Talk:Knockback

I can't think of a good way to edit this in at the moment, but I plan to make the initial explanation clearer and differentiate between the base knockback of an attack and the effective knockback once weight and damage are factored in. – MaskedMarth ^{(t c)} 02:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

And falling speed. – MaskedMarth ^{(t c)} 02:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't understand

I actually don't understand anything about knockback. Let's take Ness' and Ganondorf's down aerials as an example. Ness' stomp is arguably the most powerful aerial spike at 0% in Brawl, however deals 12%, and Ganondorf's thunderstomp deals 11% more damage (23%) but has much less knockback, and can't KO at exactly 0% (although can kill as low as 8%). However on grounded opponents and if not Staled, Ganondorf's thunderstomp can KO as low as 90%, unlike Ness' one, which can kill grounded enemys just at very high percents, as 170%. Can anyone explain this? 189.153.149.232 01:52, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

You appear to be assuming that knockback is only based on damage - while it's certainly important, it's not the critical factor. As said in the article, each move has two knockback values - one says how fast the target flies at 0%, and the second says how much faster it gets for each additional %. Therefore, in your example, Ness' dair has higher base knockback, but Ganondorf's has better knockback scaling. In other words, Ness' starts out more powerful, but Ganondorf's powers up faster, eventually overtaking Ness'. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic 02:09, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

Terminal knockback

I been doing some testing, and I think we can say the "terminal knockback", or the knockback a character is KO'd at, is 6200. With the standard horizontal trajectory from the center of Final Destination, Bowser, if holding the direction towards the stage after being hit, is KO'd at exactly 6202. With some more testing, this value varies slightly from character to character, but it doesn't sway more or less than 100 away from 6200 (with the exception of Fox, who got up to 6400 before being KO'd).

By implementing this as the terminal knockback, this can be combined with post calculation base knockback and knockback scaling to find the "terminal percentage", which will then give a reasonably accurate value (moreso than KO percentages) for how powerful a move is knockback wise in comparison to another move, regardless of the moves' trajectories. Omega Tyrant 00:27, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

I suggest having a go at forming some knockback data with the new information, then putting it into a userspace article. If all goes well, it can be implemented in here. ToastUltimatum Complaints Box 10:21, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

Anybody else have any comments about this, before I go implementing this? Omega Tyrant 14:58, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

One last bump before implementation. Omega Tyrant 19:49, 26 October 2011 (EDT)

What exactly are you "implementing"? Just changing the average KO range value of 5500-6500 into a value of 6200? Toomai Glittershine The Different 20:13, 26 October 2011 (EDT)

Know how we plan to document the statistics of each move? With this, we create a statistic called "terminal percentage" or something like that, which is the percentage the move/hitbox reaches 6200 in knockback, thus giving a statistic that can be used to compare the knockback power of one move against another under average circumstances, in a more accurate manner than KO percentages would. Omega Tyrant 20:24, 26 October 2011 (EDT)

What?

How much distance is a "unit"? Avengingbandit 20:14, 15 January 2012 (EST)

Read the article, it's simply the numbers the game uses. Omega Tyrant 20:33, 15 January 2012 (EST)

So, a unit is about a foot in HRC? Avengingbandit 12:41, 16 January 2012 (EST)

No, it's not a measurement, it's the numbers the game uses. Please stop being so dense on talk pages. Omega Tyrant 12:54, 16 January 2012 (EST)

Units are the measurement of length used by the game; Final Destination in Brawl is about 174 units long. Units differ in apparent length between the other two games. Toomai Glittershine The Riotous 13:33, 16 January 2012 (EST)

The units are actually measurable? Omega Tyrant 13:39, 16 January 2012 (EST)

Knockback units are not measurable without conversion. Distance units are. Toomai Glittershine The Labbie 13:48, 16 January 2012 (EST)

How do you know that FD is 174 units long? THEAVENGINGBANDIT 13:59, 16 January 2012 (EST)

