A big problem with TA off is that when it comes down to a 2v1 situation, it’s a no-win situation for the 1. Also, with TA on, the more in sync you are with your teammate, the more likely you can play in the dangerous waters of side-by-side. A huge advantage over other teams without this capability, and successfully pulling such a thing off consistently is much more awe-inspiring than a TA off tag-team wall of hate.
I will say this much: if there’s one thing that changed little between Melee and Brawl, it’s the strategy of TA Off, and that got silly real quick.
Admittedly, this is quite impossible to pull off online… but that’s friggin’ online. Even if it weren’t for Nintendo’s shitty WFC, it’d be difficult to coordinate the kind of things that are relatively easy to do live.
A 2v1 situation isn’t unique to Smash Brothers, it’s the nature of a 2v2. In RTSs, you are at a huge disadvantage in a 1v2. The same be true in shooters if the other team doesn’t decide to play rouge agents. But heck, making a 2v1 situation is part of the strategy. If one team makes a 2v1 situation, good for them. That was their strategy and hopefully it worked out for them. Making a 2v1 fair for the 1 guy makes no sense as this is a team match.
Also, part of the strategy would be breaking the wall. Since we were talking about items on high, this will solve the wall as a well placed item or an assist trophy will break it. A team camping gives up their item advantage and a team that is a moving wall is amazing, but can be broken by good tactics and execution.
It’s not that the 2v1 situation is unfair, it’s that it’s unwinnable. The 2v1 scenario is so lopsided the remaining player would be better off just jumping in the pit and starting the next round. Overall, TA Off is a removal of depth in a team scenario where “vs. the other two” is just as important as staying in sync with your teammate. That aspect just isn’t there when you remove the concern from your own attacks near your teammate. No having to think about jumping into a brawl. The concern for your teammate makes you think about how to assist rather than just fly at someone screaming “YEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGHHHH!!!”
Again, it’s probably one of the only things I will concede to not having much, if any, change between iterations of Smash. There was a reason why TA On became the standard then, and there was a time in which TA Off was tried. The simplest strat of covering each other’s smash attacks repeatedly was nigh invincible. Hell, I remember a time myself and LordLocke, for lulz, did double Ice Climbers and just moved around the stage alternating down and up on the c-stick on top of each other. Doing nothing but that netted us 5th out of 40+ teams, no effort put in. A lot of which we KNEW were better than us in any other situation, even had we taken it seriously, all because of how dumb TA Off was. And that’s not even counting the silliness that would occur once 1 teammate was removed from play.
Not to say 2v1 TA On is a “fair” scenario, 'cause it’s far from this. The two still have a major advantage, it’s just not a totally unwinnable scenario if TA were Off. In a TA Off scenario, that last one player cannot do ANYTHING offensive. Even the most mediocre of teams will still understand the basics of praying on the opponent’s recovery to any offense, and with TA Off, there is no repercussions to camp out behind your teammate and wait for said offense with a burly attack chain that would otherwise never land on an intelligent opponent. He can’t turtle up, 'cause he’ll eventually be backed into a corner by one, while the other either a) flanks safely, or b) in an items scenario, scrounge up items like crazy and throw them into the mix. With TA Off, those items are safe to throw in there, aside from an explosive.
These are far from the doom prophecies that items bring to the table, as they are core strategies and not dependent on anything “random” to cause the scenarios. The second one teammate is ousted and the remaining two regroup, the last teammate has no chance of success. Jump in the pit is a better strategy. Up until the time the team can regroup, there lies the hope that the remaining teammate can make a kill and bring it to 1v1. If that’s not feasible? They’ll eventually regroup and Jump In The Pit becomes the strat of choice again.
