Tier List Speculation

[Narpas_sword]

Yes. Crawling under the missile works.
It works a lot better than Zair.

Rolling = better to shield.

clanking is no better than shielding

 

[Rizner]

I like the way all the transform keepers vanished after Aura asked them to explain why it should be kept

Ok, so like one of these happens, it makes sense. But...

And here's the counter argument people who want transform to stay have made:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nothing

the past 3 pages or so of this silly thread have been full of people laying out legitimate concerns with transform.

your hole is just a little deeper now. You could try addressing some of their points though to try and get yourself out if you really do feel passionately on the subject.

like, people have things going on throughout the day. We can't be here always to answer concerns or questions immediately. Sometimes a question comes that requires thought - give people time to think lol.

Okay, so instead of talking about why it shouldn't be there, why not instead explain why it should be there in the first place?
"Because its been there" isn't gonna fly.

So a thing about this game is they want to keep character identities in tact, while also making the game balanced and fun for people who play it. With 3.5, many of the things they removed or changed because of design ideas had lashback because people didn't appreciate how it changed the way the game had to be played with their character. It didn't necessarily make their character better or worse or anything, but that identity and play style that was enjoyed being modified or removed has an impact to the playerbase which can't be ignored.
There are some things in this game which exist on characters that aren't necessarily broken, but are atypical when it comes to the rest of the cast. Characters like Lucario show this to an extreme, and if they were to take away Lucario's mechanic structure it would rub people the wrong way. If they decided that Lucario was OP and made changes while keeping the mechanics he has in, it is a lot easier to receive and understand and move past going to future versions.

For some people, Transform is a large part of Zelda's identity. It does give her some counterplay to people who try choosing specific stages and characters against her. I agree, that is a thing. It is something that other characters do not have. Yes, I can't argue that. It isn't a free thing to do, though. Zelda or Sheik have to work for getting that transform or should get punished by much of the cast. Also, why shouldn't someone in the cast have an option to mitigate counterpicking? Is that inherently a bad thing? Unless the matchup spreads become ridiculous in the way they cover eachother, this really isn't a problem (and in all iterations so far, this has not been the case. I do not see this being the case in the next version either).

If Zelda had 1/2 positive and 1/2 negative matchups, and Shiek had 1/2 positive and 1/2 negative, and their matchups mostly overlapped but didn't quite (some things won't change - they both will have positive matchups against slow characters, characters without good disjoint and linear movement or approach options, large characters on non-small stages, etc). So between the two of them, let's say that they have 2/3 good matchups, and 1/3 bad matchups. Is that so unhealthy it needs to change? Is having a mastery of two entire characters inherently broken, where if their matchups were as good as possible at not overlapping (I believe 2/3 is a large overestimation of what the possibilities are for this m/u spread) being ahead of 2/3 of the cast, and only creating maybe 2 more really bad matchups that wouldn't exist otherwise (like if you were playing against a Ness, that gives shiek a really good matchup because she can be Zelda) so bad that it needs to be removed? If someone can actually master both entities perfectly, is it to an extreme that needs changing or deletion? Would adding more startup or end lag do enough to counteract it? What if the matchup spread between both ended up at 1/2? What if it were 3/4? What ratio do you think needs to be covered between both characters for this to actually be a problem?

I do not see the worth of transform being removed large enough to sacrifice what some people enjoy about the character. In 3.5 many Zelda mains felt she lost some of what made her who she was, and something like this would further alienate Zelda players. It would turn into 'Well, why not just play Shiek' for many of the people who do play them both, because realistically her character traits fit what makes characters good better in the PM environment than the character traits which fit Zelda.

The problem with keeping transform lies mostly in how much it clashes with the PMDT's design philosophy. Based on the fact that literally every other transformation has gotten removed, Zelda's/Sheik's seems out of place. Admittedly, I guess you can say that keeping transform could fall under the philosophy of "bcuz melee" that the PMDT likes to abide by seemingly randomly and I couldn't really call you wrong.

Their design philosophy isn't to remove transforms. Just because they removed the one which required a smashball to return to form and a ridiculous button input doesn't mean that their philosophies are to never allow transforms at all.

