Tier List Speculation

[Rᴏb]

Didn't DF and Magus already disprove this?

My understanding from that thread was that the only consistent follow up G&W can get from upthrow is upb --> bair even if you SDI+DI the upb correctly. This would be fine imo if you could actually tell what throw G&W was doing. I may be interpreting what they said wrong, but that sounds about right to me.

 

[foxygrandpa]

Yeah, because it's not like Fox currently dictates the metagame of the upper 8 in Melee or resulted in PM making changes so that characters were capable of dealing with fast-fallers efficiently if they blatantly refused to learn matchups and outplay in PM's setting.

Oh, wait, that's exactly what happened. Pardon me, I had a bit of memory loss.

Look, I understand what you're trying to get across, and I agree that Fox does in fact have a lot of checks now in PM, and has had them since his tweaks in 2.6 and onward. A lot of characters have been experimented with and buffed/nerfed depending on how they work out, and this had led to some of them either being borderline broken or borderline useless. But that doesn't actually refute Melee top tiers being good, nor does it prove that they're overrated. It's a mod that's constantly getting refined, and since 3.5, I've felt like this game is heading in a much better direction than it was before in terms of handling balance and providing characters with much needed mixups, punish game tweaks, etc.

This is a game of matchups, so I understand that now that Fox actually has a few questionable matchups around the cast that it suddenly raises the question, "Is Fox actually the best character in the game?" As a matter of fact, yes, in 3.02, Fox was not the best character game. But he was still one of the best characters in the game.

In fact, this has been relevant since he was playable in the game. Even with certain absurdities showing up like 2.1 Ike, 2.5 Sonic, 2.6 Ivysaur, etc., he's stayed relevant within the top 3 or top 5 of the game. In 3.5, he was unquestionably the best character in the game, since most if not all characters were scaled down to quite a degree. He was the best character in the game even when his matchup with Roy was questionable.

What we understand about Fox from Melee can be applied to this game, because that's how he was inserted. That's the base model the PMDT inserted into the game and maintained until 2.6. That's the character that got his shine nerfed and still maintained full steam in the top 3 into 3.02. That's the character that survived up-smash nerfs and became one of the best Melee top tiers alongside Sheik in 3.5.

And that's because nothing's been done to his neutral, which many people have said, time and time again, is the best of all characters. In most fighting games, the neutral plays a huge role in determining how things play out, so you tend to be in a good place if you have a character with a fantastic neutral. Fox has that and a punish game that rivals some of the best punishers between all the patches of PM that there have ever been.

Our vision of the character might be a little flawed because there are matchups Fox has a bit of a tougher time with in this game, and there is a lot to be learned about the game as a whole. But your vision is also flawed if you're actively ignoring that Fox has the best collective traits of any character rolled into one simply because there are characters that may have some awkward design changes.

Show me a character with more consistent relevancy between every patch that isn't either Fox or, barring 3.02, Sheik.

3.02 fox was not even top 5, and he still dominated the meta.

3.5, wolf, sheik, lucario, rob, and roy were all on par or arguably better than fox.


Consistent relevancy?
Metaknight (obscenely broken in 3.02 and imo the best in this patch) and roy were both pretty much good all along. Mewtwo is also a pretty consistently good character, and has been since his inclusion to the game. Toon link has always been pretty good too (such a good matchup spread), and so has diddy kong. Wolf too, can't forget him. Lucas has always been a beast since 3.02, even though he's underused I don't think anyone can argue for him being bad. Samus has been really good in the last two iterations, easily high tier in 3.5 and 3.6 and was pretty broken with z-air in 3.02. Falco also has never been worse than high tier. I think lucario and ROB too, but I don't have so much info on them from 3.02 so if someone knows better, please correct me.

