find a new way to "cheat" as some players say, and open up a combo clinic in a tourny.

 

[Dark Sonic]

To Yuna... you want a guaranteed 0% ko? Falcon knee combo... i've done it plenty of times.

Then your opponents are too predictable. Even pros rarely land a zero to death combo, simply because they are fighting against other pros, who are hard enough to predict that they break out.

 

[Rhubarbo]

It's funny how people have responded to this. I agree with some aspects of killing the combo system, and agree with others.

As a Falcon mainer in melee, the inability to combo into the knee hurts majorly. To Yuna... you want a guaranteed 0% ko? Falcon knee combo... i've done it plenty of times. As I was saying though, combos require a perfect hand/eye/mind whatever coordination to implement and to defend. The "faster" player won because they were able to translate electrical signals in the brain into ko after ko on-screen with their fingers.

But I don't think the combo system is dead, rather its different. Brawl as a game has almost completely different physics from its predecessors. The fact is, almost all combos were based on mind-gamey tactics and L-canceling... the mindgames are different and l-cancel is dead, so people say you can't combo anymore.

The truth of the matter is that brawl came out 2 months ago. With melee we had 6 YEARS to abuse the battle system... do you see the discrepancy? Players are just finding tactics to allow for a new combo system. The people who whine about not being able to play their old mains (such as myself), are really just afraid of re-learning their fav. characters.

It will take some time to learn the new system, but i'll guarantee that someone in the next year will find a new way to "cheat" as some players say, and open up a combo clinic in a tourny.

Combos aren't the product of a glitch that can be found. Brawl's pgysics won't change if a new glitch is discovered. Even if this physics glitch was discovered, it would allow for situational combos only.

Combos are dead in Brawl...trust me. I won't waste my time bashing you more, Sonic Wave, the honors are yours!

 

[DarkKnight077]

Combos aren't the product of a glitch that can be found. Brawl's pgysics won't change if a new glitch is discovered. Even if this physics glitch was discovered, it would allow for situational combos only.

Combos are dead in Brawl...trust me. I won't waste my time bashing you more, Sonic Wave, the honors are yours!

You know what?

No johns.

Seriously you can punish in Brawl it;s called gimping. Use it.

Again No Johns.

 

[Dark Sonic]

You know what?

No johns.

Seriously you can punish in Brawl it;s called gimping. Use it.

Again No Johns.

And for the characters that are bad at that? Or when fighting those with actually decent recoveries and knowledge of DI?

 

[Taymond]

@kamogawa, in Melee you could DI to disrupt a combo, but if your DI was correctly predicted, you would be attacked again before you could do anything other than DI. You could make it harder with DI, but you could not escape with DI. In Brawl, you can DI completely out of chase range. You can DI so far that you flat out cannot be caught up to in time to attack you before you can do something other than DI.

The thing is.. you can always DI. In Melee, you could be attacked again before you could do anything except DI, before you could dodge or attack or take a real action. In Brawl, you can do all those non-DI things, as well.

@Evolution1988, stop clinging to dead arguments. Timescale does not just, flat out, prove the things you want it to. The reason we say people can't combo anymore is because.. people can't combo anymore. Because you don't know what combo means. Because combo doesn't mean, "if my opponent is dumb enough, I can juggle them ad infinitum." Combos were "based" around those things because those things facilitated combos. Their absence doesn't necessarily make combos an impossibility, but the fact that nothing else stepped in to facilitate combos does.

Secondly, I don't care how long Brawl has been out. The release situations are gigantically different, and you cannot expect the two to progress identically. I see a discrepancy, all right, in your argument. An argument by analogy only works if the two things compared are actually similar enough to draw an analogy. The situation shortly post-release was completely different in Melee. No, we don't know everything, but we know far, far more than we did at an equivalent time in Melee.

And no, you cannot guarantee that someone will just waltz in and MAKE a way to combo like crazy when Brawl's physics engine, from the most basic level, works actively to prevent combos. There are almost insurmountable hurdles to, well.. hurdle.

 

[DarkKnight077]

And for the characters that are bad at that? Or when fighting those with actually decent recoveries and knowledge of DI?

Well, you have to really lucky doing it. Sometimes gimping can both ways. Unfortunately only number of characters can use it like Sonic, Link and probably Snake. (Not sure just guessing). But if you a character than use gimping then use it, I don't know why you need combos to kills someone.

