Do you believe every character is viable on a national level?

[Deleted member]

Time for another dumb thread by yours truly. If this is better suited to be in Competitive Discussion rather than here then I don't mind it being moved.

The question explains itself, but this is another one of those things that pops up in my mind frequently when it comes to Smash 4's metagame. I've had many people think that every character in this game is viable at the highest level and that nobody in Smash 4 is truly bad, and while I personally disagree I wanna see others' opinions on the matter.

 

[Andyomon00]

This is a really interesting topic of discussion and I'm looking forward to the conversations this creates.

As for my own two cents, I don't think the every character is viable on a national level.

While a majority of the cast are at least somewhat viable, there are characters that absolutely get stomped on at the national level. Characters like Ganon and Charizard are never seen outside of a handful of locals because their weaknesses are so detrimental to them that any character with a decent enough kit can outpace them.It also doesn't help that the current meta is dominated by characters with absurdly good data and options.

 

[LunarWingCloud]

To be brutally honest, no. Since the dawn of competitive fighting games it's always been a fact that every game has its good and bad characters, and even Smash 4 has its fair share of characters who likely will not place very high on a national level. That is not to say in the larger scope that they are that bad of characters, as most of the cast isn't too bad, but on a competitive level you cannot afford to use characters who have even the smallest disadvantages against a considerable number of other relevant characters. Therefore, no, not everyone will be viable. Thankfully, more characters ARE viable than ever before, but that isn't every character.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

Nah. It's unfortunate but when it comes down to it, I don't think any characters lower than top 10 would really be able to take a major. It's a harsh reality but that's how I've been starting to feel. The top tiers have such dominant MUs over everyone else. I do however believe that ALMOST any character can place top 32 on a national level assuming they don't run into multiple ridiculous players on the way there.

 

[FamilyTeam]

You won't see a Lucina winning a national anytime soon. So no.
Not even PM has perfect balancing, so this game is no different.

 

[ArcanaXIII]

While I do believe that there are certainly more characters that can hold their own against even the top tiers, there are some characters that just can't keep up and just lose horribly. They are just miles behind the top tiers and just get absolutely destroyed because their options are just terrible.

 

[Wintermelon43]

Top Tier:Easily viable

High Tier:Still viable

Upper Mid tier:Most likely viable

Mid Tierrobably viable

Lower Mid tier:Slight chance of viable

Everything else is defitenly not viable

 

[nedskii-]

Without shiek, yes. And extreme hard work with perfect practice. But shiek existing changes everything. Basically think, "can my character beat a high level shiek" if you are planning to go to a national level and place 1-5 type

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

I'm not all the sure. Palutena definitely isn't very viable with her poor moveset, and I've often had the impression that she's worse than even Zelda.

 

[Deleted member]

I'm not all the sure. Palutena definitely isn't very viable with her poor moveset, and I've often had the impression that she's worse than even Zelda.

Palutena has won a Canadian national courtesy of IceNinja, which isn't really something Zelda has ever achieved. Both are bad characters but she definitely has more going for her than Zelda.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

Palutena has won a Canadian national courtesy of IceNinja, which isn't really something Zelda has ever achieved. Both are bad characters but she definitely has more going for her than Zelda.

I guess I'm just saying this because of Palutena's lack of any efficient offensive attacks; a lot of her KO moves are easily whiffed with their inconvenient hitboxes. Zelda is at least fortunate to have more manageable KO moves, even if they aren't the greatest, and she does have more long-ranged options to use, thanks to Din's Fire and Phantom Slash; both of which can potentially make KOs.

 

[Murlough]

I think that every character can win a national. However I don't think many of the characters are viable.

Viability, to me, means that a character can win with the exact same amount of effort put into that character as another. So, say Zero's Shiek versus Nairo's ZSS, both characters are viable as both characters have had tons of effort put into them by the respective players on top of the fact that they are already good.

