User talk:Alex the weeb/Archive 5

current talk page

Archives

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4

Can't edit

I try to save my edits on Nakamaman, but it declines them. Why? 46.229.158.109 08:20, May 19, 2020 (EDT)

What exactly are you trying to change? It might be that you're adding phrases or links that are automatically considered spam. Alex the Weeb 08:23, May 19, 2020 (EDT)

I tried to clean up paragraphs remove paragraphs like that

Before my edit

After my edit

Ethan "Nakamaman" Xiong is the #2 solo Marth main in Minnesota. He first appeared on the Minnesota Power Rankings in April of 2016, being ranked 9th. At The Big House 6, he notably 2-0'd DJ Nintendo, and placed 97th. At Smash 'N' Splash 3, he didn't drop a game until losing to Android 2-0 in Round 2 Pools, and losing 3-0 to Leffen to place 33rd. At EVO 2017, he beat Iceman in Round 1 Pools, lost to Redd 2-0 in Round 2 Pools, beat Cort 2-0, beat Kounotori (who was ranked 91st on the 2013 SSBMRank) 2-1, before ultimately losing 2-0 to Darkatma to place 65th. He is currently ranked 6th on the Minnesota Power Rankings for Melee. Along with being a professional smasher, Nakamaman runs the main stream for Minnesota's Melee scene. The stream for Minnesota Smash (Melee) can be found on twitch.tv/mnsmash. VODs can be found on youtube.com/mnsmash.

Nakamaman is a solo Marth main in Minnesota. He first appeared on the Minnesota Power Rankings in April of 2016, being ranked 9th. He has notable wins over DJ Nintendo, Iceman, Redd and Kounotori. He is currently ranked 6th on the Minnesota Power Rankings for Melee. Along with being a professional smasher, Nakamaman runs the main stream for Minnesota's Melee scene. The stream for Minnesota Smash (Melee) can be found on twitch.tv/mnsmash. VODs can be found on youtube.com/mnsmash.

I also removed unused paramets from infobox and added him to Category:Marth professionals (SSBM). 46.229.158.109 08:32, May 19, 2020 (EDT)

The problem might be the Twitch or YouTube links. What message is coming up when you try to save the edit? Also see if the edit will save without the links. Alex the Weeb 08:36, May 19, 2020 (EDT)

I removed links and it works now. And the message was something like "You can't do this edit as IP".

btw, can this be added back? It's pretty important info. 46.229.158.109 08:42, May 19, 2020 (EDT)

I'm assuming certain social media links can't be added by IPs. I could add them in for you if you want, but in future you may want to consider creating an account. Alex the Weeb 08:43, May 19, 2020 (EDT)

Kara canceling

You reverted my edit for no reason, I know this subject better and expect someone that revert my edit to verify his sources Eknoa (talk) 11:56, June 7, 2020 (EDT)

I’m sorry you feel that way, but I did in fact have a reason for reverting your edit, which I put in the edit summary. If you’re going to change established knowledge about the game, you’re going to need evidence that what you are claiming is correct, and simply claiming to be knowledgeable on the subject isn’t good enough. If you can provide evidence that the technique was possible prior to 7.0.0, then by all means do so, but until then, do not change the page to say that it was. And in future, be sure to check edit summaries if you don’t know why your edit was reverted. Alex the Weeb 12:17, June 7, 2020 (EDT)

Sorry if this sounded a bit harsh, I wrote it without reading

I read it on Twitter (there was a clip to prove it) but I don't find it, I will edit the page only after I find the post Eknoa (talk) 12:46, June 7, 2020 (EDT)

Rematch page

I saw your edit on the Rematch page and wanted to see if you wanted to work together on getting the technical stuff completed. I've been working on how battle power translates to SP gained (with 0 power) and so far I've worked out a formula for novice and advanced Spirits, just need to get ace and legend. --CanvasK (talk) 12:42, July 4, 2020 (EDT)

At the moment I'm working on beating every battle spiritless, which is gonna take a while, especially since with lockdown loosening where I live I have a few family visits coming up. But when I'm done with that, lemme know if there's anything else you need help with regarding rematch mode. Alex the Weeb 12:50, July 4, 2020 (EDT)

I've been wanting to do that too, but didn't want to burn myself out too soon. Since there are only so many different powers used for battles I went ahead and did the minimum, so all of the data for spiritless is collected and just needs to be analyzed. I'll let you know if I hit any walls with the formula stuff. --CanvasK (talk) 13:06, July 4, 2020 (EDT)

Update but not much progress. I started going various battles with different power levels and got this graph (all but green are ace, green is legend). It appears to be cubic but I haven't been able to fit a line to it. --CanvasK (talk) 16:51, July 7, 2020 (EDT)

Semi-spikes

On Discord, we had this discussion when Invy completed the page. Semi-spike angles are determined with a game-by-game basis and for Ultimate, we determined that 30 is the cut off. Not only that, but the Semi-spike (category) doesn't appear on any moveset page with an angle above 30. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 14:24, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

Well, first of all if the convention that was used for Smash 4 on the Wiki were to be changed for Ultimate, the discussion absolutely MUST take place on the Wiki. Secondly, articles not having the correct categories is a separate issue entirely. Finally, using such a cut off point means that 0˚ is not a semi-spike when 120 or more units of knockback are dealt, which I think we can all agree is a problem... Alex the Weeb 14:27, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

Problem is that the page doesn't include any move with angles between 31 and 35 right now and I'm not up to the task of scouring scripts to find those. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 14:29, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

Again, that's a separate issue entirely. If you want to make a discussion about using a different convention for Ultimate, then by all means do so, but I can't imagine you'd have much of a case as since at least Melee, 35˚ has always been the cutoff point, and there is no real reason why Ultimate should be any different from the 3 games that preceded it. Alex the Weeb 14:31, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

The main point was that the Sakurai angle is getting awfully close to 35 as games pass. It's 38 right now in Ultimate. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 14:33, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

Right...and in Brawl it was 37˚, but 35˚ was still the cutoff...anyway this is not the appropriate place to have the discussion. Alex the Weeb 14:35, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

Intangibility Trivia

Hello. I want to thank you for explaining how Bowser's "Helpless State Intangibility" works. Would it be alright if that information was put in a Trivia section on the "Intangibility" page? Also, if you don't want to do it, and if I end up doing it, is it alright that I give you the credit for discovering it? I'd feel terrible if I didn't.Thecontributor22 (talk) 00:45, September 4, 2020 (EDT)

I guess you could add it if you want. Don't worry about credit or anything. Alex the Weeb 04:17, September 4, 2020 (EDT)

Okay, then. Once again, thank you!

