Talk:Infinite Dimensional Cape: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Can't this be done by using the "shake" setting on the WiiMote to UpSmash? [[Special:Contributions/70.92.240.69|70.92.240.69]] 01:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC) | Can't this be done by using the "shake" setting on the WiiMote to UpSmash? [[Special:Contributions/70.92.240.69|70.92.240.69]] 01:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
It means Wiimote only, not Wiimote and Nunchuck. [[Special:Contributions/69.127.114.161|69.127.114.161]] 21:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC) | It means Wiimote only, not Wiimote and Nunchuck. Plus, the smash will be in the direction of the shaking, meaning you would alternate between Up and Down smash. So I guess it's impossible anyway. [[Special:Contributions/69.127.114.161|69.127.114.161]] 21:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:21, July 21, 2009
Technique name?
It is not really an infinite. It's just an extended one. Maybe "Extended Dimensional Cape" is a better name? - Timothyung (talk) 06:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
- It lacks an official name besides this, but It CAN be done infinitely. It goes as long as the person can maintain it.
Subject of IDC's banning
IDC was banned due to it being a powerful stall and the inability to tell stalling from simply using it. Claims of it being a broken approach/defense are unsubstantiated. Keep your facts straight.
--MetaXzero
likely to attack
"When Meta Knight exits the infinite maneuver, he will most likely attack, and may be open for punishment if not used carefully." -Why exactly is this? Zixor (talk) 08:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Why exactly is what? "Handsome" Hollywood K. 08:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Why exactly is he most likely to attack? Zixor (talk) 09:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
WiiMote
Can't this be done by using the "shake" setting on the WiiMote to UpSmash? 70.92.240.69 01:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
It means Wiimote only, not Wiimote and Nunchuck. Plus, the smash will be in the direction of the shaking, meaning you would alternate between Up and Down smash. So I guess it's impossible anyway. 69.127.114.161 21:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)