Now say, *Insert name here*'s Mii Swordfighter went into a national. The competition is full of people who not only main higher tier characters but also put tons of effort into getting those characters up to par with other competitors.

Well, for Mii Swordfighter to even stand a chance against the Marios and Pikachus he would have to have a ridiculously higher level of effort put into him.

When a character requires that the player using him must be years ahead of the competition to win, that indicates low-viability to me.

Sure, every character could win hypothetically. But to do so would require so much effort that doing so would be an unviable decision.

 

[Arcticbanana]

I think it's obvious that some characters are straight-up better than others. Take little mac for example, stand on the top platform of battlefield and he basically loses. I could go on about how every low tier is bad but you get the idea.

 

[TurboLink]

Without shiek, yes. And extreme hard work with perfect practice. But shiek existing changes everything. Basically think, "can my character beat a high level shiek" if you are planning to go to a national level and place 1-5 type

LOL. Don't try to put all the blame on one character. She's not even everyone's worst matchup.

Time for another dumb thread by yours truly. If this is better suited to be in Competitive Discussion rather than here then I don't mind it being moved.

The question explains itself, but this is another one of those things that pops up in my mind frequently when it comes to Smash 4's metagame. I've had many people think that every character in this game is viable at the highest level and that nobody in Smash 4 is truly bad, and while I personally disagree I wanna see others' opinions on the matter.

And no, not everyone in this game is viable on a national level. I expect many people to be disappointed once the patches stop coming. I don't have any faith in Sakurai's judgement.

I guess I'm just saying this because of Palutena's lack of any efficient offensive attacks; a lot of her KO moves are easily whiffed with their inconvenient hitboxes. Zelda is at least fortunate to have more manageable KO moves, even if they aren't the greatest, and she does have more long-ranged options to use, thanks to Din's Fire and Phantom Slash; both of which can potentially make KOs.

Din's Fire and Phantom Slash are easily avoided.

 

[Cylent]

As much as I'd like to say all characters are viable, unfortunately I don't think they are :/

 

[WinterShorts]

I think the majority of the cast of characters are viable when you put in the work, especially in the case of Smash Wii U. I say most, because I don't think characters like Zelda, Beginner Marth, and the Miis would place anywhere near national level (you could probably place high at smaller tournaments, but nothing more).

 

[Ghostly ~]

I don't think so because there is always a last tier set like D/F where these characters (, , , , , and ?) cannot be viable enough in national level. I could be wrong if a patch gives major buffs to unviable characters or if someone use a unviable character (in a current patch) that pulls major upsets and somehow win a national tournament or manage to get a great placing.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

Din's Fire and Phantom Slash are easily avoided.

The ironic part is that one of those moves is quite painful for Rosalina, as it can potentially leave her Lumaless. Or at least that's what I've heard.

 

[Protocon]

A character is only as good as the person who wields it.

 

[Deleted member]

A character is only as good as the person who wields it.

I personally disagree. People can be held back by mediocre or bad characters. Trela didn't start doing super well in major tournaments with the characters he played at that point (Shulk, Mewtwo, Robin, Mii Swordfighter) until he picked up Ryu and solo mained him from that point on. Robin or Mewtwo aren't bad characters by any stretch, but you get my point.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

I personally disagree. People can be held back by mediocre or bad characters. Trela didn't start doing super well in major tournaments with the characters he played at that point (Shulk, Mewtwo, Robin, Mii Swordfighter) until he picked up Ryu and solo mained him from that point on. Robin or Mewtwo aren't bad characters by any stretch, but you get my point.

The irony of the story, however, is that some of the best fighters have a bad match-up against at least one of the worst fighters.

 

[valakmtnsmash4]

Well Keitaro is carrying falco decently but shulk only has Jerm So not all characters can take big tourneys

 

[Protocon]

I personally disagree. People can be held back by mediocre or bad characters. Trela didn't start doing super well in major tournaments with the characters he played at that point (Shulk, Mewtwo, Robin, Mii Swordfighter) until he picked up Ryu and solo mained him from that point on. Robin or Mewtwo aren't bad characters by any stretch, but you get my point.