Thecontributor22 (talk) 11:31, September 4, 2020 (EDT)

Wario's Back Throw

Since only the Back throw has a video that has DI on it:https://youtu.be/Xx4bOx-1SLc, I look at most of the data from the 8.0 Knockback list found on Reddit (which are kill% tested on the middle of FD without DI unfortunately). As stated in the moveset section, Wario's Back throw is not a viable kill throw, it only KOs Mario at the edge of FD at 196% with DI. Not sure about Up air, that section of the document is currently blacked out for me for no reason idk why. NPM Morr!? 11:40, September 9, 2020 (EDT)

It is very misleading to only use DI data for 1 throw, just to make sure it fits a certain description. If you really want the data to incorporate DI, you should get it for all 3 throws. Alex the Weeb 11:42, September 9, 2020 (EDT)

OK, i see, there are literally omly 1 or 2 videos that shows DI, just found that Wario's Up air kills Mario at 170% on mid FD without DI. Also I still feel like since Wario's Back throw kills that late maybe change the wording to "only kills at really high percents" idk. NPM Morr!? 11:49, September 9, 2020 (EDT)

If you're referencing that other user's edit, 169% (the actual KO percent) from the ground for an up air is pretty good. Remember that up airs are designed to hit above the fighter, so you'll usually be netting KOs with them from noticeably higher than ground height. As for the back throw thing, the wording can be changed, but also bear in mind that base-heavy throws such as Wario's back throw benefit much more from rage than scale-heavy throws. For instance, with max range Wario's KOs at under 140% without DI, and even with DI it KOs at around 155%, many back throws can't even do that. Alex the Weeb 11:59, September 9, 2020 (EDT)

So probably change it to "kill at high percents with rage", also no I am not referencing the other user's edit, I found the kill percent to be 170% on the list myself, which I didn't say it is bad. NPM Morr!? 12:08, September 9, 2020 (EDT)

Could you help me?

Could you perhaps actually help me answer some of the questions instead of reverting me right off the bat? I am CERTAIN that the increased difficulty is a thing for sure, I just don't know exactly why or how much. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:51, September 26, 2020 (EDT)

I don't exactly know what you expect me to do here. I don't have access to any information that you don't have access to, and you yourself admitted that you weren't sure what's going on here. For all I know, the "increased difficulty" could just be confirmation bias... Alex the Weeb 18:54, September 26, 2020 (EDT)

That's what they said to me about the ledge planting too. I believed (and still do) that it was introduced in an update in Ultimate, but I was at least able to confirm that it was a change that occurred in game transition. That being said, you raise a good point, I shall start labbing this. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:58, September 26, 2020 (EDT)

literally a writing coach but ok

The comma there is entirely unnecessary. I will admit that my initial edit summary was misleading -- there is leeway with whether or not you are permitted to use a comma before a conjunction -- but my focus was to acknowledge the confusion between such a comma and the Oxford comma and I assumed further elaboration was unnecessary. Since I have been proven incorrect, I will now provide that elaboration.

In casual writing such as communication over a personal talk page, you could (but do not have to) include a comma before a conjunction if you would take a pause when saying it out loud. In professional writing such as, I don't know, an encyclopedia, you would only use a comma when absolutely necessary. However, even if we're pretending that an encyclopedia is casual, there would be no pause if I were to say the sentence "N's Castle is the base of operations for Team Plasma in Pokémon Black and White and the setting for the final storyline battles of the game." It's a single, coherent thought. There is no reason that a comma is desirable and certainly not necessary.

If you're going to be a smartass, maybe make sure you know who you're talking to first.

I can provide some resources on commas if you'd like to know more. TheNuttyOne 14:46, September 28, 2020 (EDT)

I don't exactly know what makes me a "smartass" in this situation, but ok. As far as your reverting is concerned however, you could have graduated at the top of your class in the Navy Seals, but that wouldn't change the fact that those commas are perfectly valid, and when at least 2 users believe they should stay there, and you are the only one who seems to think that they're a problem, then they really should be left as they are. Alex the Weeb 14:52, September 28, 2020 (EDT)

This

I probably would have reverted it anyway for being uncited, but it is quite possible that Mew's appearance odds were patched after the advent of the Sw/Sh DLC, as new creatures were added in when the DLC came about. It is likely to be patched up again when the second DLC run in Sw/Sh releases if this holds true. Perhaps some investigation is in order? Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 06:38, September 30, 2020 (EDT)

This

I was actually about to revert it again myself, but I do feel the need to point out that there is currently an unresolved discussion on Steve's page, which I linked to in my last edit summary. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:20, October 3, 2020 (EDT)

As the person who started that conversation, I'd consider it resolved by the presentation using gendered pronouns, and I updated the "gender" section on the page to reflect this. Otherwise, the consensus leans in favor of using "he" by default anyway. ~ Serena Strawberry (talk) 18:23, October 3, 2020 (EDT)

Steve's shield

In the Shield page, there is a section called Steve's shield. You did put in the move to summon the Crafting Table, but how about the Perfect Shield thing? Why are you removing that? Please let me know why. 112.137.84.74 19:39, October 6, 2020 (EDT)

I'm not Alex, but I can answer for him: the shield that Steve pulls out is an aesthetic detail, rather than actually doing something in-game. Although I will say, it should definitely be noted somewhere, if it isn't already... Aidan, the Spooky Rurouni 20:12, October 6, 2020 (EDT)

