Official 4BR Tier List v1.0 - Competitive Impressions

[conTAgi0n]

You're just straight up wrong about that. Shieldbreaker is Smash's version of Tomebreaker, Axebreaker, etc. Dancing Blade and counter are both skills as well. A lot of his normals are based off Marth's different attack animations in game and his victory poses are based on the poses he makes after killing an enemy. Marth is very similar to how he is in his own games. If you had said Lucina I'd have agreed a little bit, but Marth, no.

Mac stuff though. Mac's really only kinda scary if you're afraid of him. You have to respect his smash attacks, and they're pretty easy to avoid too. He struggles a bit vs shields, but what does that mean? We constantly hear that said about Fox or Cloud, but there's a difference: Fox and Cloud have much better range, start up, and end lag on their grabs. Mac doesn't have that, even then his throws don't yield him anything close to as much positional advantage either. Tbh, I'm sometimes more inclined to just pummel and grab release into ftilt than I am going to throw. Depends on how and where you land the grab though. But for the most part you're safe in shield against Mac. Not only that but he gets juggled to hell, counter's not the most reliable thing for getting down when you're above the stage, he can't contest you with aerials so you can just hit him over and over and over and push him towards the edge. For example, while the Mac v Falcon MU is even, that's because they can both **** on each other. Falcon's dash grab release at the edge shenanigans are very potent against Mac: if he jumps he gets down tilted and dies, if he waits he's usually forced to recover low and because he doesn't snap to the ledge you can punish him. Either way you kill him, you still feel sad...

http://smashboards.com/threads/summer-of-smash-week-4-ceo-karisuma-8-xanadu.438506/ You wanna check here for that stuff.

@ARGHETH addressed the Marth stuff so I won't say much about that. My point was that a "generic" design, whatever that means, isn't necessarily a bad one.

As for the Mac stuff, maybe I should clarify that I definitely don't think Mac is unbalanced or in need of nerfs or anything. Also since perhaps my last post sounds salty, maybe I should also add that I don't feel like I particularly struggle with the LM matchup. I actually tend to do pretty decently vs LM with the characters I am comfortable with. That being said, I do think that Mac can deal with shields. Certainly just sitting in shield and waiting for a shield grab will not get you far against a smart LM. LM isn't invincible in neutral but he does feel overpowering. He has to given how hopeless he is in disadvantage. I don't really like the idea of characters that feel overpowering in neutral and make up for it with extra bad disadvantage, and that is basically the definition of Little Mac.

Again, what qualifies as good or bad design is to a significant degree subjective, and I don't hold anything against LM players despite my personal dislike of his design.

 

[Frihetsanka]

So, if given the choice between 2 minute matches and 50 minute matches, which matches would go to time more often? In 2 minute matches I expect we'd see a lot of defensive play, while with 50 minute matches stalling would be pointless. Reducing the time would lead to more time outs, not less.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Even amid all these upsets Diddy Kong and Sheik have remained consistent with 9 and 6 mains respectively making it into the final bracket of CEO. There can be no question that these two characters are the best at top level right now. Especially Sheik demands the precision and consistency of a top level player to excell like that, the nerfs have turned her into an elite-tier character. Diddy is easier to play and be consistent with but he's just as good as Sheik. I couldn't say who's better in the end. Perhaps it's just not possible to tell.

Cloud is great but I predict that once more none of the Cloud players in attendance will break into the top 4 of this tournament [unless Nietono uses him as a secondary at one point or something], despite great representation. I think it's a matter of time until the technology of top level players starts to trinkle down onto high- and mid-level play and starts defusing Cloud's dominance on that level of play. He could be anywhere between 3rd and 5th with Fox and Rosalina being his main competition for a 3rd/4th place spot.

 

[Frihetsanka]

Both Diddy Kong and Sheik have been #1 in the past. They've been out for longer too, giving players more time to practice them. Cloud is fairly new, and he faced serious competition in the first few months of the game, with a dominant Sheik before 1.15 and a dominant Bayonetta before 1.16. I suspect that more and more players at a top level will pick up Cloud and do well with him.

Will Sheik and Diddy Kong be as prominent in a year from now, or will Cloud catch up (assuming no patches)? It's probably a good thing though that not everyone thinks that Cloud is #1 (or Diddy Kong, or Sheik), that probably means that the top tiers are less unbalanced than before.