Their design goals, as listed from their site:

• A fast-paced game

• with flowing, natural movement

• where the player has a great degree of control over their character due to the technical skill that they've achieved.

• The balance of offense and defense changes depending on the exact matchup and playstyle, but overall tends to favor offense slightly.

• Offstage edgeguarding is risky but rewarding, while on-stage edgeguarding is safer but less rewarding.

• Recoveries generally require great skill to use, with the advantage usually being with the edgeguarding player, with some exceptions.

• The combos are challenging and spontaneous, with anything longer than 2-3 hits requiring a knowledge of both characters' options and some degree of prediction and/or a deep understanding of the mental aspect of the game.

Transformation doesn't not go against any of these. Technical skill for two characters is required to optimize this, so it goes with point 3. Offensive is favored, because you need to hit your opponent away and transform (offensive moves give you that space) or you will get punished by good players for just doing this in a defensive way. Onstage edgeguarding (transforming and figuring out the next step) isn't as risky, because you aren't out there, but you are risking the fact that you will then have to play as that other character if you don't get the edgeguard with them at that exact time.
Nothing really goes against these points that I see at this time. If I have missed something, let me know.


Uniqueness does not mean against a design. Something a character has that's different isn't inherently bad. Homogenization for the sake of homogenization leads to a bland game.


I probably missed some points that were made still. I'm leaving here for a bit, so I will not immediately respond to replies for the most part. Please tag me in anything that you would like me to reply to. I'm happy to answer when I get the chance.

 

[Boiko]

I can have complete mastery of two characters, but I can't use them both at once. You can.

Tell me where that fits in terms of cast wide balancing.

 

[Rizner]

I can have complete mastery of two characters, but I can use them both at once. You can.

Tell me where that fits in terms of cast wide balancing.

It's different. Yes. Some characters also have good matchup spreads without transform. Samus can SWD, Zelda can't. It comes with the characters. It's a consideration when balancing. If it's overpowered, you can add a tradeoff to it without removing it through different starting or ending lag.

 

[Boiko]

It's different. Yes. Some characters also have good matchup spreads without transform. Samus can SWD, Zelda can't. It comes with the characters. It's a consideration when balancing. If it's overpowered, you can add a tradeoff to it without removing it through different starting or ending lag.

That's not even comparable. You have two sets of unique tools, I have one. No matter what it's skewed.

Edit: And end lag can't be added due to the way transform ends. Even with end lag, since loading times are inconsistent, you're going to have inconsistent punishes as a result. Adding lag at the front doesn't do much because no one is going to transform right in front of you.

And regarding an earlier point you made, "give people time to think" that's fair. But if you're thinking, don't post in the thread dismissing it with zero back up. Wait until you have time to say something meaningful, like you did.

 

[Rizner]

That's not even comparable. You have two sets of unique tools, I have one. No matter what it's skewed.

Balancing isn't as black and white as it seems. Rock paper scissors is balanced - you have two matchups, one you win and one you lose.

Add in two more dimensions - call it win and not win.
If you throw out a win, you beat rock, paper and scissors. You lose to not win.
Not win beats win, but loses to rock paper and scissors.

At face value, this might seem unbalanced, but then you realize that there is counterplay being done so there are probably more wins being thrown out, which causes more not wins, which causes more regular attacks, and this becomes a new game which can be considered balanced in a way.

PM doesn't need every character to be the same. You can have some of these gray areas of balancing and still achieve cast wide balance. Zelda/Shiek, when combined, have more tools than the rest of the cast. Other characters have less tools which are better. Some characters have less tools overall. Regardless, we all picked up a toolbox and are figuring out how to best utilize what tool and when. And at the moment, these tools don't seem to be inherently better than the tools you or someone else has. Some of the tools cover the same options. Having tools available to one character and not another isn't a fair way to assess this.