It's on Perfect shield. ~ Serena Strawberry (talk) 20:19, October 6, 2020 (EDT)

My edit to Arsène

You, uh, read the edit description, didn't you? Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 15:26, November 16, 2020 (EST)

This: No, hang on. Read the trivia you're defending very closely. As stated in my edit description, it incorrectly compares Kazooie to Pikmin and Lumas, which are mere tools, or moveset elements, whilst Kazooie is something else entirely. She is not a "pivotal role" in "the entirety of a character's moveset," in reference to Banjo, of course. She isn't taking commands. She is a single, discrete character, and she and Banjo are acting independently of one another as fighters in and of themselves, even if she is the one doing most of the heavy lifting and they are KOd together (the latter also defends my "incomparable" point). On the flipside, Banjo isn't comparable to Olimar or Rosalina. Again, he's not giving commands, and he is anything but the main face of the duo, as some claim he is. Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 17:53, November 16, 2020 (EST)

To chime in on this without furthering the edit war, I agree with Sam that Kazooie shouldn't be mentioned here; she's clearly a co-star with Banjo rather than a secondary companion, and like Arsène, she is an individual rather than an interchangeable species. ~ StrawberryChan (talk) 18:24, November 16, 2020 (EST)

I also have to agree that Kazooie is more of a co-star than just a companion like the others, it's more comparable to the Icies where Nana is her own individual instead of Popo's tool. Kazooie acts independently from Banjo, who doesn't even give commands like Rosalina and Olimar.

Also next time please take it to the talk page instead of edit warring. Thank you. Omegɑ Toɑd 19:01, November 16, 2020 (EST)

SW:1RV

Why are you blatantly violating SW:1RV? That's three reverts there. And other similar articles do make a note when a clone pair is nigh-identical, such as Marcina, Chroy, and Pits, so I don't get where you get that "we don't do this" here from, or why you are so hung up on omitting a fact from the article about the character's equivalence to each other. Omega Tyrant 15:10, February 23, 2021 (EST)

None of those articles contain the redundant phrase "nigh-identical clones", or any variant thereof. They do go on to briefly elaborate on the level of cloning present (which also really shouldn't be there), but none of them include the redundancy in question. Disambig articles are supposed to be minimalistic, so really all of those pages should be cut down even more.

Furthermore, the wording you chose specifically sticks out like a sore thumb, and such fanciful wording is advised against in the manual of style, which recommends a semiformal style, and for good reason.

Regarding 1RV, I am well aware of the rule, but I was hardly left with much of a choice, seeing as how both you and Omega Toad also engaged in edit warring, in addition to re-introducing the aforementioned issues. Since the 1RV violation is the main reason for this message, I assume Omega Toad will be receiving a similar message? Alex the Weeb 15:21, February 23, 2021 (EST)

That point about semiformal writing suggests to not use slang or silly words. In what dimension is "nigh-identical" either of those things? Get off your high horse already. Aidan, the Lovely Rurouni 15:38, February 23, 2021 (EST)

I didn't say it was. I'm saying it's not semiformal in the slightest. Alex the Weeb 15:40, February 23, 2021 (EST)

The definition of a clone is to be identical; it's a duplicate, a mirror image. See Merriam-Webster's definition of the word. To call something "nigh-identical" is not redundant, nor is it not semiformal.

Furthermore, the level of cloning absolutely should be there, because to do otherwise insinuates that all clones are on the same level, which they are absolutely not. You can't sit here and tell me that Lucas and Richter are the same type of clone, especially when even the game itself isn't clear on what constitutes as a clone and what isn't a clone.

Like I said, get off your high horse already. Aidan, the Lovely Rurouni 15:48, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Right, so saying two fighters are both nearly identical and clones is redundant, by repetition. It's the equivalent of, for example, describing something as a "geriatric home for the elderly". I also really don't see how you could consider "nigh-identical" to be semiformal, when language like that is rare even in formal writing. Regarding the level of cloning, when did I say it shouldn't be there? We use the terms clone, semi-clone and pseudo-clone for a reason. If there was a disambig page for Ness and Lucas, we would say they're pseudo-clones. Lastly, could you please stop belittling me by claiming I'm on a high horse, simply because I'm pointing out the issues with the edit? Alex the Weeb 15:56, February 23, 2021 (EST)

"Regarding 1RV, I am well aware of the rule, but I was hardly left with much of a choice, seeing as how both you and Omega Toad also engaged in edit warring."

Listen to what you just said. You were ‘not left with a choice’ because Aidan and Omega were also edit warring. I’m sorry, but 1RV clearly states NOT to revert just because someone violated 1RV. So I don’t know how you possibly think you’re in the right by doing what you’re doing. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 16:18, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Why am I the only one getting flack for violating 1RV? And how exactly do you propose this issue should be resolved? I remove a redundant phrase from a disambig page which in addition is also worded in a way that doesn't conform to the writing style of the rest of the Wiki, and then a user violates 1RV to add it back. At this point, the only other option I have is to raise the issue on the disambig's talk page, which inevitably nobody will respond to, and thus due to a technicality, the user who originally violated 1RV not only gets away with it, but gets to keep their version of the article's wording in-tact, which they accomplished specifically by violating 1RV, as undoing it again would also be violating 1RV. There is no resolution to this situation that isn't inherently problematic.

So I decided to take the risk of violating 1RV myself, only for yet another user to come along and violate 1RV yet again. So I'm forced to repeat my actions. As a result of this, I have 3 separate users come to my talk page, talk down to and belittle me, and largely not attempt to actually resolve the issue, meanwhile the other users who violate 1RV get no such repercussions. And to make matters worse, all of this happens during one of the worst periods of my life, and I'm beginning to question if contributing to the Wiki is even worth it anymore, since no matter what I do, I'm always the bad guy. Alex the Weeb 16:37, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Alright here's the deal. Yes I am fully aware I may have broken 1RV as well, but listen: 3 types of clones exist, Richter (and Daisy as well) are special cases where they are 99.99% identical to their base fighters. Every other clone, including ones marked as full clones, have several distinguishing features that seperate them from their base fighters (eg Lucina has no tipper, Dr Mario has a different down B, aerial, and b throw), meanwhile Richter's only difference is holy water being aura instead of flame, everything else is completely identical.