3.6b sheik wasn't that great in 3.6b, being pushed by a lot of experienced sheik players, but that mistake was quickly fixed, but yeah I can agree she's been consistently relevant for an entire version and a half.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

I never said anything about melee tiers dictating project m tiers. You said that we don't know the first thing about this game and I pointed to the first melee tier list as an example of people not knowing the first thing about their game still being able to make some decent predictions. That's it. Stop reading Fox hate into everything people say.

fox hate or no fox hate, you're once again obfuscating the point, and whether or not it was your point, it was definitely MY point that people are using melee tiers to guess the tiers of project m. And I"m saying those guesses are misguided and wrong, and I cited an example of them doing just that, and you said that it was "not serious."

Yeah, because it's not like Fox currently dictates the metagame of the upper 8 in Melee or resulted in PM making changes so that characters were capable of dealing with fast-fallers efficiently if they blatantly refused to learn matchups and outplay in PM's setting.

Oh, wait, that's exactly what happened. Pardon me, I had a bit of memory loss.

Look, I understand what you're trying to get across, and I agree that Fox does in fact have a lot of checks now in PM, and has had them since his tweaks in 2.6 and onward. A lot of characters have been experimented with and buffed/nerfed depending on how they work out, and this had led to some of them either being borderline broken or borderline useless. But that doesn't actually refute Melee top tiers being good, nor does it prove that they're overrated. It's a mod that's constantly getting refined, and since 3.5, I've felt like this game is heading in a much better direction than it was before in terms of handling balance and providing characters with much needed mixups, punish game tweaks, etc.

This is a game of matchups, so I understand that now that Fox actually has a few questionable matchups around the cast that it suddenly raises the question, "Is Fox actually the best character in the game?" As a matter of fact, yes, in 3.02, Fox was not the best character game. But he was still one of the best characters in the game.

In fact, this has been relevant since he was playable in the game. Even with certain absurdities showing up like 2.1 Ike, 2.5 Sonic, 2.6 Ivysaur, etc., he's stayed relevant within the top 3 or top 5 of the game. In 3.5, he was unquestionably the best character in the game, since most if not all characters were scaled down to quite a degree. He was the best character in the game even when his matchup with Roy was questionable.

What we understand about Fox from Melee can be applied to this game, because that's how he was inserted. That's the base model the PMDT inserted into the game and maintained until 2.6. That's the character that got his shine nerfed and still maintained full steam in the top 3 into 3.02. That's the character that survived up-smash nerfs and became one of the best Melee top tiers alongside Sheik in 3.5.

And that's because nothing's been done to his neutral, which many people have said, time and time again, is the best of all characters. In most fighting games, the neutral plays a huge role in determining how things play out, so you tend to be in a good place if you have a character with a fantastic neutral. Fox has that and a punish game that rivals some of the best punishers between all the patches of PM that there have ever been.

Our vision of the character might be a little flawed because there are matchups Fox has a bit of a tougher time with in this game, and there is a lot to be learned about the game as a whole. But your vision is also flawed if you're actively ignoring that Fox has the best collective traits of any character rolled into one simply because there are characters that may have some awkward design changes.

Show me a character with more consistent relevancy between every patch that isn't either Fox or, barring 3.02, Sheik.

It seems like we're arguing completely different things. I never implied that Fox was bad. I don't think he's bad. I just don't think he's top 5, let alone best character in the game. And you seem to agree more or less (you said top 3) with me in that regard, that he's never been best, up until 3.5 where we disagree once again. Not only do I not think that Fox would be top 5 in a year if we kept 3.5, but I think Lucario was better even then since with aura lucario's neutral is near perfect and his punishes, well I dont need to say more in that regard. My point was never fox though, everyone is making it about fox but fox is supposed to be my grand example to prove my point. And the point was and always will be that we are too young to be making a tier list, and it will definitely change once people start learning PM as it's own thing instead of an extension of melee.

 

[Frost | Odds]

this is kind of a side point, but what about Lucky vs. Mr.Lz at evo?

Lucky is a PM fox moreso than any other top melee foxes, he actually plays the game regularly and knows PM-specific tech

and he got embarassed by a good gnw

I'm just gonna keep bringing up that Alphicans nearly beat Lz with Fox, despite being emphatically not a PM or even a Melee player. Difference is that he actually had the patience to do so.