Meanwhile, a 2v1 TA On scenario still keeps the team on their toes, as the 1 player can hang onto the hope that he can get the two opponents to break each other apart/kill. The two can decide to step up and double-team with that risk, or have one sit back and tag-team/item scrounge, both of which can be considerably more risky than in a TA Off scenario due to the fact the remaining 1 player does not have the fear of going offensive if the opponent’s teammate abandons them. They can still punish said offense rather easily, but it’s not a derp scenario. The “tagged out” teammate actually has to pay attention for a proper time to step in.
I disagree entirely. Turning FF on removes depth. There is no longer any strategy or any realy team work. It justy boils down to 2 1v1s that go on at the same time. It should be no surprise that the team tier list mimic the 1v1 list when it shouldn’t.
Doing silly things like Yoshi’s egg roll and having another player attack is an assist. It allows the attacking player to get easy shots off. Of course, Yoshi is doing nothing besides helping the other team mate. If the other guy’s assault fails, then the assist end badly. Right now, it has nothing to do with combining attack or using unique tactics. It’s just split off and fight.
Again, it’s not invincible. You just have to break the wall. A moving wall is vulnerable in that it’s moving. Since the players are going to try to stay together, it’s going to be slower than the other team. The other team could go for a mobile force and try to break the wall by attacking from two sides. They could also use projectiles, items, or assist to pull it off. It’s stage dependent, but I can’t see how you can not break it. I think the IC thing has more to do with they didn’t know how to break it more than it’s invincible (this is competitive Smash Brothers players we are talking about. They will shield against a warp star).
The problem is we shouldn’t change the rules of the game for one scenario that is not unique to Smash Brothers but is true of almost any team game. I can tell you from experience that in Starcraft 2, if you lose your partner early on, it’s game over. Heck, losing a partner at all is game over as the other team can just make more units than you can.
Given, the 1 player can still win. It’s a lot more of a struggle for him, but it can be done if it’s close (i.e. they both have 1 stock and at least one of them has high damage). If the other team has more lives than it doesn’t matter how fair it is for the 1 guy, he still lost. So I don’t see the logic in bending the rules for just this.
The best option for the one player is dodge, seek items, and land pop shots. Basically, guerrilla tactics. He can hope for the time to run out or get lucky with an item. But again, why are we trying to create rules for a 2v2 game based on 2v1? This is the same logic that is why items are off and most of the stages are banned.
Put into a tough scenario that happens a lot, the best players will find ways to deal with it and get around it. Seeing as one of the “best,” choices you mentioned was “jump into the pit,” I think that you have no hope of figuring out new tactics and trying a new way of playing (which I think adds far more). To be the best, players have to grow. Smash Brothers problem is that it wants to contract.
P.S. On the pit thing, it’s actually horrible in any scenario to just give up. If the match gets to a point of unwinnable, than try to prolong it as much as possible. Heck, they it be decided in a Sudden Death. The point at that point isn’t to win, but to get inside the other teams head and make them uneasy. They have to struggle to get you, but you can just jump around, taunt and have a good time. It doesn’t matter, you lost. The point is to frustrate them so that they screw up in the next matches. This gives your team mate time to relax and you can chill with some fun projectile spamming and running away. At least this way, you can fight another day.
I can’t say I often see the scenario you describe, at least, not with teams that know how to manage teamwork appropriately.
The problem you’re missing is that team dynamic not only exists still in TA On, but is far more strategic in the scenario where team sync is that much more required.
Missing here is the fact that this wall, as you describe it, wasn’t defensive in the least in this scenario. Never has to be. The fact you can cover someone’s recovery completely without worry means an offensive wall of limbs will at the very least force BOTH opposing teammates to either do one of two things: run away, or do the same thing defensively. If you manage to actually BREAK that (good luck against any decent team doing so) you’re only doing so to create the above concern you have with TA On: two 1v1 fights. Keep the two apart, then fight 'em 1v1. Now you’ve made it no different than TA On. Seems a little silly, considering how incredibly improbable it is to even stop such a thing in the first place.
I may not know that much about Starcraft, but from what I do know, it seems like a comparison of apples and oranges here. Don’t know what else to say.