Knockback scaling formula

Is the formula for knockback scaling

(knockback at x percent - base knockback)/damage percentage

If not, does anyone know the formula for knockback scaling? Awesome Cardinal 2000 17:09, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Scaling is a designed number, not a formula result. For example Mario's up tilt in Brawl has a scaling of 130, meaning it increases in power 30% faster than attacks that have a scaling of 100 and the same statistics otherwise. Toomai Glittershine The Incomprehensible 17:24, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Well on the meteor smash chart, it says that Ganondorf's d-air knockback scaling is 57.17. When the values for base knockback is subtracted from knockback at 100%, you get 5717, which divided by 100 is 57.17. I meant how do you figure it out when you have the two knockback values. Sorry about that. Awesome Cardinal 2000 18:07, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Those values were recorded from the velocity characters get knocked back at in the game. It's not the actual technical data in the game that Toomai is referring to. Omega Tyrant 18:20, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Is it possible to figure out that 57.17 is Ganondorf's d-air knockback scaling value? Awesome Cardinal 2000 19:35, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

The technical value can be found through hacking (which Toomai has access to). However, the value I recorded is meant to be "post calculation" (the result from the ingame calculation, instead of being the value that goes in to the game's knockback formula), intended to be a more "practical" value players can make better use of. Omega Tyrant 19:51, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Thanks! Awesome Cardinal 2000 21:37, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Zero knockback glitch in Melee??

I know this is strange, but... in Melee, I have battled a lot of times, like 5000 matches, and I also mostly go to Training to test my skills and... sometimes, when I land an attack, it appears to deal half the damage it usually does, and NO knockback. And it happens to me very very, when I don't expect to. The hit indicator also appears to least for only one frame: fire attacks only show small flames, and electric attacks just show little sparks without the foe, all for about that amount of time. And I'm NOT lying. I don't know how this happens, and it scares me on serious battles. Here are some examples:

1- I entered Training with Mario to test SHFFL'd attacks and recoveries with him. Bowser was my enemy. I suddenly landed an up smash on him in the last attack frames, and... he only took about 10% damage, with the hit indicator showing for about one frame. Strange... I tested this over and over again, and it appeared to be well, unlike that hit. 2- I was completing 15-Minute Melee with Fox, as he can quickly kill the enemies with special attacks. At about 3 minutes passed, a Wireframe spawned below the upper platform, and right after that i used the Reflector on it, but... it only did about 2% damage, displayed an electric sound instead of the usual "burn" one, the wireframe didn't flinch, and the effect was shown as I said above. Very bizarre. 3- I was having a Melee against CPU Marth with Jigglypuff, on Mute City (i was ignoring tourney rules for that time, though items were set to None). After some hits, i landed a Rest on him, but... it only did 14% damage, again with no knockback, with the flames shwon as I said above. Scary.

And this also happened to me when I was battling a friend, but I don't remember exactly how it was. I also didn't say anything, as he didn't even notice the effect.

So, HOW THIS EXACTLY HAPPENS? I tested those thing many times after the situations, but the attacks appeared to be normal. And it only appears to happen on grounded foes. And if you try to test it, it happens VERY RARELY... it happens like 1/1000 of the time, like encountering a shiny Pokémon with Pokérus in a Pokemon game (only trainers will understand this). Well, that is what I think, because there appears to be no apparent reason for that to happen. My Melee version is NTSC of course, and 1.2 I think, because there are no Boomerang glitches. And I DON'T use any type of hack. Well, respond this is you know something about it, or if this happens to you. Crazymasterhand98 14:29, 1 September 2013 (EDT)

You are seeing phantom hits. This is not a glitch. Toomai Glittershine The Non-Toxic 14:42, 1 September 2013 (EDT)

Really? Because they are so hard to pull off, even with all that Training... and they look nothing like in Brawl :/ Crazymasterhand98 16:28, 1 September 2013 (EDT)

Luigi down taunt

the section on melee says that Luigi's down taunt has set knockback. there are no directional taunts in melee, is this supposed to just say "taunt"?DJLO (talk) 15:49, 26 September 2013 (EDT)