The word clone refers to a copy of something, it's not redundant to call something "a nearly identical copy". I've called you out twice on edit warring before, after my revert you should've taken it to the talk page instead of reverting it. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 17:09, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Do with the article as you wish. This isn't a hill I'm willing to die on. I give up. I'm probably gonna take a break from the Wiki for a bit as well, unless something major comes up. Alex the Weeb 17:12, February 23, 2021 (EST)

"Why am I the only one getting flack for violating 1RV?"

Because you are the only one who did so, both me and Toad reverted once, while you reverted three times. After I first reverted you, at that point you take it to the talk page if you care enough about such minor wording.

"And how exactly do you propose this issue should be resolved?"

You know what a talk page is, use it.

"At this point, the only other option I have is to raise the issue on the disambig's talk page, which inevitably nobody will respond to"

If you think something is so minor that it is not worth bringing up on a talk page, then why get so pedantic and edit war over minor wording to begin with? And if you did raise it up on the talk page and no users actually respond to you, then your wording would be "consensus" by default and your version stays up, so again what's the issue?

"but gets to keep their version of the article's wording in-tact"

If you discussed something on the talkpage and no one refuted you there or otherwise consensus went with you, then no it wouldn't be. So again, what is the problem?

"So I decided to take the risk of violating 1RV myself, only for yet another user to come along and violate 1RV yet again. So I'm forced to repeat my actions"

Again you're the one in violation here, no one else reverted more than once, and I came here after I seen you reverted me twice and reverted Toad, without making a peep on the talk page. From what I seen and heard from others, you already have a history here of causing problems and ignoring SW:1RV. so you are on thin ice.

"And to make matters worse, all of this happens during one of the worst periods of my life"

We're all going through shit, being troubled does not give you any excuse to blatantly ignore policy. Omega Tyrant 18:17, February 23, 2021 (EST)

[1] Alex the Weeb 18:19, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Yes that is my one revert, not a second or third as you did. Omega Tyrant 18:21, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Then you do not understand 1RV. 1RV states "if a user reverts an edit, one should not revert their revert". Alex the Weeb 18:24, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Neither do you, because you've done that several times already. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:27, February 23, 2021 (EST)

With all due respect, what you have just said is neither relevant nor helpful. Omega Tyrant appears to misunderstand what 1RV states, which is what I have addressed here. Alex the Weeb 18:31, February 23, 2021 (EST)

This discussion clearly isn't going anywhere, it's clear you're trying to put the blame on us for reverting you rather than admitting you were the one who broke the policy in the first place. Rule is don't revert more than once, you reverted thrice while me and Tyrant reverted only once. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 18:35, February 23, 2021 (EST)

I am doing no such thing. Aside from the fact that I wasn't the first to violate the policy, I have never once denied that I violated it. Alex the Weeb 18:37, February 23, 2021 (EST)

It is very relevant, the fact you have an established history with ignoring the policy gives you a short leash here. Omega Tyrant 18:40, February 23, 2021 (EST)

The name of the policy is "only revert once", I only reverted once, and at that point it should be clear to you to take it to the talk page if you care that much about it, not keep reverting back, including reverting another user that got involved. Excuses like "no one would respond" or "I'm having a hard time in my life" do not fly. Omega Tyrant 18:40, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Black Vulpine: No, it isn't. Omega Tyrant claimed that he did not violate the policy, and I was explaining why he did. Bringing up that I also violated the policy is a tu quoque fallacy.

Omega Tyrant: Perhaps the policy has changed somewhat since you were last active, so let me explain. The number of times you hit the undo button is not what determines whether or not 1RV has been violated. Reverting an edit that was itself a revert, which both you and Omega Toad also did, is a violation of 1RV as well. But Omega Toad is correct that this discussion isn't going anywhere, which is why I would like to request that we end it here unless you have any other points you wish to bring up.Alex the Weeb 18:37, February 23, 2021 (EST)

"Omega Tyrant appears to misunderstand what 1RV states, which is what I have addressed here."
You appear to misunderstand that you are living in a glass house. Even if we were to accept the fact that Tyrant is breaking 1RV, you are clearly the more serious offender, and while you say you're not denying that you broke the policy, you also seem to be trying to downplay the fact that you are the more serious offender, as well as a serial offender of the policy. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:47, February 23, 2021 (EST)

I'm not downplaying anything. I was responding to a specific claim that Omega Tyrant had made, and you responded to my response with something that had nothing to do with the claim I was responding to. Right now, it seems as though you are simply trying to add kindling to a fire that doesn't need to burn any longer. I've made it clear that I am no longer willing to fight the edit in question, so Omega Tyrant is free to add it back. Once again, I request that if you do not have any other points to raise, then I would like to end this discussion so I can begin my hiatus. Alex the Weeb 18:54, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Warning

We have received a multitude of complaints about your behaviour from several users over the past few weeks/months. After reviewing them, the staff team as a whole have determined that your attitude with other editors is doing more harm to the wiki than your edits are doing good. This is your last warning to adjust yourself, or we shall be forced to start enacting blocks. Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 20:30, February 26, 2021 (EST)

Smasher article for AsumSaus

I agree he would be notable enough for an article, but no one ever tried creating an article for him before, so there's none I can restore at the moment like I did for Scrumpy. If you want to create it yourself though, have at it. Omega Tyrant 20:35, April 5, 2021 (EDT)

Capes deal knockback and knockback velocity

Regarding your edit to Knockback page:

FYI, there's 6 velocity types / variables in Melee. 4 are known, "character velocity/normal velocity", knockback velocity, attacker shield knockback velocity, and player nudge velocity (this one is induced when you stand near an opponent). The velocity induced by a cape hit, when reverse effect applies, is definitely knockback velocity. The addition of the knockback velocity also adheres to normal knockback stacking rules: If one gets caped within ten frames of previous hit, cape induced kb speed overrides the previous kb speed entirely. If it's 10+ frames after, there's conditional vector addition normally. You were right though in noticing that cape hit itself won't "count" for hit timer. The next hit will still look whether the hit preceding cape knockback was within 10 frames. I had not noticed this before, so thank you for that!