As someone said earlier, it depends on how much effort you put into a character.

Theoretically, I believe you can take a lower tiered character, and beat one who is higher only through the use of extreme practice and dedication.

Look at this way, what makes a level 9 CPU so difficult?

Their perfect shielding, in-human reaction time and input reading. Imagine if a human had that power; a high rate of perfect shielding, being able to respond and counter a player's movement and attack within the first few frames, and not cracking or stressing under pressure.

That person would be next to unbeatable, as long as they don't share the weakness the cpu has, which is that they don't adapt, and they operate on a set pattern/formula.

 

[Andyomon00]

As someone said earlier, it depends on how much effort you put into a character.

Theoretically, I believe you can take a lower tiered character, and beat one who is higher only through the use of extreme practice and dedication.

Look at this way, what makes a level 9 CPU so difficult?

Their perfect shielding, in-human reaction time and input reading. Imagine if a human had that power; a high rate of perfect shielding, being able to respond and counter a player's movement and attack within the first few frames, and not cracking or stressing under pressure.

That person would be next to unbeatable, as long as they don't share the weakness the cpu has, which is that they don't adapt, and they operate on a set pattern/formula.

In theory, yes any character can be good if you put the time in. But there are some characters who,no matter how good you get, will always fall short.

is the best example of this. Has absurd strength and can kill stupidly early if his blows connect. However, this strength is countered by the fact that he has some of the worst frame data in the game, has very few recovery options, and is easily countered by half the cast. No matter how good you get with him, he will always under perform in comparison to the rest of the roster.

Also, people aren't the level 9 CPU. The level 9 CPU reads inputs and makes mechanical adjustments that are almost always wrong when going up against a half decent player as you said. For players to iron out the flaws of the CPU play style and play like a machine would require telepathy. What I'm basically trying to say it that it's impossible to do what you're describing.

However with very few exceptions(Ex: and ), I do believe that most characters in the cast have some potential and just need a really good player to unlock it (Ex: Jwest and or Ryo and ).

 

[Conn1496]

In short, I think it's a plausible argument to say literally any character is viable with time, patience and skill, but the actual chances are just a whole different thing altogether.

Sure, I don't think we'll see Zelda (for example) pulling anything flashy off in a tournament all by her own any time soon, but if someone comes along who can really make the most of low-tier tools, we might see some spectacular play (-and actually already kinda have.) from said characters. Whether that classes them as viable or not, I dunno, but I think some people just have a natural affinity for playing these lesser represented characters, and it really does a lot for the community when they stand out.

I'd also argue that low-tiers have some benefit in the sense that a lot of people aren't specifically prepared for their strengths to come through, so they can catch a lot of people off-guard. I mean, Nairo's Doc certainly caused a storm a while back, and sure Nairo plays ZSS mainly, but I'd dare say that his Doc play could carry him a long, long way if he took to it. It's not completely impossible.

-and I'm not going to judge players like Nairo for taking the "easy route" with ZSS because actually, a lot of higher tier characters take more skill to pull off well and consistently (-and then you have the argument that they're often playing for money and titles, etc. so it matters more and risks are a lot more harmful.), so judging them for that is kinda stupid, but I'd personally love to see people pulling out and sticking to their lower tiers just to prove a point that any character can make it. However, tournament scenes kind of breed a type of player who doesn't like to take risks all the time, and that's fair to them, really. For some of them, it's basically their livelihood.

So in a logical sense, I believe that, yes, all characters are potentially viable. In a meta sense? -no, they're not. -and that's just down to the players and the mindset of the game, I feel. It's not a bad thing, by any means, since these people often have a career to keep going and play exceptionally entertainingly regardless (Infact, the idea of people playing at their peak is often more hype than an underdog low-tier rising up.), but when I see people pulling out the low-tiers, I get a sense of excitement at seeing something new being tried and practiced out in a competitive environment, and to be honest, I think the lack of that really puts me off watching a lot of it...