Yeah that's right. also minor things like this don't really need a talk page discussion, if you come across something like it just change it. Scr7(talk · contribs) 15:52, 26 September 2013 (EDT)

eh, you guys are pretty strict about what gets added. i think ill stick to asking first, instead of wasting time writing something only to have it be removed. its better to ask permission than forgiveness, right? besides, it makes more sense to me to discuss a change first, instead of putting incorrect information on the main article. as you can see from my contribs, i have no qualms about typos and similar things that i am 100% sure about fixing. but otherwise, it makes sense to me to ask. DJLO (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2013 (EDT)

Deletion

(Moved from Talk:Fobble)

Per the current policy, yes, this page should be deleted. It's very clear on that and there's no discussion there. However, I don't like the current policy and I feel that it needs another visit/discussion. When we first had the debate, Project M was just starting to be seen as a legitimate game, and since then it has actually trumped Brawl in popularity for competition (both at Apex and at all of the locals that I go to). I think we should reconsider the policy on Project M pages, as there is stuff (like this page) that needs to be documented, but which cannot be documented under its tyranny. It's kinda awkward only being allowed to document part of a game with character pages and nothing else like stage or technique pages.

Most of the arguments presented on the debate page against independent Project M pages were simply that there isn't enough relevant information for PM techniques to warrant their own pages, but even if it's only a dozen or so pages that's not hurting anything. We don't need an article on modified stages, but there's new stages, which have enough information about them to fill an article. And there's new techniques like aerial glide tossing and fobbling that can also fill out a page. Not having pages on them seems silly, since it would leave us with a half documented game. Ryxis (talk) 09:08, 6 March 2014 (EST)

If this technique is possible due to changing physics to match Melee's, why is it not also a Melee technique (which would make it okay under the current rules)? Toomai Glittershine The Quintonic 11:02, 6 March 2014 (EST)

I think the move was changed between Melee and PM? I'm not sure. I don't play Ness. All I know is that I've never heard this term used with Melee, but I've heard it used a good deal with PM. Ryxis (talk) 14:29, 6 March 2014 (EST)

From what I can tell by the article, the base technique is "use a weak hitbox to cancel a strong one's knockback so you can hit with the strong one multiple times". That sounds like standard Home-Run Contest strategy to me, and so would apply in both SSBM and SSBB, even though people don't currently use the term "fobble" to refer to it. If the article could be rewritten to apply to this case as well I'd have no problem with it. Toomai Glittershine Le Grand Fromage 14:46, 6 March 2014 (EST)

I think there should be a page called Techniques (PM) and Stages (PM) but thats just me. --TheLegendaryKRB (talk) 17:37, 6 March 2014 (EST)

I agree we should revise the article and clean it up so not only it is easier to understand, but so it is easier to find within a new Techniques (PM) page. If people want to find this information I think it should all be in one place, on this wiki. We really don't need a P:M centric wiki for small (yet important) topics and techniques like Fobbling. As you said Ryxis "new techniques like aerial glide tossing and fobbling .. can also fill out a page. Not having pages on them seems silly, since it would leave us with a half documented game." The overall goal of the wiki (if I'm not mistaken) is to document Smash in the best way possible and enable users of the wiki to find information on what they need in one simple place. In my mind, as with Ryxis', it would be foolish to segregate P:M's intricate parts onto other forums and wikis further complicating the user when they want to find this kind of information. TheAliami (talk) 21:46, 6 March 2014 (EST)

Okay, I cleaned up the article some. Hopefully it's a bit clearer what it is now. (Though my main bone here is the ban on PM pages, not this specific article in general). Ryxis (talk) 07:54, 7 March 2014 (EST)

Also, the technique is more than canceling a strong hit with a weak hit. It's specific to PK Fire. There aren't any other ways to produce a repeating hitbox and still be able to attack outside of teams battles. It's not in any other smash game. Ryxis (talk) 13:12, 7 March 2014 (EST)