The amount of knockback velocity induced by a cape hit indeed doesn't follow the same rules as "normal" hits. But it's still knockback, induced by a hit. Therefore I don't think cape should be listed as "no knockback move". I'm intending to fill the cape knockback details onto cape article sometime. If you're curious, the amount of velocity induced is 2.0 on aerial victims and 2.25 * cos(hitbox angle) on grounded opponents (grounded hit filters out vertical component of the knockback velocity, before adding the velocity).

TauKhan (talk) 14:27, October 24, 2021 (EDT)

So, from what I can tell, the game actually IS running the knockback calculation, but the momentum added by the cape is NOT the knockback calculated by the formula (which as far as I can tell is only used to calculate the hitstun of opponents hit on the ledge). Generally, "knockback" refers to the launch speed added to an opponent hit by an attack, as calculated by the knockback formula, rather than simply any momentum applied to a victim by an attack. This is important because from what I can tell, the game handles this momentum and launch speed from knockback separately, and can apply both at the same time to a fighter without stacking the two, which is why hitting a launched opponent with the cape in Brawl (where knockback stacking isn't additive) will cause them to be sent further than normal.

As for whether or not the came follows the normal knockback stacking rules, I'm not super familiar with how they work in Melee, but I do know how they work in Brawl, and it definitely does NOT follow the rules for Brawl knockback stacking. If an opponent with residual momentum from the cape is hit by the cape again, the momentum applied by the cape is added onto the residual momentum, regardless of when the last hit occurred, and more and more of this momentum can be stacked additively by repeatedly caping opponents, with no limit other than the normal velocity caps that the game applies. This is absolutely not how knockback stacking works in Brawl, so clearly the game isn't treating the momentum from the cape like knockback.

Maybe it's more similar in Melee, but nevertheless there are differences between what is generally understood as knockback, and the effect the cape has on opponents, so I think it's accurate to list it as not doing knockback. The only exception is that in Ultimate, moves with the reverse effect now just apply the calculated knockback to opponents hanging on the ledge (while in Melee it would apply a set amount of momentum to them, and use the HITSTUN from the knockback calculation). Alex the Weeb 14:56, October 24, 2021 (EDT)

Got a word from PM dev that Cape is 0KB hitbox in Brawl, which means it's distinctly different. In melee, 0KB cape wouldn't even apply reverse effect, and the associated set knockback velocity. Indeed, for instance Yoshi's dj armor prevents reverse effect and the velocity until yoshi is at high enough % that the *normally calculated* knockback dealt by cape exceeds the armor.

In melee, cape very much deals knockback and knockback velocity on hit, and the knockback velocity follows normal rules of stacking and interaction. The detail that the knockback velocity isn't normally proportional to the knockback is asine. I propose the article should be changed to list Cape 0 KB from Brawl onwards, (or just Brawl, i've got no idea). TauKhan (talk) 03:04, October 25, 2021 (EDT)

"Got a word from PM dev that Cape is 0KB hitbox in Brawl"...and yet it still pushes opponents back, just like it does in Melee. See what I mean? Also, I already covered that the knockback formula is run when the attack connects in Melee, and as I said it is used to determine hitstun for opponents hanging on the ledge. The fact that it is also used to determine armour breaking doesn't change anything, the game still does not apply this knockback to the opponent, and instead applies a special form of momentum to them, which shares some properties with knockback, but it distinct from it. With regards to future games, I can confirm that the hitbox also has 0 knockback in Smash 4, but is programmed with WBKB of 80 in Ultimate, which is once again not actually applied to the opponent, with the exception that now hitting opponents on the edge actually DOES apply the result of the knockback calculation to opponents. I think with the generally understood meaning of knockback, the article is accurate in its current state. Alex the Weeb 03:17, October 25, 2021 (EDT)

"and instead applies a special form of momentum to them" There's nothing special about the momentum applied in Melee. It's just knockback velocity. It's *totally* indistinguishable from any other sort of knockback velocity induced by any other attack in Melee. Cape deals knockback, and if the received knockback > 0, applies reverse effect with set knockback velocity. It deals knockback. What it does in Brawl I don't know yet. Though it probably still just applies knockback velocity. That is irrelevant to the proposal of excepting Melee in the article. TauKhan (talk) 05:52, October 25, 2021 (EDT)

Meta Ridley

I tried for several minutes to get him to perform Mega Fire Ball at full health, but he only ever did rapid fire, slam, swoop, and claw sweep. At around 60% he started using it, and it was a OHKO even at that high, so I don't think the note is needed either way. As for it OHKOing on Very Hard, it OHKOd at every part unless you are close to the back blue part, so it can OHKO from center. Perhaps that one at least can be re-added with a more descriptive note. --CanvasK (talk) 18:42, November 2, 2021 (EDT)

Meta Ridley can definitely use the move at full HP. As for whether it will OHKO at full HP, as you can see it is very borderline. If the move launches you to the right, it will sometimes KO and sometimes not, and if it launches you to the left, it never will. Due to its inconsistency, it doesn't seem right to include it to me. Alex the Weeb 20:10, November 2, 2021 (EDT)

I'm not sure why I couldn't get him to use it that high, but alright. Are we factoring in DI or no? I got a KO further to the left (granted, at lower HP) without DI. If we both did no DI then yeah it is inconsistent. If DI is important then my point is invalid. I guess either way it means it shouldn't be listed, more for future reference. --CanvasK (talk) 20:28, November 2, 2021 (EDT)

I used no DI. Alex the Weeb 05:30, November 3, 2021 (EDT)