 

[Rawkobo]

It seems like we're arguing completely different things. I never implied that Fox was bad. I don't think he's bad. I just don't think he's top 5, let alone best character in the game. And you seem to agree more or less (you said top 3) with me in that regard, that he's never been best, up until 3.5 where we disagree once again. Not only do I not think that Fox would be top 5 in a year if we kept 3.5, but I think Lucario was better even then since with aura lucario's neutral is near perfect and his punishes, well I dont need to say more in that regard. My point was never fox though, everyone is making it about fox but fox is supposed to be my grand example to prove my point. And the point was and always will be that we are too young to be making a tier list, and it will definitely change once people start learning PM as it's own thing instead of an extension of melee.

That is why this thread is called "Tier List Speculation." It's completely fair to postulate points and clear up misunderstandings about any character within the metagame. To assume that there's no purpose to a thread meant to not be universally agreed upon is perhaps one of the only wrong possible approaches. Even if the game is "still young" and "in development," we also have to remember that there were a core of characters in the game for about, if I recall correctly, three years now. That's pretty significant to say we at least know something as to how balance changes have affected them, especially when they were some of the only available options in the first place.

What other four characters would you find better than Fox, if you're certain he wouldn't be top 5 later on? I can understand Lucario, he was in a very strong place in 3.5. But I'm going to be honest. Other than Wolf, I don't see any more characters capable of dethroning Fox theoretically. And Wolf at least has some reasonable flaws with his kit.

3.02 fox was not even top 5, and he still dominated the meta.

3.5, wolf, sheik, lucario, rob, and roy were all on par or arguably better than fox.


Consistent relevancy?
Metaknight (obscenely broken in 3.02 and imo the best in this patch) and roy were both pretty much good all along. Mewtwo is also a pretty consistently good character, and has been since his inclusion to the game. Toon link has always been pretty good too (such a good matchup spread), and so has diddy kong. Wolf too, can't forget him. Lucas has always been a beast since 3.02, even though he's underused I don't think anyone can argue for him being bad. Samus has been really good in the last two iterations, easily high tier in 3.5 and 3.6 and was pretty broken with z-air in 3.02. Falco also has never been worse than high tier. I think lucario and ROB too, but I don't have so much info on them from 3.02 so if someone knows better, please correct me.

3.6b sheik wasn't that great in 3.6b, being pushed by a lot of experienced sheik players, but that mistake was quickly fixed, but yeah I can agree she's been consistently relevant for an entire version and a half.

I don't agree at all in regards to the point about 3.5, but all of the characters you mentioned were in constant contention for being the top 6 characters in most of the tier lists pooled, so I can understand discussing about it beforehand.

"Patch and a half" is a lackluster description of Sheik's relevancy and implies you definitely weren't around for 2.0 to 2.6, when she actually had a lot of her Melee traits still intact. She was most definitely a highly relevant character then. She dropped down during 3.02 because the design of many a character of the time ended up outclassing her at her own job VS the cast in a vacuum (mainly, Mario and Diddy, though both characters had their own specific reasons for being bonkers).

Everything else you've said I can generally agree with, more than likely because these characters are intended to be high, if not top tier. Whether or not they have better overall success than Fox will remain a point of contention, and to be perfectly honest, as I mentioned on Discord, I don't care if Fox is touched anymore because of the fact that since the metagame is so focused on him, there is most often a way in this game to deal with him.

If Fox didn't retain anything from Melee in some way, or wasn't expected to, we really would not be having this problem or discussion to begin with.

 

[Soft Serve]

Donate now and you too can buff Ness's grab range!

Spoiler

Damn this is depressing

 

[frankxthexbunny]

That is why this thread is called "Tier List Speculation." It's completely fair to postulate points and clear up misunderstandings about any character within the metagame. To assume that there's no purpose to a thread meant to not be universally agreed upon is perhaps one of the only wrong possible approaches. Even if the game is "still young" and "in development," we also have to remember that there were a core of characters in the game for about, if I recall correctly, three years now. That's pretty significant to say we at least know something as to how balance changes have affected them, especially when they were some of the only available options in the first place.