From my perspective fobbling looks to be a more general variant of bat dropping, so yes it is in other games. Toomai Glittershine The Producer 13:24, 7 March 2014 (EST)

They have a similar vein to them, but they're not the same thing. It's not just more general bat dropping; it's its own technique. "PK Fire wobbling" (fobbling) is not in any other game, and techniques exclusive to HRC hardly apply to competitive multiplayer enough to warrant that techniques with the same end result not get their own page. Ryxis (talk) 13:39, 7 March 2014 (EST)

Guys here's an idea. Since the the technique is dependent on a physics exploit, why don't we name the page after said physics exploit. In this case, the page could be named "Knockback stacking".--Brian^{Don't try me!} 01:24, 8 March 2014 (EST)

And while we're at it we can move all pages derivative of wavedashing to a single page called "slide." Ryxis (talk) 09:36, 8 March 2014 (EST)

Bumping this. (Again I'd much rather a discussion on PM pages themselves, not on this specific technique and its minor similarities to other techniques). Ryxis (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2014 (EDT)

If you want a discussion on PM pages themselves, the have my opinion on it: We should only have the absolute bare minumum of PM-exclusive pages, which are the character pages, and only because because the PM page was pushing 85KB (3rd longest page; now it's only 35KB+ and top 30 or something). This page is less than 4KB (the actual content probably being less) and can be trivially merged into the main PM page under a "techniques" section (that doesn't even exist right now, and I'm not really sure why) or into a hypothetical page on knockback stacking as suggested above (because that's a real mechanic across the series that could deserve an article). Toomai Glittershine The Metroid 10:18, 14 March 2014 (EDT)

This debate has gone on for long enough. Either delete it asap or let it stay without the deletion tag. TheAliami (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

Strong Move Move to Knockback stacking, per Brian. We already have In Melee and In Brawl sections, and as per The Project M debate, we can add a small In PM section and be done.

Also, Ryxis brought up a point. We should create a page called "Pseudo-Wavedash" for wavedash techniques other than an actual wavedash. HOWEVER, I don't want to move the wavedash techniques there. Qwerty the amazing 00:18, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

Anybody?Qwerty the lord 20:59, 5 June 2014 (EDT)

Split

Nah... that's a bad idea. This page is small enough, and I don't see any way in which that tiny section can make a page. It's 90 percent "list of moves" anyway. Agree?Qwerty the lord 19:44, 20 May 2014 (EDT)

This should be getting discussed and resolved. I'm looking to feature this article, and I can't do that if there's a split tag on it. Omega Tyrant 21:50, 5 June 2014 (EDT)

Eh, I'm not seeing the need. This isn't an excessively large article, and I'd need to see a convincing case that the set knockback section really deserves the split. Right now, it seems to fit here fine. Miles (talk) 21:58, 5 June 2014 (EDT)

Yeah, it's fine the way it is. I don't see why we would need to split it. We don't need to shorten an already small page. Berrenta (talk) 23:02, 5 June 2014 (EDT)

Vertical Knockback in Melee

So I've been playing Melee and PM for a fairly short amount of time, and I was wondering how vertical knockback works in Melee (and I suppose Smash 64 since there's no such gravity involved until Brawl). Fox is pretty darn light, but he can survive very strong up smashes like his own and Pikachu's at say, 100% damage after being hit on certain stages. Meanwhile Samus is pretty darn heavy, but she generally gets KO'd earlier than that (maybe 90% damage-ish). Clearly falling speed has a lot to do with mitigating vertical knockback, so much so that Falco, the 5th lightest character in the game, has the highest falling speed, which makes him survive the 3rd longest overall. If my calculations on Pikachu's up smash is correct, it deals nearly 240 units of knockback (which is pretty darn strong) at 100% damage on Falco, but he easily survives the hit especially with good DI accounted for. So that brings up the question, how much exactly does falling speed impact vertical knockback if it allows even light characters to sponge high vertical knockback finishers at a reasonable percent? Moreover, are there any charts that show what the rankings are for best vertical endurance in Melee?--Smashgold347238 (talk) 01:27, 1 August 2014 (EDT)