Speed and Shield Shulk Dash Attack

Hey, I noticed you added a tag for additional images of Shulk's dash attack, but I fail to see what's different about Speed and Shield Art versions of that move. I'm assuming it's the distance Shulk travels, but that would literally be impossible to visualize as the dash attack uses its animation for distance. This means I can't shorten or lengthen it, nor do I know by how much as there's nothing to indicate it. Since I'm pretty much the only one to do hitboxes for Ultimate and the only one crazy enough to manually do projectiles (which would be similar to manually moving Shulk to account for the Arts), I think it's best to remove the tag and mention that those Arts affect the distance. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 11:44, February 2, 2022 (EST)

There may well be a way to visualize it. I don't think we should remove tags just because no one is up to the task at the present time. The range will be affected by how far Shulk moves forward, and this is relevant. Alex the Weeb 11:59, February 2, 2022 (EST)

If you find out how many units per frame it adds/removes, just lemme know because I can change the camera settings for that. If you test in-game to eyeball it, remember one training mode square is 1.07 unit in reality. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 12:02, February 2, 2022 (EST)

Well the params list "spd_dash_attack_Speed_mul" and "shield_dash_attack_speed_mul" as 1.5 and 0.7 respectively, so that would be my best guess. Alex the Weeb 12:06, February 2, 2022 (EST)

I tested in-game and can verify the 1.5 and 0.7 values. Shulk went 1.5/0.7 times the distance overall and per frame. If you need values, here's a pastebin of the first 40 frames with frame 1 as the zero (I'd only trust them within 0.05u at most). I found the animation files, opened them in Blender, and scaled them by 1.5/0.7 and got somewhat close to what I tested. --CanvasK (talk) 18:56, February 2, 2022 (EST)

Final Smash-Assist Trophy Connections

I figure it's pretty much immaterial now but upon thinking I would say that on the topic of the Cook Kirby trivia section, that final smash and Chef Kawasaki don't really have the same function (e.g. Kawasaki uses a ladle to trap fighters, only drops one piece of food rather than several, and can also throw plates), but at the same time, neither do Negative Zone and Ashley, as while they have some commonalities (e.g. forming a dark zone around themself with some of the same possible hindering effects like damage and slowing), they do not share all their effects (e.g. Negative Zone can increase knockback, Ashley can disable recovery moves). Thus, it seems that trivium is invalid not because there are 2 examples, but because there are none (at least, none I can recall). But if you disagree about Negative Zone and Ashley being significantly different though then I guess you could put that trivium on the Negative Zone page if you feel it belongs. Pk62001 (talk) 20:45, April 7, 2022 (EDT)

Delete Account

Hi, I would to know how to delete my SmashWiki account. Please respond. Daniel1204 (talk page) 14:07, April 19, 2022 (EDT)

I can't help you with that, you'll have to talk to a bureaucrat. Alex the Weeb 14:15, April 19, 2022 (EDT)

Pretty sure your wiki account can't be deleted. NPM Morr!? 14:17, April 19, 2022 (EDT)

Position shifting aerials

Saw your subpage and decided to look in to the animation files. Here is every character's position on every frame of forward/back air (excluding the ones with no animation movement). This doesn't factor in character scaling (eg WFT's values would be multiplied by 0.96) or physics related movement (such as stick movement or stuff like Corrin's bair). The values you have are also off by a factor of 10, so WFT's 0.36 would actually be 3.6; the lines in Training that are labeled are increments of 50 instead of the labeled 5. --CanvasK (talk) 11:09, May 15, 2022 (EDT)

Hi, thanks for the info, it's definitely interesting. Regarding the units, I was explicitly using the labelled units, so the values are correct for the units I was using. I would want to continue to use these units because anyone can easily visualize them. It would probably be difficult to translate all the numbers across, and it also doesn't help that I would have to manually count out the frames to find the interruptible frame, so I'm not 100% sure what to do with this data. Complicating things further is that some of these shifts are so slight that they're effectively like rounding errors, that is to say they are so small they can effectively be ignored. I'm also having trouble verifying some of these, for example Yoshi's Fair doesn't actually seem to shift him forward at all in-game, at least as far as the player arrow is concerned, and having him land on frame 18 (which should give him the frame 17 offset) doesn't have him land any further forward either. Are you sure we're talking about the same thing? Alex the Weeb 12:45, May 15, 2022 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure we're talking about the same thing. WFT's Bair has an ending position of 4.036 and is scaled by 0.96 to 3.87456. I tested found that in game it was about 3.6-3.7, which I would say is close enough considering the movement caused by doing aerials. Mario's Bair is a bit more feasible than Yoshi's Fair. On the far-left ledge in Training, get right up next to it but face away, double-jump, Bair. If performed too early, he won't land on the ledge even if using smash stick for aerials. Perform it later and he'll successfully land while his feet are out. I also looked into up, down, and neutral aerials and found some that had movement, but landing on the appropriate frames yielded no movement like you've found. Yoshi's Dair ends with a small offset and when I used it multiple times in a wind area he seemed to go the opposite direction, so perhaps the game is compensating. I do agree that most of these are negligible or are drowned out by other forces. If anything, the list lets you know to ignore anyone not on it and what values to expect (especially if a way to do aerials without movement is found or the amount can be figured and subtracted). --CanvasK (talk) 13:19, May 15, 2022 (EDT)

I really don't think we're talking about the same thing. There is definitely a distinction between the temporary position shifting of moves like Pikachu's Bair, which will affect your position when landing, and unambiguously changes where the game considers your character to be, and the more animation-based position shifting of moves like Yoshi's Fair, which has him lean forward, but in test after test does not appear to actually change where the game considers Yoshi to be. Maybe there's some hidden parameter or flag or something that decides whether or not the game considers the fighter's position to have changed in accordance with these values, or maybe something else is going on, but to clarify, I'm only interested in moves which meaningfully shift a character's position.