 

[Rᴏb]

Design philosophy =/= Design goal

I would argue that one imposes their design philosophies in order to reach their design goal. Examples of other design philosophies the PMDT have employed are "no non-committal burst movement", "revising moves with static knockback curves and making them scale more with percentage", "less tools that mitigate positional advantage", "reducing recovery potency" etc. Do any of these go against the goals the PMDT have laid out? Nope, but they've been employed because they help minimize the whole slew of issues that PM is susceptible to due to how vague it's goals actually are. I'd say that removing transformations for the sake of more balanced match-up spreads is a similar design philosophy that the PMDT seemingly have already employed for the most part, they just need to bite the bullet and get rid of the one transformation that was in Melee.

 

[Binary Clone]

they removed the one which required a smashball to return to form and a ridiculous button input

Wait wait I get what you're saying here but are we just ignoring the existence of Pokemon Trainer and the fact that they removed that?

 

[Player -0]

This is theory yea, not your actual experience?

! im talking Zair. Not crawl or SWD (LOL @ using SWD when nayrus is on)
Crawl is the option ive mentioned, and it's much better than zair.

Missile>Zair vs Nayru works in theory, but the timing and spacing to make it work in your favour is so tight.

So yes. You CAN use it.
But you wouldnt.

Aggressive posts for days lol.

Ideally a Zelda would want to use the later part of Nayru's or the aerial one so she could act asap. This would allow a Zair without that tight of timing, if she did the early Nayru's then crawl or Zair (after AD through missile) still works.

Crawl being the option you mentioned? When? Taking an option I mentioned then passing it off as your idea then calling it "much better" is lolzy not to mention super rude.

In some cases, yes. Zair is the go to option.

 

[AuraMaudeGone]

Snip

Interesting stance. You speak like Zelda and Sheik are still recognized as one character. Some people here feel differently, what do you say about them?

 

[RyokoYaksa]

Wait wait I get what you're saying here but are we just ignoring the existence of Pokemon Trainer and the fact that they removed that?

There are a few technical reasons this happened.

1. The one way switch between three, not two, characters being clunky.
2. That silly stamina mechanic.
3. The DownB switch taking unreasonably forever in the PM environment even without additional loading time. We just couldn't get this move working to an acceptable level like Transform.

The Pokemon had far more to gain from being split up and given new DownBs in this case. In the end, it still wasn't an easy decision to make.

What about Samus -> ZSS one's way switch?
Honestly, the removal of this didn't click well with everyone, but the nonstandard convoluted input wasn't really doing it much of any favors. Even this switch's removal was felt, and removing the Z/S switch is far more of a direct attack to fans of the character.

the past 3 pages or so of this silly thread have been full of people laying out legitimate concerns with transform.

your hole is just a little deeper now. You could try addressing some of their points though to try and get yourself out if you really do feel passionately on the subject.

5 years late to the party. It's been nothing but the same cycle of arguments that have not warranted the removal of Transform. The data we have from internal testing and out gathered over the years does not back up the claims of it being overpowered in practice and it never has. No matter how forcefully people go out of their way to ignore this part, this is how it is, and why it's not on the chopping block. You can keep saying "ooh, but this character can get around counterpicks" all you like, but for anyone that's actually tried using both actively in tournament can attest to, getting this to work to their advantage against smart players is harder than it sounds and nothing stops the attempt from backfiring. In practice, it's simply hasn't been shown to be anywhere near as balance breaking as other overtuned things that have been changed, because it hasn't. A few vocal people overblowing the situation to be far more than what it actually is is precisely the kind of concern that gets tiresome to hear.

 

[Narpas_sword]

Aggressive posts for days lol.

Ideally a Zelda would want to use the later part of Nayru's or the aerial one so she could act asap. This would allow a Zair without that tight of timing, if she did the early Nayru's then crawl or Zair (after AD through missile) still works.

Crawl being the option you mentioned? When? Taking an option I mentioned then passing it off as your idea then calling it "much better" is lolzy not to mention super rude.

In some cases, yes. Zair is the go to option.

Aggressive? hardly...
I caps'd one word for emphasis, yea.

Must have been earlier or a different topic i said to crawl, apologies, this topic goes so fast and circles back to the same things i forget how long ago it was posted.

But were talking Zair right?