Even though gravity might not be a factor when knockback is calculated, it factors into how fast the character slows down from upwards knockback, which results in varying vertical distance. Toomai Glittershine The Aurum 10:40, 1 August 2014 (EDT)

I'm still curious as to where people get their endurance rankings from. Is it just pure experimentation like M2K's huge list of frame data? Smashgold347238 (talk) 23:17, 1 August 2014 (EDT)

I presume it's experimentation, given that what's around right now was probably easier to test than to decode at the time. Toomai Glittershine The Spectrum 00:26, 2 August 2014 (EDT)

Knockback is calculated after damage is dealt?

Since when? At least in Melee, I am at least 95% sure that KB gets calculated before damage... Serpent King (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2015 (EDT)

Since always, I'm pretty sure. I thought the formula page on the SSB64 website spelled it out but I can't see it right now with a quick look. Toomai Glittershine The Undirigible 23:13, 17 March 2015 (EDT)

http://clashtournaments.com/mew2kings-melee-information-and-discoveries/#14 <--Do we really disagree with the king? Serpent King (talk) 01:30, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

I'm confused about how the cloaking device proves this. Whether or not the damage is calculated after the attack hits, the result would be the same. Also, the values of the knockback variables for Mario's side smash attack in Melee seem to be similar to the ones in Smash 4; it has the same base knockback and a very slightly lower knockback growth value. If the formula had changed, I would expect the knockback variables to be much different. Therefore, I don't think that Melee's formula uses the damage that an opponent has before the damage is dealt by an attack. LimitCrown (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

Also, if Melee's formula used the damage that a target has before damage is dealt, then it would mean that a smash attack would deal the same amount of knockback to an opponent who hasn't sustained any damage, no matter how much the attack is charged. LimitCrown (talk) 02:41, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

The Cloaking Device has a weird effect: You do not sustain damage while under its effects. You get the KB, just not the damage. What's this about the smash attack doing the same KB uncharged? as the charge factor is not part of the formula, I do not see where you are coming from there. Does a full charged smash attack not have a different Base KB value as a non charged one? Serpent King (talk) 03:39, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

Also, I am going to point out that as the damage dealt is already factored into the formula under a different var (d), it seems unlikely that it would be included in the p variable too. Serpent King (talk) 03:39, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

If the percentage of the target before an attack hits the target is 0% and the knockback formula in Melee used the percentage of the target before the damage was dealt, then an uncharged smash attack that hits only once would deal the same amount of knockback as a fully-charged one. This isn't the case, however, so the percentage of the target after the damage is dealt is used. The game calculates the percentage that a target would have after being hit by an attack before the game calculates the amount of knockback that an attack would deal. LimitCrown (talk) 04:14, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

Maybe we can get M2K to explain what he meant by that article then. I can see viability in both sides of this. Serpent King (talk) 04:28, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

What else needs to be explained? I already said why Melee's formula uses the percentage of the target after damage is dealt. LimitCrown (talk) 04:53, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

The fact that post-hit damage is used in Melee has been proven by Magus420, who provides much more reliable research than that of Mew2king. Mew2king can make lists of what the game outputs, but Magus420 analyzes the game’s code and tells you precisely what it does. Both approaches have their merits, but for deciding how knockback formulas work, Magus420’s is far superior. Kadano talk 07:42, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

Understood, thank you. The Robot was wrong. Serpent King (talk) 07:50, 18 March 2015 (EDT)

Angle indicators in Smash 4?

