Talk:Meteor smash
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Archives
There are no archives provided for this page.Please specify the archive count or remove this template from this page.
Separating "intentional" from "incidental"
I've always had the opinion that listing pointless, trapping-only meteor smashes beside attacks designed to KO off the bottom is a bad idea. It is slightly confusing and most users will probably only care about one at a time. Seeing as this page is one of the biggest on the wiki, I suggest we split incidental meteor smashes onto a subpage and leave all the intentional ones here. Toomai Glittershine 
The Undirigible 22:06, 5 May 2012 (EDT)
- We could do a split like that, though we should use different names, as "incidental" with the other being "intentional" seems to imply something was a meteor smash due to a programming mistake, something we are completely incapable of verifying. Omega Tyrant
14:17, 6 May 2012 (EDT) - How would we define a "pointless" meteor smash from an "intentional" one? Some attacks have meteor smash hitboxes that are obviously designed to link into the other hits, such as Sonic's up smash, but others aren't so cut and dried. For example, would King Dedede's down aerial meteor smash be considered pointless or intentional? Mousehunter321 (talk · contributions) 14:21, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
Maybe we could use "incidental" for the "pointless" meteor smashes (the ones whose primary purpose is to keep opponents in range for the rest of the attack) and not have a specific name for intentional ones?
Dedede's dair would be incidental, since as far as I'm aware it's not feasible to avoid connecting with the final hit. Toomai Glittershine The Emissary 15:40, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
- I'm failing to see how this is in any way a useful categorization. I think it's more likely to cause confusion than provide any useful information. Miles (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
- The point is to split our sixth-fattest page into meteor smashes that can actually be used as such and meteor smashes that happen to exist just because a multi-hit attack needs downwards-hitting hitboxes. Users likely only care about meteor smashes that are practical to meteor smash with; if they're interested in those that are only there for technical reasons, we'd link to the subpage. Toomai Glittershine The Honcho 19:10, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
- The point is to split our sixth-fattest page into meteor smashes that can actually be used as such and meteor smashes that happen to exist just because a multi-hit attack needs downwards-hitting hitboxes. Users likely only care about meteor smashes that are practical to meteor smash with; if they're interested in those that are only there for technical reasons, we'd link to the subpage. Toomai Glittershine
- Dedede can land right after the initial hit (it's also feasible for the opponent to get hit by the tip of it and SDI below). I've done it to people a few times. Also, look at my post on why "incidental" should not be used. Omega Tyrant 17:19, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
- I thought your post was complaining about "intentional", not "incidental". I fail to see how "incidental" - for which I believe the definition is "not the primary purpose of something" - can be implied to mean "there by mistake". Dedede's dair is still incidental because when you're designing a multi-hit attack you intend for the last hit to be the one that matters. Toomai Glittershine The Honcho 19:10, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
- The definition of incidental is: "Loosely associated; existing as a byproduct, tangent, or accident." You also didn't say anything about not using "intentional".
- I thought your post was complaining about "intentional", not "incidental". I fail to see how "incidental" - for which I believe the definition is "not the primary purpose of something" - can be implied to mean "there by mistake". Dedede's dair is still incidental because when you're designing a multi-hit attack you intend for the last hit to be the one that matters. Toomai Glittershine
- As for alternate titles, Toast suggested "nonconventional" on the IRC, which I believe to be a better fit. Omega Tyrant 19:40, 6 May 2012 (EDT)
- How about "minor"? A lot shorter and gets across the idea of being less useful than normal ones (which would just be called "meteor smashes" with no adjective). Toomai Glittershine The Riotous 21:30, 10 May 2012 (EDT)
- I would still go with "nonconventional". "Minor" doesn't exactly imply that the meteor smash doesn't work as your typical "hit the recovering opponent down to their death" meteor, and could instead be mistaken to imply these meteor smashes are just ineffective/barely effective (such as Fox's dair, which while not very effective, is still a conventional meteor smash). Omega Tyrant 21:54, 10 May 2012 (EDT)
- Well I guess we can always change the name later, the main point is to split the page.
- I will note though that maybe "unconventional" is better than "nonconventional". Seems to flow better to me, and Google gives twice the results for it. Toomai Glittershine The Inconceivable 21:59, 10 May 2012 (EDT)
- I would still go with "nonconventional". "Minor" doesn't exactly imply that the meteor smash doesn't work as your typical "hit the recovering opponent down to their death" meteor, and could instead be mistaken to imply these meteor smashes are just ineffective/barely effective (such as Fox's dair, which while not very effective, is still a conventional meteor smash). Omega Tyrant
- How about "minor"? A lot shorter and gets across the idea of being less useful than normal ones (which would just be called "meteor smashes" with no adjective). Toomai Glittershine
- As for alternate titles, Toast suggested "nonconventional" on the IRC, which I believe to be a better fit. Omega Tyrant