 

[Nobie]

I think the most Fire Emblem-ey part of Marth is the fact that his dash and dash attack are so terrible in terms of startup and end lag.

Fire Emblem's a series where if you charge in head first and guns blazing, you're going to get your butt handed to you. Marth's bad dash properties (he also has some good ones such as speed and low profile!) capture the Fire Emblem feeling.

Is it intentional? I dunno.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Both Diddy Kong and Sheik have been #1 in the past. They've been out for longer too, giving players more time to practice them. Cloud is fairly new, and he faced serious competition in the first few months of the game, with a dominant Sheik before 1.15 and a dominant Bayonetta before 1.16. I suspect that more and more players at a top level will pick up Cloud and do well with him.

Cloud already has a billion people repping him one way or another at top level, whether it's OGs like Rain and M2K, 'newschool' people like Tweek or dudes that use him as a secondary character [Komorikiri, Sodrek, Leo, ... list can be expanded basically however much you want]. He's also not super hard to get the hang of so I think we've seen about as much of Cloud as there is to the character. In the future I see him very present in the metagame because he's a great secondary and downright stupid in doubles but he won't dominate singles like people fear imo.

But it's a moot point anyway because smash 4 really doesn't work like a lot of other competitive games. It's not like in Brawl or Melee where the ideal route for the most part is to focus entirely on your main character, ideally a top 2 character of your respective game and not stretch yourself too thin via playing other characters. In Smash 4 you REALLY want to have a secondary character in your pocket if you want to optimize your chances at winning, even if you already play a top tier. That's why people, including myself, keep expressing that sentiment that a tier list for smash 4 has to be pretty useless at this point. Rosalina may not even be a top 5 character anymore technically but she's still one of the best characters to pick as a main - better than, say, Mario whom a lot of people have started to place higher on their personal tier lists than her [because he's "solo-viable"].

I think when it comes to viability and tournament performance in smash 4 a good rule of thumb would be: "If you want to optimize your chances at winning a tournament you're going to main Sheik, Diddy Kong, Fox, Sonic or Rosalina and you're going to second Cloud or Mewtwo." That should cover just about everything you'll ever need in a competitive environment but it also leaves tons of room for variety.

Edit: Ofc you can throw in characters like ZSS or Bayonetta into the mix of viable mains but the general idea remains the same and I think it largely invalidates tier lists for smash 4.

 

[Shady Shaymin]

Cloud already has a billion people repping him one way or another at top level, whether it's OGs like Rain and M2K, 'newschool' people like Tweek or dudes that use him as a secondary character [Komorikiri, Sodrek, Leo, ... list can be expanded basically however much you want]. He's also not super hard to get the hang of so I think we've seen about as much of Cloud as there is to the character. In the future I see him very present in the metagame because he's a great secondary and downright stupid in doubles but he won't dominate singles like people fear imo.

But it's a moot point anyway because smash 4 really doesn't work like a lot of other competitive games. It's not like in Brawl or Melee where the ideal route for the most part is to focus entirely on your main character, ideally a top 2 character of your respective game and not stretch yourself too thin via playing other characters. In Smash 4 you REALLY want to have a secondary character in your pocket if you want to optimize your chances at winning, even if you already play a top tier. That's why people, including myself, keep expressing that sentiment that a tier list for smash 4 has to be pretty useless at this point. Rosalina may not even be a top 5 character anymore technically but she's still one of the best characters to pick as a main - better than, say, Mario whom a lot of people have started to place higher on their personal tier lists than her [because he's "solo-viable"].

I think when it comes to viability and tournament performance in smash 4 a good rule of thumb would be: "If you want to optimize your chances at winning a tournament you're going to main Sheik, Diddy Kong, Fox, Sonic or Rosalina and you're going to second Cloud or Mewtwo." That should cover just about everything you'll ever need in a competitive environment but it also leaves tons of room for variety.

Edit: Ofc you can throw in characters like ZSS or Bayonetta into the mix of viable mains but the general idea remains the same and I think it largely invalidates tier lists for smash 4.

Just out of curiosity, why do you put Mewtwo in a category with Cloud as best pockets in the game? I find that Mewtwo works very well for me as a secondary to Diddy, but I know that mewtwo is by no means a traditional pick as a secondary character.

 

[Emblem Lord]

Good overall toolbox. Good aerial poke/kill move with fair. Good ground poke with long range in dtilt. Doesnt commit to this at all. Confusion puts opponent in mix-up situation and does good damage. Has a projectile to control space.