I'm not sure if it's just a part of the aesthetic overhaul in Smash 4, but some particles appear to behave like the angle indicators in Brawl, mostly with body attacks such as kicks, though sword attacks used different looking ones, and throws without an actual "hit" didn't have any. I have some images[1], so I'm just curious if these are actual indicators or just part of the new art style. (To avoid confirmation bias as best as I could, I did include some that, in the case that they actually were angle indicators, would show the wrong angle.) b2jammer (talk) 21:51, 7 June 2015 (EDT)

Formula

Is Smash 4's knockback formula the same as Brawl's and likely Melee? The page includes rage as a factor; so it must be, right? -- Ethan7 (talk) 12:22, 9 November 2015 (EST)

"Rage affects base knockback"

To the user who reverted my edit, what do you mean "rage affects base knockback"? It is seemingly consensus that rage is a knockback multiplier. Chilex (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

I'm not actually sure. The page for rage used to say base knockback is what is affected by rage and I thought I heard that it is base knockback on websites. But it also could be the other way. I rather not put anything until we know how rage affects the knockback. -- Ethan(Discussion) 00:19, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

So you think, and you're "not actually sure"? Quote from the rage article: "At maximum rage, attacks will deal approximately 1.132x the amount of knockback that would normally be dealt." There is nothing in said article that has anything to do with it affecting just base knockback. Chilex (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

Also from said article: "The Rage Formula is multiplied on the end of the knock back formula denoted as R which stands for all variables such as crouching. All other variables aside R is .0011x where X is the damage of the Attacker." Chilex (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

I said used and put it in italics to make sure you would notice it. I think you are right, so if you are sure that is how rage affects knockback, go and put it in. Could you give me a source outside of SmashWiki that says how rage affects knockback? -- Ethan(Discussion) 17:00, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

Star/Screen KO Knockback Cap

[2] This at 8:37. This Charizard guy seriously hit a Bombchu at 194/199% at the top of the stage and still got Screen KO'd. Seriously, what is the amount of knockback that makes a Blast KO always happen? Kirby's Crazy Appetite ~ 00:32, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

A threshold for only Blast KOs doesn't exist, as far as I know. Gold 06:28, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

Knockback Merging in Smash 4

I'm pretty sure there is some form of knockback merging. It's easiest to do in doubles, but some characters like Robin can also do it with something like Arcthunder and Levin Sword down air (the resulting trajectory is an angle below 0 degrees). We should do more research on this, instead of assuming that it carries over from Brawl. Gold 09:16, 18 November 2016 (EST)

Elemental knockback

In all games, the screen will briefly flash white when the character takes strong knockback from non-elemental attacks. But the screen will flash in a different color depending on what elemental attack used: Orange from flame attacks, light blue from electric attacks, purple from darkness attacks, and blue from aura attacks. Juju1995 (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2017 (EST)

Knockback exponential by nature?

I think we've all suspected it for a while now, that knockback (and by extension, units) are by nature exponential, in the sense that a known increase in knockback value seems to have a greater effect at higher knockback values, but I think I might have proof of this. I was wondering exactly how much stronger Jigglypuff's sweetspotted back air in SSB4 was, as it has the same KBG, damage and angle, but +30 base knockback. I tested it using a stage I created with multiple springs spaced evenly apart right next to each other, and I discovered something strange. At 0%, the +30 units of knockback made little difference, about half a large spring length of extra distance, but at higher percents, it made a difference of over 2 large spring lengths, despite the fact that it was still an increase of just 30 units of knockback. It would appear by this that 30 units of knockback makes more of a difference when the knockback was high to begin with, when you would expect it to be the other way around (e.g the difference between 1 lion and 10 lions is a much bigger difference than 101 lions and 110 lions). Any chance someone could look into this? Alex Parpotta (talk) 09:09, 13 May 2017 (EDT)

You're comparing initial velocity (knockback dealt) to distance travelled (spring reached). The formula for this conversion is d = (v^2)/2a. Because the initial velocity is squared, a linear increase makes a quadratic result. I wouldn't call this too much of a surprise. Toomai Glittershine The Hammer 10:16, 13 May 2017 (EDT)

Proof that knockback stacking exists in SSB4

I have a gif that proves knockback stacking is present in SSB4.