What other four characters would you find better than Fox, if you're certain he wouldn't be top 5 later on? I can understand Lucario, he was in a very strong place in 3.5. But I'm going to be honest. Other than Wolf, I don't see any more characters capable of dethroning Fox theoretically. And Wolf at least has some reasonable flaws with his kit.

You used the word unquestionably. I think that I just questioned it with lucario. I dont know who the other four would be. I'm obviously not brilliant enough to predict a year of developed meta out of the blue. Possibly falcon wolf meta tlink, possibly ike or diddy or shiek or lucas. probably samus and ROB, maybe mewtwo or roy. Don't you think it's a bit of a trap to take my thesis "Melee meta will die with time and then melee high tiers will drop down on the tier list" which is by nature a thesis stating that we don't have any clue who is going to be high tier, and then ask me to predict that unknown tier list? I don't know. I'm just stating that fox is developed, and he is scary, and he is winning, and so we assume he will be winning in a year once other characters grow developed and scary as well. And I think that's unlikely. That is all. If I made a tier list right now Fox wouldn't be S tier, but I know as little as you do, and I'm equally sure just like every other time a character we didn't expect is going to start demolishing everybody, then HE will be called best, until another character comes, then HE is the best, and so on until this happens to all the really good characters. and theres our list.

 

[Nausicaa]

People knew even less about Melee in 2002 when they correctly predicted the top 4 characters in the game.

Don't use that a measuring stick to what a 'tier list' means in Project M.
Try predicting the Top 10 Heroes in DotA and you'll be at least in a SIMILAR ball-park of analogies. lol
At this point, every comment in the discussion about this 'prediction' thing is 100% irrelevant.

In 3.5, he was unquestionably the best character in the game, since most if not all characters were scaled down to quite a degree. He was the best character in the game even when his matchup with Roy was questionable.

What we understand about Fox from Melee can be applied to this game, because that's how he was inserted. That's the base model the PMDT inserted into the game and maintained until 2.6. That's the character that got his shine nerfed and still maintained full steam in the top 3 into 3.02. That's the character that survived up-smash nerfs and became one of the best Melee top tiers alongside Sheik in 3.5.

Show me a character with more consistent relevancy between every patch that isn't either Fox or, barring 3.02, Sheik.

Careful with the unquestionably inaccurate statements about things being unquestionable.
Fox dictates lots. There's a reason he's the most played character by a large margin in both Melee and PM, why he gets results in every condition he's put into, why he gets so much attention by everyone from the DT to the forums to the commentators to the players.
This is true and everybody is well aware of that.
The points being made that you're seemingly trying to 'discuss' are not at all contradictory to what you're pointing out.
Good post, glad this stuff is brought up, but you might want to both re-read the posts of the person you're talking to, and avoid using what are essentially nothing more than assumptions as if they're statistics of some form.

Nausicaa's post always make me question the way I see life the game.

Then make me sad because I can't bend my brain to even try to see it differently.

And I've tried to try.

Maybe I've done it wrong. It always ends with me giving up so quickly I think I never even tried.

Simple versions are tricky when it comes to not-in-person stuff.

Summary of some of that stuff.
Pay attention to what you're paying attention to.

'Pay attention to when you're turning around to B-Air. Don't think about whether you should or shouldn't, if it was good or bad, or whatever, just take note and forget about it because it's not a big deal, just NOTICE when you're turning around'

Step 1
You're obviously paying attention to SOMETHING when you play Smash.
wtf is it?
Watch that. Play with that. Go with that and see where it goes.
It's the line between awareness and focus. You'll know when you cross it.

wtf is your mind doing when you're playing Smash?

everybody is too busy (mental business is the only business EVER worth mentioning, side-note) to look at what they're ALREADY DOING.

Pay attention to what's going on mentally.
So... what's going on mentally? Your attention is moving in some way. Changing somehow in some way, whatever that may be.