He fits the bill of a strong fundamental char with several low commitment tools.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Mewtwo just has good properties for a counterpick character. A clear gameplan that's not terribly hard to execute on a fundamental level, a number of obvious strengths and murderous efficiency once he has momentum on his side. That's the kind of stuff that can save your ass if you're a game down in a set and Mewtwo doesn't seem to have any major or prominent counter so he's reliable in the same way Cloud is.

It's true that he's not a common secondary pick but I personally don't see a good reason for that. In some ways he's even better than Cloud as a secondary because with Mewtwo as your pocket character of choice you can avoid the dreaded Cloud ditto and stand a far better chance against Sheik. So depending on who your main character is you should think twice about just defaulting to Cloud as your alt.-character. If you play Fox for example you hardly benefit from Cloud's power because he can't cover the Sheik matchup sufficiently, something Mewtwo can.

 

[blackghost]

Cloud already has a billion people repping him one way or another at top level, whether it's OGs like Rain and M2K, 'newschool' people like Tweek or dudes that use him as a secondary character [Komorikiri, Sodrek, Leo, ... list can be expanded basically however much you want]. He's also not super hard to get the hang of so I think we've seen about as much of Cloud as there is to the character. In the future I see him very present in the metagame because he's a great secondary and downright stupid in doubles but he won't dominate singles like people fear imo.

But it's a moot point anyway because smash 4 really doesn't work like a lot of other competitive games. It's not like in Brawl or Melee where the ideal route for the most part is to focus entirely on your main character, ideally a top 2 character of your respective game and not stretch yourself too thin via playing other characters. In Smash 4 you REALLY want to have a secondary character in your pocket if you want to optimize your chances at winning, even if you already play a top tier. That's why people, including myself, keep expressing that sentiment that a tier list for smash 4 has to be pretty useless at this point. Rosalina may not even be a top 5 character anymore technically but she's still one of the best characters to pick as a main - better than, say, Mario whom a lot of people have started to place higher on their personal tier lists than her [because he's "solo-viable"].

I think when it comes to viability and tournament performance in smash 4 a good rule of thumb would be: "If you want to optimize your chances at winning a tournament you're going to main Sheik, Diddy Kong, Fox, Sonic or Rosalina and you're going to second Cloud or Mewtwo." That should cover just about everything you'll ever need in a competitive environment but it also leaves tons of room for variety.

Edit: Ofc you can throw in characters like ZSS or Bayonetta into the mix of viable mains but the general idea remains the same and I think it largely invalidates tier lists for smash 4.

prepatch bayonetta wasnt solo viable. demonstrated by her not winning anything and even prepatch she lost too hard to diddy to win a major event as a solo main.
now she needs a secondary that deals with zoners.
watching i think only shiek, diddy, and cloud are definate solo viable

 

[C0rvus]

Rosa is probably solo viable, despite her having a few bad matchups. I think Dabuz winning events is a testament to that fact. At top level, it seems like the Cloud matchup is doable, and Meta Knight is a dying breed. Only Abadango has beaten Dabuz with Meta Knight, unless I am mistaken. Dabuz has also beaten Nairo before. When we discuss solo viability, I think our lens is top level, correct? In this case, Fox is probably also solo viable, and I think you could make an argument for Sonic, personally.

 

[soniczx123]

Rosa is probably solo viable, despite her having a few bad matchups. I think Dabuz winning events is a testament to that fact. At top level, it seems like the Cloud matchup is doable, and Meta Knight is a dying breed. Only Abadango has beaten Dabuz with Meta Knight, unless I am mistaken. Dabuz has also beaten Nairo before. When we discuss solo viability, I think our lens is top level, correct? In this case, Fox is probably also solo viable, and I think you could make an argument for Sonic, personally.

With Cloud in the meta, Sonic being solo-viable is a hard sell atm.

 

[C0rvus]

I figured as much. His Cloud matchup seems worse than Rosa's. Sonic did recently win something, but it was a Cloud secondary. He's very close to solo viable.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Kels beat M2K at Apex. It's a losing matchup but not a terrible one. Sonic doesn't have terrible matchup and people are quick to forget that the US Sonic metagame isn't where it could be when you compare it with Japan's.

prepatch bayonetta wasnt solo viable. demonstrated by her not winning anything and even prepatch she lost too hard to diddy to win a major event as a solo main.
now she needs a secondary that deals with zoners.
watching i think only shiek, diddy, and cloud are definate solo viable

I don't know what this post has to do with anything I said though ...