If your character doesn't have that well get creative?

 

[kamogawa]

I would just like to say one more thing before I gracefully bow out of the thread:

People make mistakes and mistakes are going to happen in a competitive scene. It is not like going against a level 9 super human CPU where every move can be predicted; something will be dodged too late, some too early. A "pro" will capitalize on those mistakes and a "chain of hits" will occur. The means by which this mistake is done is probably what is going to be what brawl strives on whether it be on skill level or mindgames. Yea, these mistakes will be done less often by those who practice, but they will happen eventually and the punishment will be done accordingly.

*bows out*

 

[orintemple]

I agree that Brawl is more like an RTS than the other smashes. It is almost completely thought based, technical skill hardly exists. If fact, you can even micro manage if you play Olimar XD

The issue is that Brawl is supposed to be a fighting game, or at the very least a party game that resembles a fighting game, not an RTS.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Well, you have to really lucky doing it. Sometimes gimping can both ways. Unfortunately only number of characters can use it like Sonic, Link and probably Snake. (Not sure just guessing). But if you a character than use gimping then use it, I don't know why you need combos to kills someone.

If your character doesn't have that well get creative?

I'm just saying the game would've been better with combos and refuting this rediculous notion that combos take away from how much you have to think.

Characters that can effectively gimp are those with good recoveries themselves that also have high priority low trajectory aerial attacks. Unfortunately not a lot of characters fit this criteria. All the rest have to rely on their characters kill moves. However, if the kill move isn't fast then it will be very rare for it to land (since you can no longer combo into it to make up for its slowness).

And the main point wasn't complaining about not being able to kill people. The point was that combos are what helped balance offense and defense, as it was your reward for successfully baiting an opponent. You get a much smaller reward in brawl and you are in fact better off on the defensive side than the offensive one. In other words the brawl engine supports defensive styles and harshly discourages offensive styles. Those who like turtling or just defensive styles in general will probably like brawl, but I personally don't like defensive styles and am saddened that it is the best strategy. In melee you could use either style and have about the same level of success, but if you want to play aggressively in brawl you must choose from a very small list of characters, and even then those characters preform better on the defensive anyway.

I. A "pro" will capitalize on those mistakes and a "chain of hits" will occur. The means by which this mistake is done is probably what is going to be what brawl strives on whether it be on skill level or mindgames. Yea, these mistakes will be done less often by those who practice, but they will happen eventually and the punishment will be done accordingly.

All you have to do is hold away from your opponent and you will be out of their range 90% of the time. Tell me how I'm going to mess that up.

 

[Artery_Clogger]

I think RTS's shouldn't have hotkeys because it makes them too broken.

 

[TRUXOFF]

What you are suggesting is that everyone just pokes each other with crappy special moves and whoever lands more crappy special moves wins. Sounds like piss.

 

[Koga]

And for the characters that are bad at that? Or when fighting those with actually decent recoveries and knowledge of DI?

no johns

i think the op meant that no mistake deserves the punishment those combos dish out

posting from the wii ftw

 

[Cerozero]

Brawl isn't like Melee Nintendo did to SSB what they did to Mario Kart with its Wii game. Go to some MK Wii boards and you will find out that it got the same treatment, a bunch of the advanced play elements where either removed or watered down in MK Wii from MK DS (And I am not talking about snaking).

What I am trying to say is that this is not an isolated incident Nintendo is going to keep doing this to their games to accommodate the new and less skilled gamers they are reeling in with their Wii yoga and Wii fits, And if you defend brawl you must suck so much you need Nintendo
to hold your hand. It's up to us to to figure out if this game can be made into anything like Melee is.

P.S God help us if Nintendo does the same thing to F-Zero they have been doing because F-Zero GX was one f***ing hard game. They already got Metroid Prime.

 

[SiegKnight]

Cerozero, you sir, kick *** ^_^ Yah, indeed F-Zero GX was amazingly awesome and full of difficulty, win and just general perfection. I loved its difficulty, but, Miyamoto said GX sucked even though he praised it once the game went gold in japan several years ago; just he hates the difficulty in it.

 

[C@sH Mooney]

Why is it that Dark Sonic is the only person here who has a clue wtf they are talking about?

=/

Startcraft guy, the reason why there is no combo's is loss of decent hitstun

No hitstun = no combos

play a good falcon in melee, then play a good falcon a brawl. The difference is quite big.