Still, I feel I digress. Regardless of personal opinions on viability, one thing people can agree on is: Smash Gods bless our low-tier heroes.

 

[marteen_]

Some characthers do have rather underdeveloped metas, so there are probably a couple of low tiers out there that have yet to have their fullest potential unlocked. (Tweek's Bowser Jr comes to mind) I don't think it's exactly the time to call "everyone's going to be national-viable or not" claims yet.. and not for another few years.

Obviously, Sm4sh has a lot more tourney viable characters to pick and choose from, and I do believe that at least the upper 40-50% of the tier list can make a decent placement at a big tournament as of now. Anything past that usually requires an incredibly good player that could reach their skill cap quicker with a better character or some horribly underdeveloped meta nobody but the player knows of coming into play.

Sadly, in any game, some characters or classes will just be inherently better or end up coming out on top. Like I implied earlier, the bottom-tier characters generally have to work significantly harder, have to rely off mindgames/reads, or work off the surprise factor more than actually utilizing their character's few strengths to get the win. That seperates a tourney viable and a nonviable to me.

So is everyone viable or will be viable? Probably not. Something's going to always be better than the other in the end like I said. There will always be a couple characters that we'll consistently see on top.

But with time, I think most of the cast is going to be perfectly viable with enough dedication.

 

[Protocon]

In theory, yes any character can be good if you put the time in. But there are some characters who,no matter how good you get, will always fall short.

is the best example of this. Has absurd strength and can kill stupidly early if his blows connect. However, this strength is countered by the fact that he has some of the worst frame data in the game, has very few recovery options, and is easily countered by half the cast. No matter how good you get with him, he will always under perform in comparison to the rest of the roster.

Also, people aren't the level 9 CPU. The level 9 CPU reads inputs and makes mechanical adjustments that are almost always wrong when going up against a half decent player as you said. For players to iron out the flaws of the CPU play style and play like a machine would require telepathy. What I'm basically trying to say it that it's impossible to do what you're describing.

However with very few exceptions(Ex: and ), I do believe that most characters in the cast have some potential and just need a really good player to unlock it (Ex: Jwest and or Ryo and ).

In regards to my cpu statment, I don't believe at all it is impossible, just very difficult to master.

I was discussing how a human could learn or inherit a trait from the computer, such as attempting to perform it's high rate of perfect shielding, which can be possible through practice and improving your reaction time. Your telepathy comment is spot on, though.

 

[Dar4]

I think it's impossible to have this discussion without defining what viable means. Everyone has a different definition. I define it as if the character has a reasonable chance to win a major. Currently, I think only about 15 or so characters can realistically win a major. So no, I don't think that most of the cast is viable.

To win a major you'll have to take out multiple top players like Zero, Nairo, Dabuz, Ranai, ESAM, Ally, Mr. R, ect. While I think any character has a realistic chance to pull off a huge upset in a single set against these top players I don't see any realistic way most characters outside the top 15 or so could pull off a complete bracket run that would require taking multiple sets against a long line of top players. You'll probably have to take 6 games from zero on top of all that.

 

[Deleted member]

I honestly don't think so.
Characters like Jigglypuff and Zelda have massive problems that prevent them from getting pretty far in tournaments; both characters are pretty bad and their problems aren't addressed through the patches. On a regional level, I can see them putting in some work. But, on a national level, where the stakes are much higher, I don't see them making it that far.

On a national level, I think a handful of characters could win one.

 

[Tizio Random]

Assuming that every player entering a major tournament would be at ZeRo's level, I would say that there are optimistically 15~ character that could win. If by viable means "x character could make at top 64 of a national" that could be more or less 3/4 of the cast.

 

[Green Zelda]

the skill of a player can only get them to a certain point i guess