 

[soniczx123]

Kels beat M2K at Apex. It's a losing matchup but not a terrible one. Sonic doesn't have terrible matchup and people are quick to forget that the US Sonic metagame isn't where it could be when you compare it with Japan's.

I can agree to that. The West has a hard time figuring out how to play this character the right way thanks to their being multiple Sonics doing well with different styles while not being considered optimal. That coupled with the massive ****storm with the lower level players, not many are picking him and trying to develop him (The Discord group are trying their best **)

In my personal opinion, is that Sonic isn't played optimally by anyone atm.

Megaman and Fox. Fox isn't so bad anymore but Megaman is terrible.

I would honestly say that the EU (yes we exist) is more advanced in the some part of the meta than the rest of the world, in particular punishes and movement (courtesy to Ixis for this)

 

[Ninety]

You're just straight up wrong about that. Shieldbreaker is Smash's version of Tomebreaker, Axebreaker, etc. Dancing Blade and counter are both skills as well. A lot of his normals are based off Marth's different attack animations in game and his victory poses are based on the poses he makes after killing an enemy. Marth is very similar to how he is in his own games. If you had said Lucina I'd have agreed a little bit, but Marth, no.

Come now. Literally the only thing Shield Breaker has that's even tangentially related to the -breaker skills is the name. Dancing Blade is only in Fates, as part of Marth's unique class which is based on his Smash appearance. You're mixing up the chicken and egg here.

Really, the only Fire Emblem character in Smash who even tangentially parallels his home game (which is nearly impossible, because fighting game and tactical RPGs are about as different genres as you could hope for) is Robin. You have to mind your effective range, which weapons to use in which situation, durability, and suffer because you didn't pick the Speed asset.

EDIT: Well I got thoroughly ninja'd

 

[meleebrawler]

Come now. Literally the only thing Shield Breaker has that's even tangentially related to the -breaker skills is the name. Dancing Blade is only in Fates, as part of Marth's unique class which is based on his Smash appearance. You're mixing up the chicken and egg here.

Really, the only Fire Emblem character in Smash who even tangentially parallels his home game (which is nearly impossible, because fighting game and tactical RPGs are about as different genres as you could hope for) is Robin. You have to mind your effective range, which weapons to use in which situation, durability, and suffer because you didn't pick the Speed asset.

EDIT: Well I got thoroughly ninja'd

In Marth's defence, his game being the first in the series leaves little to actually take. No supports, no skills, no weapon triangle, heck Marth himself couldn't even promote at all. It was just raw stats and the occasional personal weapon that set characters apart. For Marth, prior to the Falchion, he has a Rapier, a weapon that deals bonus damage to cavalry and armour (hence Shieldbreaker). Dancing Blade, if anything is loosely based on either the Astra skill in later titles or Brave weapons allowing four strikes with sufficient speed.

Also Robin's the only one with durability because he's the only without unbreakable weapons.

 

[jespoke]

Also Robin's the only one with durability because he's the only without unbreakable weapons.

...... [Glares at Roy and his freaking 20 durability ultimate weapon]

 

[Fatmanonice]

That makes getting a stock lead and intentionally committing to a time out 3 minutes into a match the optimal strategy for like half of the cast.

This. Can you imagine a 3 stock match against a top level that actually knows how to properly stall? Good luck if your character is slow, has few kill options, doesn't have a reflector, or is even remotely big. I like the 2 stock format because it makes stalling a lot harder and people choking while trying to stall happens all the time because of the pressure. People must not remember how BS stalling was in Brawl and this game has characters that are significantly more capable of doing it.

 

[soniczx123]

This. Can you imagine a 3 stock match against a top level that actually knows how to properly stall? Good luck if your character is slow, has few kill options, doesn't have a reflector, or is even remotely big. I like the 2 stock format because it makes stalling a lot harder and people choking while trying to stall happens all the time because of the pressure. People must not remember how BS stalling was in Brawl and this game has characters that are significantly more capable of doing it.