Still missing the idea that TA On isn’t meant for “saving” 2v1. In a decent team scenario, team-up strategies are still there and VERY used, it just requires the two players to be much more in sync. Pick-up Teams just aren’t gonna do well. Can’t say the same for TA Off, where sync stops at watching each other’s attacks and covering each other’s recovery. That’s it.
In a 2v1 scenario, the 1 doesn’t have a chance. Not a sliver of a chance. It takes about three seconds to see what the 1 is doing, distract for a couple seconds to force them on the defensive, then zone until they die. There’s no “getting around it”. Even with items in play. Hell, ESPECIALLY with items in play, considering that the two now have that much more control of the stage than the 1, and chucking items without worry for your teammate is ever-present. It’s not a hope for the best scenario once your teammate dies, it’s a “wait for the inevitable” scenario. For the one player to succeed, it would require complete and total stupidity coming from the opposing team. Somehow, I don’t see that scenario EVER occurring, as if the team’s that fucking dumb, they’re never gonna kill your teammate in the first place. This is what I meant by the “jump in the pit” scenario. Yes, you can do exactly what you say, but the fact remains that the one remaining player is now just dicking around. It’s like running out the timer when your opponent would otherwise perfect you. At best, you’ll bum 'em out for not turning you into goo. Sadly, this game does not provide much for antics, as too many of the options to drive someone nuts is just not possible. Especially in that 2v1 scenario. You can’t even breathe.
^^^ hold up let me help this out ^^^
If items are on in 1 vs 2 situation TA off guerilla tactics will work. Note the word “tactics” meaning strategy.
This one is particularly for you cyantalan
If you have the problem of winning in a 2v2 get better, get a better partner or make your partner better!
Uggh self defeating thoughts and complaining.
More on items:
Note with items on we wouldnt have the old “Grrr Ice climber, metaknight ,(insert whoever) is too powerful and the game is not fair.” Simply because smash w/o items isnt a fair game anymore and requires less ability to play. Thats the bottom line. If you take a variable out of any game it becomes easier to learn.
Example: I and the rest of the world decide to play SSF4 w/o super meter because focus attack dash cancels do to much damage. The game just got easier because I nor anybody else needs to learn that technique.
Items are critical in Smash and the community just doesn’t understand. They try to make the game fair w/ rules and what have they done but gone and ass-raped themselves. People don
Ha ha ha. What do you not understand? I feel that my post is pretty black and white.
Is your post a place holder for your argument which you cant seem to formulate?
I should do this too. It will go like this
No, I seriously was trying to understand where you were going with the statement. In regards to TA On or TA Off, summarizing me, mocking Smashboards, what? Can’t see the angle you’re coming from with such a flat statement.
You expect anyone here to believe that after 3 years of back and forth, both sides only coming to the conclusion the other side is retarded and washing their hands of it, that this wonderfully articulate post you provided isn’t just trolling? Come on, now.
Thread is really hard to take seriously, but that being said I think shouldn’t ban smashball fighting over it is half the fun of casual play, too bad Peach has a pretty terrible one. Hacking the smashball into a more balanced item might be a good option.
The idea of item standard play is pretty dead unfortunatly. I like smash I think its fun. I dont think smash tournaments are fun considering there is a billion rules. Not to mention the smash community tries to make smash like SF or something. Its a terrible thing.
http://allisbrawl.com/group.aspx?id=13845 I’ve recently been trying to create my own kind of ISP. though it’s a bit different then the one that you’ve all been discussing it’d appreciate it if you’d looks it through. I know that i am intending on finding a way to incorporate the smash ball though so far whats on that page is the best i got so far.
Wow, I was just curious to see if this thread was still here… and it is, and has recent (ish) posts! Considering it seems that people still look at this thread every now and then… I probably should update the OP and all. It’s probably REALLY old. And outdated. And not right.