You're saying to zair after AD through missiles?
To what point?
You hit Her with a Zair and you are going to do what now?
It resets neutral. Just. And creates space.

Now you have a zelda further away that you have to approach again.

Net gain = 0.

3.5 Zair is Bad.
It's not Ice Dtilt bad. But it is bad.

I dunno. Maybe your Samus is a lot better than mine. And maybe you fight a better Zelda on a regular basis more often than i do?

 

[trash?]

and removing the Z/S switch is far more of a direct attack to fans of the character.

anyone mind explaining me why zelda players are always so insecure that they only see any changes towards their character as an attack, regardless of what that change actually does

 

[Akhenderson]

If transform is supposed to be something integral in Zelda and Sheik's design, then why aren't they designed around that move?
Probably the best example I can give is a fighting game character that has a shockingly similar mechanic to Sheilda are the Maids, Kohaku and Hisui from Melty Blood.

Kohaku and Hisui are both different characters in their own right, but you can also choose a "tag team" version (referred to as "Maids") of them as well. However, what is better about the design of the Maids vs the design of Sheilda is inherent in their moveset and the character designs.

Maids by themselves possess their own normals, command normals, their own specials, their own combos, but, when choosing the team version, they replace some of their specials, and pretty much lose their command normals. Some of their specials are also integral in playing a more defensive or stronger pressure based game.
For example, Hisui's 214A throws a slow projectile that can pressure the opponent at a distance, or try to stop them from rushing down for a little bit. However Maids Hisui 214A is an attack in which Kohaku assists by throwing out a small move as a pressure tool, but not as a zoning tool, losing one part of effectiveness for the added benefit that you get to use a different character mid match.
Don't even get me started on Kohaku either. She loses her best pressure and combo tool (4B) in order to just have Hisui next to her.

Another reason why they work so well design wise is that they both fill the same archetype of being really good pressure characters with weak defensive options. Both characters have really good staggered pressure blockstrings and good oki, allowing them to relentlessly lock the opponent down, but their ability to get out of pressure is still mediocre, which gives them similar match up spreads. Not equal, but similar enough that it's negligible.

The reason why Sheilda is so much of a problem because you're literally changing everything about who you're facing because they have radically different play styles and attributes that cover each other depending on match ups.

I think that if you actually were to give them similar play styles because right now, the issue seems to be "they play radically different which makes them impossible to character/stage counter pick."
My idea would be to make them both the same character archetype and keep transform, make them two completely different characters but lose the transformation, or weaken both characters so that it justifies the fact that they have complete flexibility mid match (not ideal).

 

[Player -0]

Aggressive? hardly...
I caps'd one word for emphasis, yea.

Must have been earlier or a different topic i said to crawl, apologies, this topic goes so fast and circles back to the same things i forget how long ago it was posted.

But were talking Zair right?

You're saying to zair after AD through missiles?
To what point?
You hit Her with a Zair and you are going to do what now?
It resets neutral. Just. And creates space.

Now you have a zelda further away that you have to approach again.

Net gain = 0.

3.5 Zair is Bad.
It's not Ice Dtilt bad. But it is bad.

I dunno. Maybe your Samus is a lot better than mine. And maybe you fight a better Zelda on a regular basis more often than i do?

The whole structure + wording.

If you don't have enough time to crawl over then you would take free damage and space as well as applying some mental pressure. This is assuming you didn't set up a SWD beforehand.

AD through -> Zair is ONE of the options I've mentioned and that's if the Zelda does early Nayru's. If Zelda does late Nayru's then my aforementioned stuff applies still.

 

[Narpas_sword]

So, still theory?

Or do you play this matchup often?

 

[Boiko]

@ Akhenderson only reason you can't make them independently weaker is because people who want to just play one, can't.

 

[robosteven]

It's incredible to me that nobody's mentioned Gen of Street Fighter yet.

oh wait a sec that was me a few pages back

 

[PoTheDragonSlayer]

Ryoko, you say that the decision to remove the switch between characters with the Pokemon and Samus/ZZS was hard to make, but now that this change has been in effect for so long, and the feelings and salt over change has subsided, you have to agree that making the Pokemon all separate characters and giving them unique down specials as well as Samus not being able to turn into ZSS was for the better, right? Yes, separating Zelda/Sheik like the three pokemon would be hard for some to accept and there would be salt, but change of any nature usually results in some backlash, because hey, we're human, and we often times look at change as immediately for the worse.