How would 2 stock make stalling harder? Wouldn't it make it easier and being a viable option earlier than in 3 stock? You can just stall after taking the first stock, unlike in 3 stock where 2 stock have to be taken for stalling to be viable. At that point, the other players has a more likely chance to make it even.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

How would 2 stock make stalling harder? Wouldn't it make it easier and being a viable option earlier than in 3 stock? You can just stall after taking the first stock, unlike in 3 stock where 2 stock have to be taken for stalling to be viable. At that point, the other players has a more likely chance to make it even.

On a fundamental level, more stock/time makes campy play and stalling harder to accomplish, that much is undeniable.

With that said, I can see where the worry comes into play. The primary concern isn't so much that it becomes easier, no, it's that the gap between stocks/percentage can become so much larger making the comeback factor harder to accomplish.

Many of the characters Fatmanonice listed have extremely non-committal options. Take Villager's fair for instance. This move allows him to continuously pressure the opponent while keeping his distance and staying farther back. Ultimately, his goal isn't even to hit the opponent, it's to limit their options. Should the attack hit, the Villager has now increased the size of the percentage gap. Should the attack be shielded/rolled away from/spot dodged/jumped over, the Villager has altered the opponent's positioning, movement, stage control, and temporary gameplan. Unless the opponent reflects the fair AND it hits Villy, they are essentially back to the beginning of the noted situation.

Now take a character like Sonic. With the combination of his godlike run-speed and spin dash, he can play an amazing hit and run style. This leaves the opponent with two options: (1) read his approach with spin-dash and attack/grab him out of it or (2) read his landing option and punish before he does. When Sonic is in spindash, he is in control. There's nothing you can throw out to cover multiple options. With autocancel dair in play (which many people don't know how to deal with) a slight mis-spacing or tech flub could lead to YOU eating an fsmash, grab, or another combo set-up.

(And for those who are uninformed, when Sonic's dair auto-cancels, the hitbox is gone, so you can basically stand underneath him and throw out a hitbox).

I also hear people act as though rage will "take a nerf" in a three stock format. I'm curious to see how that view is affected when Lucario's start to take stocks back to back. When rage DK or Bowser get an opponent who struggles to kill to 50% 3 times and takes ends the match like that.

...or the alternative, where the opponent is too afraid to commit in fear of losing a stock too early, and Bowser/DK/Lucario not having the best tools to approach with, so we're stuck in an 8 minute match of spaced aerials. That's gonna be a blast to watch.

Now most of this strictly applies to non-top level play. If I were arguing for top level play, three stocks all the way, but since mid-level play is in the question, you have to realize how different players are going to react to the situations and how this could be problematic.

 

[Rysir]

Would it also not be more logical to just finish the person off in a 3 stock match anyway? Why stall when you got 3 stocks and your opponent has 1? That position would more likely cause someone to go neck deep to finish someone off instead of hanging back for several mins.

 

[blackghost]

But it's a moot point anyway because smash 4 really doesn't work like a lot of other competitive games.


Edit: Ofc you can throw in characters like ZSS or Bayonetta into the mix of viable mains but the general idea remains the same and I think it largely invalidates tier lists for smash 4.

smash 4 probably will end up like ultra street fighter 4. you will need multiple strong vharactera and maybe a surprise character couuter pick.
tier lists arent invalidated becuase you need more matchup experience. tier lists are to describe what characters strengths and weaknesses compare to the rest of the cast. diddy and shieks tools are objectively better than robins for example but metaknight tools are especially good agianst rosalina.
what people dont seem to get is just because character x beats character y doesnt mean x is worse than y objectively.
lastly bayo isnt solo viable currently her matchups with shiek and diddyand any decent zoner are too bad to be solo viable.

 

[Ulevo]

This. Can you imagine a 3 stock match against a top level that actually knows how to properly stall? Good luck if your character is slow, has few kill options, doesn't have a reflector, or is even remotely big. I like the 2 stock format because it makes stalling a lot harder and people choking while trying to stall happens all the time because of the pressure. People must not remember how BS stalling was in Brawl and this game has characters that are significantly more capable of doing it.

Not to mention the time factor. I don't care what anyone says about how tournaments will run "on time" if properly scheduled. That is not the point. Matches are mentally taxing and having to play them for longer is not beneficial to the players in this regard. It is already difficult to avoid burn out in a large bracket with pools, which is the entire reason pool floating is even up for debate.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

So according to Ally he's out, lost to Zenyou (Mario) in losers (round 1).

 

[BunbUn129]

49th place.