Step 2
You'll come to a state where you're at ease with every action (mental action) with equanimity, and be free of it. Meaning, you won't be bound to anything. This will make sense when you experience it.
Ever been in 'the zone' before with anything, even for a moment?
There's no major thought process, or effort in focus, or whatever. It's a state of freedom in the sense that you act completely on your own terms, at your own pace, in your own way.
Note
There's a difference here.
Not THIS statement. - You're ABLE to act a certain way when in 'the zone'
It's THIS statement. - You ACT a certain way when you're in 'the zone'
It's not like you forget what you're doing.
You're simply so AWARE of what you're doing, that you're free of it. Balanced, and liberated of it, and what can possibly happen then? It simply flows.
This comes from Step 1

Step 3
Applying this stuff to life will come naturally, use Smash as your content and context to grow from. So don't even contemplate that.

So scratch ALL of that.
And go back to Step 1

Wtf are you paying attention to?
If a baby teleported into your position, what would be the first thing noticed? (it would probably munch on it's toes and slap the nearest object with its lack of muscle control and depth perception and look around at lights that are nearest lol)

Better example would then be...
If YOU teleported from some OTHER place, into the position you're in now, what would be the first thing your attention goes to?
Probably the cool/warm air on the skin, whether you're inhaling or exhaling, the pressuring on your butt/feet if sitting/standing, the thickness of the air or weight of the food in the tummy, position of the hands and feet, light in the area, then sound, etc.

If only for a moment.
But THAT moment, is where you can lean.
It's the permanent-reset-button that will allow you to beat Melee-gods on a whim, play with the best musicians in the world seamlessly, and read the hardest literature to understand and fully experience it without messing it up with interpretation.

Next time you play Smash
Pay
attention
to
1
single
thing

"wtf are you paying attention to"
Moment, to moment, to moment.
Trust me.

**** works like ****ing magic.
@TheGravyTrain update your reading comprehension skillz

 

[Rawkobo]

You used the word unquestionably. I think that I just questioned it with lucario. I dont know who the other four would be. I'm obviously not brilliant enough to predict a year of developed meta out of the blue. Possibly falcon wolf meta tlink, possibly ike or diddy or shiek or lucas. probably samus and ROB, maybe mewtwo or roy. Don't you think it's a bit of a trap to take my thesis "Melee meta will die with time and then melee high tiers will drop down on the tier list" which is by nature a thesis stating that we don't have any clue who is going to be high tier, and then ask me to predict that unknown tier list? I don't know. I'm just stating that fox is developed, and he is scary, and he is winning, and so we assume he will be winning in a year once other characters grow developed and scary as well. And I think that's unlikely. That is all. If I made a tier list right now Fox wouldn't be S tier.

Is it an unreasonable position that characters with mostly developed metagames because they came 1-for-1 from Melee, then got slight adjustments but still kind of stayed in the upper echelon through the test of time of three years, would then follow to stay the theoretically most relevant? There are obvious exceptions, such as Puff for most patches she's existed, and I would argue Marth for a few patches considering his other Fire Emblem counterparts, but is it unreasonable for us to, with this knowledge, place them higher because they have these more developed metagames capable of being employed without too much more of a need of exploration, particularly at an upper-mid level?

Perhaps I was being a bit harsh. I'm not saying that your claim, as well as several others' claims like @ foxygrandpa 's and @ Nausicaa 's, are outside the realm of possibility. In fact, there are a lot of characters that had ridiculous designs in 3.02 of all patches that have completely fallen off the radar...and yet, as far as I can tell through practice and experimentation, should be perhaps rated much higher than they are. In particular, I think people are sleeping a lot on Sonic because Wizzy stopped playing, and then the top tier player dropoff for the character goes pretty deep, if I'm just being honest based off of observation. I'm no expert, but Sonic has some pretty disgusting lack of representation that I hope to maybe see rectified at Paragon LA or other events.

It's lack of development that leads to the realm of possibility of Fox being worse than top 3. But when people are making tier lists, it's a screenshot of the current period. Melee was also this way, and it's currently contributing to the discussion that Marth might be third best in the game, simply because of the new cultivation of his metagame making his Sheik matchup surprisingly better than it used to be at a top level, as well as being an arguable check to Fox's dominance these days.