By the way, you can compensate for the drift caused by the c-stick. Use frame by frame to make an input on the C-stick for one frame, then a few frames later, while the character is still inactionable, and definitely no longer drifting, input in the opposite direction for a frame. The drifts will cancel out. How long you have to wait between inputs obviously varies from character to character because of friction and acceleration differences, but it should always be possible to cancel out the effect. Alex the Weeb 13:30, May 15, 2022 (EDT)

Perhaps the ECB is set to follow the trans bone on Mario's, Pikachu's, and WFT's Bairs and thus allow their animation movement be tied to their physical movement, but I can't verify that. I tested Pikachu's Bair and was able to land with around 7 units of displacement around frame 12, which is the around the trans bone position on that frame. That plus WFT's leads me to believe that we are on about the same thing, but I can't verify or explain the other characters nor am I going to harp on about it.

I kept getting very slight movement when I tried that, but I didn't try very long. I'll mess around with that another day. --CanvasK (talk) 14:39, May 15, 2022 (EDT)

Green Hill Zone

Just because something is unique to a stage doesn't necessarily make it "odd". The leaves on Hanenbow will return to green and straighten out over time, that's their mechanic. The minecarts on The Great Cave Offensive will move if someone enters them or own their own over time, that's its mechanic. The sections on Green Hill Zone break when damaged or own their own over time, that's their mechanic. Not everything needs to play by the same rules. --CanvasK (talk) 20:40, June 22, 2022 (EDT)

Those aren't fair comparisons. There are many instances of destroyable terrain, and almost all of them behave in the same way, needing to be damaged by attacks or items to break. GHZ is the sole exception to this. Alex the Weeb 21:02, June 22, 2022 (EDT)

The major point is that it doesn't need to be described as "odd", it can just be said that is how the stage works. Out of the dozens of stages, 2 allow the player to wrap around the screen instead of being KOd, that's not "odd" that's how it is. King of Fighters Stadium has an invisible wall that needs enough speed to break through, that's not "odd" that's how it is. Mario Galaxy has curved gravity, that's not "odd" that's how it is. Wrecking Crew, WarioWare Inc., and Spiral Mountain do things that most stages don't do, but that is just how they are. Magicant's tomato and octopus statue can be stood on and also attacked to get rid of them or they will rid themselves over time, similar to Green Hill Zone's sections.

What's odd is Metal Mario's fast fall speed being slower than his normal fall speed in Smash 64. What's odd is Jeff not casting a shadow in Ultimate. What's odd is bouncy rubber causing things to bounce higher than they should. What's odd is Special Flags not appearing in Stamina Special Smashes. These don't make sense and likely shouldn't do what they do. Something decreasing a value by X per frame? Perfectly reasonable and logical, there's no weirdness going on. --CanvasK (talk) 21:52, June 22, 2022 (EDT)

Also, it's not like Green Hill Zone's ground breaking is original to Smash—that's what the level is and has been known for in the Sonic series. Aidan, the Nonbinary Rurouni 09:58, June 23, 2022 (EDT)

You guys are simply overthinking this. Breakable terrain usually works in a certain way. In this case it works in a different way. This is unusual behaviour, as it's not normal for terrain to destroy itself. Alex the Weeb 10:03, June 23, 2022 (EDT)

Min Min doesn't have traditional specials, tilts, or aerials, Kazuya has attacks galore. There are stages with multiple planes, there are stages with fewer dimensions. There is terrain that can go away on a timer, there is terrain that can go away by taking damage, there is terrain that moves based on weight, there is terrain that takes damage from weight (Boxing Ring). So, how is it odd that terrain can be a little different? What is stopping terrain from having a timer and health? Add some params, add a function, simple. You are overthinking this by thinking that everything that is breakable terrain has to function the exact same way when Smash loves throwing in gimmicks that go counter to that idea. --CanvasK (talk) 10:18, June 23, 2022 (EDT)

Wuhu Island

I asked on the talk page why isn’t wuhu island banned in competitive. Why can’t we use talk pages for that given that no one noted why the hazards off version is banned anyways?

It’s something that can be noted in the article, not asking something like “who do you like the most in the fighters pass?” —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gligar2007 (talk • contribs) 23:44, June 25, 2022 (EDT)

You should have made it clearer that your post was about expanding the article's content, because it was not immediately apparent. Anyway, Wuhu is banned because it has slopes that turn upwards at the edges and is a semisoft platform like Skyloft, not much else about it. And please fix your signature. Rdrfc (talk) 05:25, June 26, 2022 (EDT)

Wouldn’t anyone see that no one mentioned why hazards off is not in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gligar2007 (talk • contribs) 09:01, June 26, 2022 (EDT)

Edit warring

Given how often you edit war here and that you've already been warned on it before, you have been given more than enough chances. You can take the week off, and any farther edit warring from you will result in successively longer blocks. Omega Tyrant 19:48, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

I assume this is over this. This actually wasn't a 1RV violation (though I kinda figured it might be interpreted that way). Toomai misunderstood my edit. From his edit summary it was clear that he was unaware of the effect the arts have on the move, hence his reference to the aerials which would not be relevant to the issue. Per 1RV, a revert may be used if "a valid edit was misunderstood or misinterpreted by the reverter, though this should be accompanied by an explanation". Toomai was under the impression that the move's hitboxes were unaffected by the speed and shield arts, which is NOT true, hence my revert + explanation. Alex the Weeb 19:58, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

"This actually wasn't a 1RV violation (though I kinda figured it might be interpreted that way)."

You double reverted, as you constantly do here, end of the story. Take it to the talk page next time like you know damn well to. Omega Tyrant 20:03, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

...I...just quoted you an exception that is clearly stated in 1RV...if you don't believe me, you can read it for yourself here. Alex the Weeb

There is no "misunderstanding" or "misinterpretation", you blatantly double reverted. If you're going to keep trying to wiki lawyer out of this, your talk page will be locked too. Omega Tyrant 20:22, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

I'm not "wiki lawyering" anything. There are 6 exemptions to 1RV. My edit falls under exemption 3. You can't claim I violated a rule I didn't violate, and then when I point out that I didn't violate it, throw out further allegations against me. Can you please actually listen to what I'm saying this time? Alex the Weeb 20:25, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

I would agree with you Alex if it weren't for the fact that there is no incorrect information present by simply removing the image tag. Simply leave a note on Toomai's and/or the article's talk and wait for a response, no harm done. That said @OT I oppose a block here, too fragile a reason. Serpent  King 20:28, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

Since SK left without correcting himself here, just going to post here that he retracted his position on discord, as he was initially under the impression that Alex only reverted Toomai and missed that he already reverted Drakroar prior.