 

[Fatmanonice]

How would 2 stock make stalling harder? Wouldn't it make it easier and being a viable option earlier than in 3 stock? You can just stall after taking the first stock, unlike in 3 stock where 2 stock have to be taken for stalling to be viable. At that point, the other players has a more likely chance to make it even.

I'd argue that there's more pressure and the player is more likely to choke when they hardcore camp in this scenario. If you're two stocks ahead, you can technically stall for two whole stocks. That gives the player a lot more breathing room. Also, imagine a match where a player keeps doing understage shenanigans for a whole match. Several of the characters I listed can not only camp really well but do this too. Imagine Brawl's planking but with characters that actually have good zoning projectiles. As Ulevo said, this would cause a lot of tournaments to drag out because there are some characters that have very few answers to these kinds of strategies and matches like this are downright exhausting to play even if your character can answer it.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

I'm really starting to believe Smash 4's skill ceiling is just too low. You can argue about 2 stocks but huge upsets happen way too often in this game for it to just be a ruleset issue.

I mean it's one thing for say a top 20 player to occasionally lose a bit early. It's another for players considered top 5 in the entire world to get 49th place (first Nairo at Pound iirc, now Ally at CEO).

Trela also drowned in pools after destroying the West Coast recently, Zero lost in pools etc. This game is just way too inconsistent even at the highest levels of play.

 

[YerTheBestAROUND]

I'm really starting to believe Smash 4's skill ceiling is just too low. You can argue about 2 stocks but huge upsets happen way too often in this game for it to just be a ruleset issue.

I mean it's one thing for say a top 20 player to occasionally lose a bit early. It's another for players considered top 5 in the entire world to get 49th place (first Nairo at Pound iirc, now Ally at CEO).

Trela also drowned in pools after destroying the West Coast recently, Zero lost in pools etc. This game is just way too inconsistent even at the highest levels of play.

This game isn't even two years old. Everyone is getting better. Doesn't matter if you are a top player or any other player, there is still stuff to learn, stuff to master. Many low tiers have hardly been explored as far as they can go. This game is young, no one is a master of it yet. Consistency will come later in the game's life. Just calm down and wait.
Always complaining about something, You want diversity, then complain when it happens. You want top players to be dethroned, then when it happens the game's suddenly inconsistent and is automatically going to die. WHAT DO YOU WANT?!

 

[Deleted member 269706]

I'm really starting to believe Smash 4's skill ceiling is just too low. You can argue about 2 stocks but huge upsets happen way too often in this game for it to just be a ruleset issue.

I mean it's one thing for say a top 20 player to occasionally lose a bit early. It's another for players considered top 5 in the entire world to get 49th place (first Nairo at Pound iirc, now Ally at CEO).

Trela also drowned in pools after destroying the West Coast recently, Zero lost in pools etc. This game is just way too inconsistent even at the highest levels of play.

For the love of- can we please stop with this? This is literally the first tournament something like this has happened. Out of how many tournaments? You guys need to chill out.

Other players are finally reaching the higher levels; can we stop acting like that's a bad thing?

Look, if Prince Ramen, and Jade, and all these other new names made it to top 8, you're point might be valid, but the fact of the matter is, they really haven't done much. They had a good set, maybe had MU knowledge on their side, and clutched it out against a high level player. It happens. After that, they went onto lose their next match and that was it for them.

Allow me to tell you the tale of a player you may have heard of, though at the time no one had. He goes by the name Hungrybox. In a pools match way back when, he beat a player known as Mew2King (maybe you've heard of him), one of the most dominant players of the game, especially at the time. Little did anyone know, this player that no one had heard of, using a character that very few people used is now arguably the best player in the world.

Inconsistencies are a part of tournaments, if they weren't we wouldn't have them. And what's more- the game is young, not even two years old. The characters are different, and the play-styles are diverse; not to bring up the vast amount of characters. Our top players have only been playing as long as the rest of us, it's not like Melee where their best players have been playing for 10+ years.

Stop paying attention to the bad. ESAM, Nairo, Dabuz, Nientono, Mr. R, VoiD, Larry Lurr, Zinoto, Fatality, FOW, Abadango, Mr. E, Pink Fresh, False, Tweek, Anti, and Hyuga (along with many others) all made it on winners side. But this game is just too inconsistent, right?

 

[LancerStaff]

Game just ain't consistent. Additional games or stocks don't fix it well enoug because of other drawbacks.