But can you at least agree that maybe, just maybe, if Zelda and Sheik were given unique down specials, and made into separate characters, that it would be for the better for both of them in the end, after all the rage over change had passed?

 

[Eisen]

So, still theory?

Or do you play this matchup often?

Not to be offensive to him, but I would not take him seriously on this issue. There are a few Samus players who've been in his/my area (including myself and Esam) who probably make the character seem ridiculous. Though I will admit she's very good... just, not because of Zair. At all. And if I remember right it sounds like he thinks SWD is actually useful for anything but style... which is also not really true.

 

[Juushichi]

Yay, Melty Blood.

@ Frost | Odds , even if I didn't play Sheik and GnW (and I don't play GnW much these days anyway), I would still feel some sort of way about improving those moves by the way.

 

[Player -0]

Not to be offensive to him, but I would not take him seriously on this issue. There are a few Samus players who've been in his/my area (including myself and Esam) who probably make the character seem ridiculous. Though I will admit she's very good... just, not because of Zair. At all. And if I remember right it sounds like he thinks SWD is actually useful for anything but style... which is also not really true.

Lol, Samus isn't good because of Zair. I've never said Samus was good because of Zair.

I know how good Samus is, I'm not overrating her because of players in the area, for one I've hardly seen your Samus and from what I've seen I wasn't that impressed (I think you were just picking her up at that time though).

SWD has uses besides sliding around the stage randomly between stocks. Extremely situational but it's still there.

I've brought up several points in the match up and my only response has been "lolbutno."

 

[Frost | Odds]

Yay, Melty Blood.

@ Frost | Odds , even if I didn't play Sheik and GnW (and I don't play GnW much these days anyway), I would still feel some sort of way about improving those moves by the way.

My point was that Bowser is pretty much a completely free MU for both those characters, and would be regardless of any such change.

Anyway, if he takes appropriate nerfs / design changes such as reduced size, he'll absolutely need much better smash attacks to compensate.

 

[Ripple]

Aftershock isn't looking good for me and DDD.

Good zss and Ivy's abound

 

[robosteven]

Aftershock isn't looking good for me and DDD.

Good zss and Ivy's abound

pick up marf

 

[Frost | Odds]

The data we have from internal testing and out gathered over the years does not back up the claims of it being overpowered in practice and it never has.

Have Sheik and Zelda ever been independently strong characters in the same patch?

 

[supascoot]

pick up marf

but marf is icky and for anime nerds. pick up roy, because he is our son.

Gonna call that no matter who wins aftershock there will be a flood of people complaining about people who are complaining about the person who won's character being op. If that makes any sense

AKA wait until there are unwarranted nerf complaints before complaining about them. and no, twitch chat doesn't count

 

[robosteven]

Gonna call that no matter who wins aftershock there will be a flood of people complaining about people who are complaining about the person who won's character being op.

unless it's a Melee character

 

[TreK]

No matter who wins Aftershock, I'll probably still be mostly complaining about Marth tho

 

[Narpas_sword]

unless it's a Melee character

Like mewtwo?
Or Mario?

 

[robosteven]

Like mewtwo?
Or Mario?

you know what I meant silly

 

[The Baron]

No matter who wins Aftershock, I'll probably still be mostly complaining about Marth tho

Why so? All smashers agree that he tips genorously and he is very charming.

Edit: Also, so that SB doesn't kick me, why does marth have this stereotype among newer and even seasoned players that he loses no matchups or at least, has no truly bad ones.

 

[Downdraft]

Have Sheik and Zelda ever been independently strong characters in the same patch?