@Alex: This attempt to wikilawyer has gone on enough, stop trying to misinterpret policies to absolve yourself and just use a damn talk page for once. Your talk page is being locked. Omega Tyrant 21:04, July 30, 2022 (EDT)

The exception Alex is referring to here reads as follows: "If a valid edit was misunderstood or misinterpreted by the reverter, though this should be accompanied by an explanation."

Considering that there were two separate users reverting Alex here, neither of whom claim to have "misunderstood or misunterpreted" anything when removing the tag, this exception cannot be used to qualify multiple reversions. For the image tag itself, whether something is or isn't necessary is subjective and cannot be declared factually incorrect, and thus if there is a disagreement, the discussion is to go to the talk page.

Also I'll confirm real quick that I have in fact retracted my opposition of a block. Serpent  King 13:10, July 31, 2022 (EDT)

Your Lucario edit

I would like to point out the pages for both Aura Sphere and Extreme Speed have trivia points that mention quirks about them that are only present in Brawl, yet neither of them are pointed out on Lucario's Brawl page.

In my opinion, trivia that focuses on one of the fighter's special moves should be put on said move's page instead of the fighter's, regardless of whether or not said trivia is only relevant in one installment. Yes, the fighter is technically relevant to the trivia, but the move is clearly the main focus.

Also, removing trivia better suited on other pages helps reduce the amount of bloat on a trivia section, which is the reason why we have a "trivia" tag in the first place.

So overall, I don't think the trivia only being relevant in Ultimate should really matter that much when the page's subject (Lucario) isn't necessarily the main focus of said trivia. Hope I elaborated my points well enough. The Jacketed Terrapin 13:15, August 10, 2022 (EDT)

Are you suggesting that a trivia point being about a special move specifically prohibits it from being on a character's article? While a trivia point about any other move would be included on said page? I see no reason why the trivia point can't go there, especially since that article's trivia section is so barren already. Alex the Weeb 13:28, August 10, 2022 (EDT)

I would like to point out SW:TRIV states:

"Trivia must be on the right page. For instance, a minor glitch involving Aether belongs on Aether and not on Ike (SSBB) or Ike."

Since this trivia is Ultimate specific it probably doesn't matter much where it goes, but since the main point of the trivia is about Force Palm, my opinion is that it works better on the Force Palm page. Also I don't see a problem with a trivia section being barren, as those are the sections most prone to becoming filled with unnecessary bloat, furthermore I hardly see how 5 trivia points is "barren". Omega Toad, the Toad Warrior. (I'm the best!) 20:14, August 10, 2022 (EDT)

I mean, arguably the main point is about the tip, and how it's false. A false tip about a character seems like a good fit for the character's article to me. Alex the Weeb 04:58, August 11, 2022 (EDT)

Except the tip isn't about Lucario, it's about Force Palm. Case closed. Aidan, the Rurouni 12:52, August 11, 2022 (EDT)

It literally is though. It's about Lucario's aura, and its effect on one of Lucario's moves. Trivia about individual moves is listen on many character trivia pages. Why should this be any different? Or are you suggesting we remove every trivia point that's about one of the characters' moves, because it's "not about the character, it's about the move"? Alex the Weeb 13:05, August 11, 2022 (EDT)

(Reset indent) The tip is literally labelled under "Force Palm Throws (Side Special)". I fail to see how that has more to do with Lucario than the move itself. Yes, it touches on aura, but that's because every attack in Lucario's moveset uses that effect. What are you not getting? I said case closed. Aidan, the Rurouni 13:10, August 11, 2022 (EDT)

Alright, calm down, there's no need to go Phoenix Wright on me...

It's a move LUCARIO uses. It's not just some move floating around in the game's code, it's one of LUCARIO's moves. So it absolutely is relevant to Lucario. How can you say it shouldn't be on Lucario's trivia section, when as I've already pointed out, we regularly note quirks with characters' moves on their trivia articles, such as a trivia point about Ike's cape during Aether being on his trivia section. Alex the Weeb 13:17, August 11, 2022 (EDT)

The point isn't that Lucario uses the move, the point is that it is a move that happens to belong to Lucario. It is more relevant to the move than it is to Lucario. Again, what are you not getting? Are you about to suggest that the glitch about Lightning Chariot (you know, the one that you added) should be moved to every stage it could be performed on because of the fact that the move was being used on the STAGE?

Also, while I did fail to respond to that comment in my initial response, given that (as quoted by Omega Toad) we have a policy in place stating that trivia should be placed accordingly, we should absolutely be putting factoids relevant to moves on the pages for the moves themselves rather than character pages. I won't suggest outright deleting them, trivia is trivia, but I will suggest moving them to the correct location. Aidan, the Rurouni 13:28, August 11, 2022 (EDT)

That is not a valid analogy. Lightning Chariot does not belong to the individual stages, it belongs to Pit. But there would be nothing wrong putting it on Pit's article. Trivia about a character's move is still trivia about the character. What's wrong with putting these trivia points in a more visible location, so more people will see them, rather than dumping them on the less visited move pages? As an example, the Ike trivia I mentioned was recently featured in this video, but only because it was placed in a visible location. Had it been relegated to the move page, it wouldn't have been seen in this case. I'd imagine this applies to a lot of people who read the trivia sections on character articles, but not necessarily on smaller, lower traffic articles. And if a trivia section isn't that big, such as in this case, that's all the more reason to welcome this kind of trivia onto them. Alex the Weeb 13:35, August 11, 2022 (EDT)