With things like Witch Time, Aura, Tippers, LCS, and even shield breaks, do you really expect the game to be that much better over time?

 

[Deleted member 269706]

Game just ain't consistent. Additional games or stocks don't fix it well enoug because of other drawbacks.

With things like Witch Time, Aura, Tippers, LCS, and even shield breaks, do you really expect the game to be that much better over time?

Melee has shine*, rest*, wobbling*, knee, laser, tippers...your point?
*Can potentially kill at 0%

 

[Pyr]

I'm really starting to believe Smash 4's skill ceiling is just too low. You can argue about 2 stocks but huge upsets happen way too often in this game for it to just be a ruleset issue.

I mean it's one thing for say a top 20 player to occasionally lose a bit early. It's another for players considered top 5 in the entire world to get 49th place (first Nairo at Pound iirc, now Ally at CEO).

Trela also drowned in pools after destroying the West Coast recently, Zero lost in pools etc. This game is just way too inconsistent even at the highest levels of play.

You asked the same thing a year ago (see: http://smashboards.com/threads/is-smash-4-already-dying-competitively.403110/).

You're just as wrong now as you were then.

And, considering Zero won for a solid year in a row, and it is mostly always the same players getting to top 8 at events, I'd say things are consistent enough. I mean, it's not like all 3 of the other games didn't have their game-changing jank.
Edit:

Melee has shine*, rest*, wobbling*, knee, laser, tippers...your point?
*Can potentially kill at 0%

He beat me to it.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

For the love of- can we please stop with this? This is literally the first tournament something like this has happened. Out of how many tournaments? You guys need to chill out.

Other players are finally reaching the higher levels; can we stop acting like that's a bad thing?

Look, if Prince Ramen, and Jade, and all these other new names made it to top 8, you're point might be valid, but the fact of the matter is, they really haven't done much. They had a good set, maybe had MU knowledge on their side, and clutched it out against a high level player. It happens. After that, they went onto lose their next match and that was it for them.

Allow me to tell you the tale of a player you may have heard of, though at the time no one had. He goes by the name Hungrybox. In a pools match way back when, he beat a player known as Mew2King (maybe you've heard of him), one of the most dominant players of the game, especially at the time. Little did anyone know, this player that no one had heard of, using a character that very few people used is now arguably the best player in the world.

Inconsistencies are a part of tournaments, if they weren't we wouldn't have them. And what's more- the game is young, not even two years old. The characters are different, and the play-styles are diverse; not to bring up the vast amount of characters. Our top players have only been playing as long as the rest of us, it's not like Melee where their best players have been playing for 10+ years.

Stop paying attention to the bad. ESAM, Nairo, Dabuz, Nientono, Mr. R, VoiD, Larry Lurr, Zinoto, Fatality, FOW, Abadango, Mr. E, Pink Fresh, False, Tweek, Anti, and Hyuga (along with many others) all made it on winners side. But this game is just too inconsistent, right?

First tournament this has happened? Hmm let's see just off the top of my head:

Ally and Void recently lost to different GnW players (Ally in pools)
Void and Vinnie lost to Bowser
Nairo 49th at Pound, also lost to different Bowser recently
Japan in general

And countless more examples if you bothered to look.

This isn't new for Smash 4, it happens all the time and that's a problem. It's hard to take the game seriously when a top 5 ranked player can lose to players not even ranked top 100.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

First tournament this has happened? Hmm let's see just off the top of my head:

Ally and Void recently lost to different GnW players (Ally in pools)
Void and Vinnie lost to Bowser
Nairo 49th at Pound, also lost to different Bowser recently
Japan in general

And countless more examples if you bothered to look.

This isn't new for Smash 4, it happens all the time and that's a problem. It's hard to take the game seriously when a top 5 ranked player can lose to players not even ranked top 100.

When I say first tournament this has happened, I'm talking about the number of players who have gone into losers so early in the bracket. (Trela, ZeRo, Ally, falln, Umeki, Mars, etc.)

But if a few minor upsets here and there are enough for you to call this game too inconsistent and have a low skill ceiling, then there is nothing I can say to change your mind. Nairo getting 49th was weird, yeah, but it's not like Mango and M2k haven't done that. Void lost to a Bowser, maybe we were wrong about Bowser in the tier list. We hardly have an established top 10, let alone top 100.