Are you implying that they are independently strong characters in 3.5?
1. Strong is an ambiguous, subjective word.
2. Zelda isn't good enough to hold her own at a high level versus many characters. Despite standing as the 13th most used character according to the site's usage statistics, she has not won any major tournaments, and only one player has gained true notoriety. By far, Zhime is the highest level Zelda. He is the best representative of Zelda. Who are the best representatives of other characters that he or other top Zelda's have beaten regularly where matchup inexperience or player superiority didn't attribute more to the win? I just looked at the Top 20 ranked PM players and don't recall seeing footage or hearing about any Zelda beating those players in tournament.

I solely play Zelda, but if the characters were ever separated, then I'm sure you'd find that most Zelda players on here would agree that she'd need some significant retooling/buffs.

High level success with Zelda is incredibly difficult.

 

[Boiko]

Usage =/= How good they are..

See: Wolf, Samus

 

[Downdraft]

Usage =/= How good they are..

See: Wolf, Samus

That wasn't my argument. The point I was making with usage statistics is that despite being popular she has accomplished nothing. My post argues that she isn't good enough.

 

[Boiko]

Yeah, and that complements my point. Just because she hasn't accomplished anything, it doesn't mean that she's bad. When's the last time you saw a Wolf hanging in grand finals outside of MD/VA? Not too often. Samus? Same thing. Just because these characters don't see success it doesn't mean they're not good.

I think Zelda is in a great place right now.

 

[PlateProp]

That wasn't my argument. The point I was making with usage statistics is that despite being popular she has accomplished nothing. My post argues that she isn't good enough.

High level sucess is hard with most characters that arent melee tops, Zelda aint special

 

[Eisen]

The problem in the current meta is that people like to talk about how often their characters win compared to others when, realistically, the best players of PM often were good in Melee as well, and thus are more likely to use Melee characters. This means that those characters have more practice and require less training to win with. Not to mention that Fox and Falco still have things they shouldn't.

Basically, what Plate said. Lots of other good characters don't see much success either. I know I talk about 3.02 Lucas (and Lucas in general) but seriously, look at how broken he was. And what did he win? Not nearly as much as Foxes and Marths and Falcons and whatnot. I think that says a lot about the potency of prior character experience.

 

[foxygrandpa]

Yeah, and that complements my point. Just because she hasn't accomplished anything, it doesn't mean that she's bad. When's the last time you saw a Wolf hanging in grand finals outside of MD/VA? Not too often. Samus? Same thing. Just because these characters don't see success it doesn't mean they're not good.

I think Zelda is in a great place right now.

I'm a little confused with your argument, not necessarily disagreeing.
I agree that transform is questionably bad in terms of practical design, but I don't see where its actually overpowered. Zelda wins a couple of matchups but doesnt actually thoroughly destroy any characters. The characters that sheik bodies (besides captain falcon) are generally bad characters like bowser. Transform does break counterpicks in a sense, but only against crappy characters and players who don't know pm matchups.
In any given matchup, either zelda or sheik is the better choice. Could you give an example of a matchup in which a character does worse against sheilda than zelda or sheik?
To argue that one character is better in certain situations is not very plausible. Sheik, for example, has the tools to do well in every scenario, besides recovery. All of sheik's weaknesses (crouch cancel, dash dance abuse) are covered by her tools. You could technically use sheik for edgeguards, but a proficient zelda can edgeguard with her too.

It's easy to say scrap transform, but at the same time what would you suggest giving them in replacement? Transform is a tool for zelda to detonate dins and a recovery tool for sheik. To give zelda a down b that detonates would reduce her learning curve dramatically imo. On top of that, sheik is literally perfect the way she is. She's balanced but with a fluid, interactive design that hasn't been quite achieved by the other tops like roy, wolf, and fox. I don't think she warrants any big changes in her meta.

If they do anything to sheik's specials, chain needs to be scrapped before transform, honestly. I'm still confused as to why that's made it this far in development.

 

[trash?]

5 years late to the party. It's been nothing but the same cycle of arguments that have not warranted the removal of Transform. The data we have from internal testing and out gathered over the years does not back up the claims of it being overpowered in practice and it never has.

because it's bad design, as mentioned a thousand times

does your obsession with research take into account why you think a mechanic based on loading times is a good idea