| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 192: |
Line 192: |
| :::Yes, gravity penalty is the result of that formula. Can I suggest that if you have any more questions, you ask them [[SmashWiki:Discord server|here]] instead. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 18:24, March 19, 2020 (EDT) | | :::Yes, gravity penalty is the result of that formula. Can I suggest that if you have any more questions, you ask them [[SmashWiki:Discord server|here]] instead. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 18:24, March 19, 2020 (EDT) |
|
| |
|
| == How launch speed is decayed == | | == How launch speed decays == |
|
| |
|
| Does the decaying work on the first frame of the knockback? Let's say the initial launch speed is 5. Since launch speed decays by 0.051 per frame, my theory is that the speed is reduced to 4.949 on the first, then 4.898 on the second and so on until it reaches 0. Is this correct? And how does the decay work when launched at different angles? I'm just curious. If anyone could explain me the details, that'd be good. [[User:Juju1995|Juju1995]] ([[User talk:Juju1995|talk]]) 21:11, September 1, 2021 (EDT) | | Does the decaying work on the first frame of the knockback? Let's say the initial launch speed is 5. Since launch speed decays by 0.051 per frame, my theory is that the speed is reduced to 4.949 on the first, then 4.898 on the second and so on until it reaches 0. Is this correct? And how does the decay work when launched at different angles? I'm just curious. If someone could explain me the details, that'd be great. [[User:Juju1995|Juju1995]] ([[User talk:Juju1995|talk]]) 21:11, September 1, 2021 (EDT) |
| | |
| == Remove lists of moves ==
| |
| | |
| This article contains 3 sections which consist of a list of moves. This includes a list of moves with set knockback, no knockback and set weight knockback. The lists are poorly maintained, and many entries are missing, at least from the set knockback and set weight sections. If all moves matching the criteria were included, these lists would be enormous, and in fact arguably already are. However, are these lists even needed at all? Why are we dedicating large sections of an already large article to lists which are difficult to maintain, aren't particularly interesting, and aren't really useful either, since the relevant information can be found on character moveset pages anyway. I don't think we should continue to have these lists on the article, as simply providing a couple of examples would accomplish the purpose of informing about and demonstrating these mechanics. A series of exhaustive lists of moves possesing a certain quality simply aren't necessary for an encyclopaedia. Thoughts? ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 18:12, December 25, 2021 (EST)
| |
| :Bump. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 09:38, December 31, 2021 (EST)
| |
| | |
| == KO differences ==
| |
| | |
| It's common knowledge that KOs are based on three known factors: the target's weight, gravity, and fall speed. So here's what I find interesting. In ''SSB'' and ''Melee'', horizontal KOs are only based on their weight, and since ''Brawl'', gravity. In all games, vertical KOs are based on their weight, gravity, and fall speed. In the case with ''Ultimate'', only weight and gravity when launched at between 70°-110° (but their DamageFlyTop animations also play a factor as well), and when launched vertically by a weight-independent attack, only gravity and fall speed. [[User:Juju1995|Juju1995]] ([[User talk:Juju1995|talk]]) 00:26, February 12, 2022 (EST)
| |
| | |
| == Making the equation more readable ==
| |
| | |
| Hey all, this equation can definitely be simplified. Since it's an image and I don't know how/what program to use to make it spit out something that looks that pretty, I'm not gonna mess with it, but at a minimum the first set of brackets can be changed into (2p+pd)/20. After this, you can multiply the fraction by 200/(w+100) to get (400p+200PD)/(20w+2000), which simplifies into (20p+10pd)/(w+100). Multiplying this by 1.4 yields (28p+10pd)/(w+100), which seems like it'd be much easier to follow (especially if you used a divisor sign instead of making it a fraction). <small>—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:69.5.140.1|69.5.140.1]] ([[User talk:69.5.140.1|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/69.5.140.1|contribs]]) 16:22, April 11, 2022 (EDT)</small>
| |
| :No, the separation of terms in the currently displayed equation makes it much easier to see the effect of each factor. ''[[User:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: blue;">'''Alex'''</span>]] the [[User talk:Alex the weeb|<span style="color: red;">'''Weeb'''</span>]]'' 16:38, April 11, 2022 (EDT)
| |
| ::Looking through the revisions, it appears that the way it is laid out is accurate to how the game calculates it ([https://www.nintendo.co.jp/n01/n64/software/nus_p_nalj/smash/M_AttackSystem.html official formula for 64]). So while it may give the same result, how it currently is is more true to form. As someone who has messed with calculating hitlag for too long, order and placement can really matter if there is something like rounding, spirits, player count, or whatever. --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 16:53, April 11, 2022 (EDT)
| |
Log in