You don't realize how underdeveloped this game is.

Maybe you're right though, maybe the skill ceiling is too low. Prove me wrong and go make top 64 at a major. The way you're talking makes it sound pretty easy.

 

[FeelMeUp]

I dunno why people keep responding to Scrub when all he does is whine about Smash 4.

Back to important things:
Lately it seems like the meta really is in a complex counterpicking state.
Sheik holds Cloud back.
Zoners/Rosa can hold Diddy back.
Rosa holds Fox back.
MK/Cloud hold Rosa back.
Cloud holds half the roster and Sonic/Ness back.
Sheik holds herself back.
Diddy holds Mewtwo/ZSS back.
etc.

 

[san.]

In previous games, there were more things that separated the best from others. More deep DI patterns that you must know, the existence of more powerful SDI, more powerful neutral options.

This game has many more coin flip situations and differences between players can be a bit more subtle than they used to be (but still there of course). Even medium level players can force some of those coin flip situations and anyone can guess wrong.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

When I say first tournament this has happened, I'm talking about the number of players who have gone into losers so early in the bracket. (Trela, ZeRo, Ally, falln, Umeki, Mars, etc.)

But if a few minor upsets here and there are enough for you to call this game too inconsistent and have a low skill ceiling, then there is nothing I can say to change your mind. Nairo getting 49th was weird, yeah, but it's not like Mango and M2k haven't done that. Void lost to a Bowser, maybe we were wrong about Bowser in the tier list. We hardly have an established top 10, let alone top 100.

You don't realize how underdeveloped this game is.

Maybe you're right though, maybe the skill ceiling is too low. Prove me wrong and go make top 64 at a major. The way you're talking makes it sound pretty easy.

The evidence for it being easy is that every single tournament these days, a top 10 calibur player gets upset. This suggests it's easier than it has ever been for other players to become good enough to occasionally take sets from these top players. No, they won't actually win the touranments or even make top 8s but a few sets here and there is feasible.

Mango and M2K have definitely not gotten 49th in modern times. M2K almost always makes top 8 and it's considered huge if he doesn't. Mango almost always makes top 5 and it's considered huge when he doesn't (in the last few years I don't even think he's not made top 8 at a major outside of 1 exception). Even on their worst days, Melee top players don't seem to perform nearly as badly as Smash 4 top players. Unless you can give me examples within the last few years of top 6 Melee players losing in pools or round 1 in bracket.

Whereas as far as Smash 4 goes everytime I think I can take it seriously, random players (random in this case meaning unranked/unknown, not bad) beats rank 10 or higher in the world. Tell me this doesn't happen.

Edit:

Nietono coming off 3rd at Apex just lost 2-1 to Dath, a Robin player.

 

[soniczx123]

The evidence for it being easy is that every single tournament these days, a top 10 calibur player gets upset. This suggests it's easier than it has ever been for other players to become good enough to occasionally take sets from these top players. No, they won't actually win the touranments or even make top 8s but a few sets here and there is feasible.

Mango and M2K have definitely not gotten 49th in modern times. M2K almost always makes top 8 and it's considered huge if he doesn't. Mango almost always makes top 5 and it's considered huge when he doesn't (in the last few years I don't even think he's not made top 8 at a major outside of 1 exception). Even on their worst days, Melee top players don't seem to perform nearly as badly as Smash 4 top players. Unless you can give me examples within the last few years of top 6 Melee players losing in pools or round 1 in bracket.

Whereas as far as Smash 4 goes everytime I think I can take it seriously, random players (random in this case meaning unranked/unknown, not bad) beats rank 10 or higher in the world. Tell me this doesn't happen.

Edit:

Nietono coming off 3rd at Apex just lost 2-1 to Dath, a Robin player.

You have to consider that Melee has been out for years compared to Smash 4, so everything is more defined and explored in that game. Smash 4 is still a new game in terms of the characters that can do well in this game along with their potential.

 

[meleebrawler]

In previous games, there were more things that separated the best from others. More deep DI patterns that you must know, the existence of more powerful SDI, more powerful neutral options.

This game has many more coin flip situations and differences between players can be a bit more subtle than they used to be (but still there of course). Even medium level players can force some of those coin flip situations and anyone can guess wrong.

There's always some element of chance in any fighting game. The trick to not making it feel overbearing or cheesy is having these "coin-flips" occur often enough that the odds average out.