If you look at the gif, you will see Kirby land fully charged hammer flip on Bowser, and immediately afterwards, Bowser is hit by the Yellow Devil. Both hitboxes use the sakurai angle, in opposite directions but the angle bowser is sent at is niether sakurai angle direction. Since Kirby's attack dealt more knockback, the resultant angle is determined more by his attack than Yellow Devil's, hence why Bowser is not sent straight upwards. This proves that we were wrong about knockback stacking not being present in SSB4. Alex Parpotta (talk) 15:21, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

So this is something I'd been meaning to address (sorry, I'm a terrible procrastinator). I'm not sure why this was ever in dispute; I guess people who only ever play 1v1 may not notice, but if you play a lot of free-for-alls and such, every so often you'll see really obvious angle merging. I've got a clearer example I can upload in a bit if people need more convincing. Zyrac(talk•contribs) 16:01, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

For the sake of bumping this, here. Sure looks like a merge to me. I'm just not sure what to write on the page, since I don't really know the details of how it works. Zyrac(talk•contribs) 16:28, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

Regarding how much staleness affects knockback

My previous edits were primarily regarding how much staleness is applied to the value of the damage dealt by an attack in the formula. Here is the page for Ruben's SSBU calculator that outlines the knockback formula, also applicable to Smash 4: [3]. There, it shows the full formula that the game uses and it can be clearly seen that the base damage value is multiplied by (1 - (1 - s) * 0.3), which evaluates to (0.7 + 0.3s). This means that the staleness and freshness bonus or, in other words, the sum of the reduction factors, is multiplied by 0.3 and so the formula uses the base damage value including 0.3x the staleness and freshness bonus. I don't see why the 0.7x value is insisted to be used for the pages when it's evidently not accurate at all.

Also, related to this, it could be beneficial if the knockback formula displayed on the page was more detailed. It doesn't include things like potential damage multipliers, more specifically the fact that there are two kinds: ones that affect only the final damage dealt and ones that directly affect the base damage value. LimitCrown (talk) 14:42, August 6, 2019 (EDT)

Move = Jigglypuff's Ftilt, Victim = Mario, Percent = 100, Staleness = 0.4695x

KB (to 4.d.p) calculated taking staleness consideration as 70% = 87.3423

KB (to 4.d.p) calculated taking staleness consideration as 30% = 103.0508

Actual KB (to 4.d.p) = 103.0508

Ok, it appears as though I made a mistake before, sorry about that. But I'm still wondering where the initial value came from...Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 17:06, August 6, 2019 (EDT)

This portion of the formula was likely misread when the information was initially added to the article. The error was present for a while, it seems. At least the error on this article and the stale-move negation one has been corrected now. LimitCrown (talk) 02:37, August 7, 2019 (EDT)

How does Gravity affect Knockback or Launch Speed

I know that launch speed is different then knockback (even though lkaunch speed is very important to knockback, but that causes questions for another time), but how does gravity affect knockback or launch speed. I know if affects one of them, but I don't know which one and how it affects either one. If someone could explain, that would be great The Holy Wooomy with 69 Nuggets of Toasted Chaos 16:32, March 18, 2020 (EDT)

First, the game calculates knockback, and then multiplies the knockback value by 0.03 to calculate the launch speed. Then, the launch speed is split into a horizontal and vertical component in accordance with the move's launch angle, and the result of the gravity penalty is added onto the vertical component of the launch speed. Alex the Weeb 16:37, March 18, 2020 (EDT)

What is the gravity penalty? Is it just the gravity of the hit fighter or is it the sum of (g - 0.075) x 5? The Holy Wooomy with 69 Nuggets of Toasted Chaos 18:21, 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 here instead. Alex the Weeb 18:24, March 19, 2020 (EDT)

How launch speed is decayed

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. 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? Alex the Weeb 18:12, December 25, 2021 (EST)

Bump. Alex the Weeb 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. 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). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.5.140.1 (talk • contribs) 16:22, April 11, 2022 (EDT)

No, the separation of terms in the currently displayed equation makes it much easier to see the effect of each factor. Alex the Weeb 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 (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. --CanvasK (talk) 16:53, April 11, 2022 (EDT)