I agree that a year from now, one could say the development of characters' metagames may have changed the course of things. And yes, until PM starts being much more of a complete picture, which involves a lot of implementation, examination, etc., it's hard to say that we know for certain that such things are the case. I should indeed watch my language with "unquestionable;" of course it's questionable. But again, that's implying it's also unreasonable to act off of what we already know, even if we don't know everything.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't say that the characters you mentioned are quite on the levels of development to be better than Fox at a top, top level. Because top level in this game requires quite the understanding of matchups, which few people have on Fox let alone other characters of this game. But they certainly try, and that's important.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

**** works like ****ing magic.
@TheGravyTrain update your reading comprehension skillz

A: You and I are on a similar wavelength I think but you're further along (which I would guess is the same thing as being further back to you) than I am I'd say. I do have a question though: What if they do it as well? If you can reach flow, and you have that advantage of oneness with your intentions, doesn't the advantage disappear the moment your opponent reaches it as well? then it's almost as if neither had done so, it'd be back to relying on one's familiarity with tech and fundamentals would it not?

B: would you ever consider playing with me? This isn't a social thread, but if you would shoot me a message.

 

[foxygrandpa]

That is why this thread is called "Tier List Speculation." It's completely fair to postulate points and clear up misunderstandings about any character within the metagame. To assume that there's no purpose to a thread meant to not be universally agreed upon is perhaps one of the only wrong possible approaches. Even if the game is "still young" and "in development," we also have to remember that there were a core of characters in the game for about, if I recall correctly, three years now. That's pretty significant to say we at least know something as to how balance changes have affected them, especially when they were some of the only available options in the first place.

What other four characters would you find better than Fox, if you're certain he wouldn't be top 5 later on? I can understand Lucario, he was in a very strong place in 3.5. But I'm going to be honest. Other than Wolf, I don't see any more characters capable of dethroning Fox theoretically. And Wolf at least has some reasonable flaws with his kit.



I don't agree at all in regards to the point about 3.5, but all of the characters you mentioned were in constant contention for being the top 6 characters in most of the tier lists pooled, so I can understand discussing about it beforehand.

"Patch and a half" is a lackluster description of Sheik's relevancy and implies you definitely weren't around for 2.0 to 2.6, when she actually had a lot of her Melee traits still intact. She was most definitely a highly relevant character then. She dropped down during 3.02 because the design of many a character of the time ended up outclassing her at her own job VS the cast in a vacuum (mainly, Mario and Diddy, though both characters had their own specific reasons for being bonkers).

Everything else you've said I can generally agree with, more than likely because these characters are intended to be high, if not top tier. Whether or not they have better overall success than Fox will remain a point of contention, and to be perfectly honest, as I mentioned on Discord, I don't care if Fox is touched anymore because of the fact that since the metagame is so focused on him, there is most often a way in this game to deal with him.

If Fox didn't retain anything from Melee in some way, or wasn't expected to, we really would not be having this problem or discussion to begin with.

I've been around since 2.1, but didn't take it as seriously back then since I felt I was always winning/losing to OP or dumb options.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but I'm almost sure that sheik's melee dthrow wasn't in 2.1. I'm adamant that sheik was not good in either 2.5, 2.6, and 3.0. It wasn't really a problem with her, as much as it was the other characters. Sheik was dropped down in 3.02 because people learned what they were doing a little bit more, and the game started to get a whole lot of popularity, and a bunch of new characters.
I didn't mention anything pre 3.02, since a lot of characters still weren't in the game, making character relevancy hard to track.


Honestly, I feel like at this point of the game where everything is relatively balanced, I don't think that it's fair to disregard characters with high placings just because the player is good. You generally are supposed to be a good player to win tournaments guys, regardless of character. It confuses me that people are disregarding ness, links and ganon's wins, by saying "but they're just good" or "outplaying their opponent". If you have to be good with a character to reach high placings and have to outplay people, and are perfectly capable of it, then you're character is most likely fine aside from minor tweaks (yes, even ness).

 

[Kidneyjoe]

Don't use that a measuring stick to what a 'tier list' means in Project M.
Try predicting the Top 10 Heroes in DotA and you'll be at least in a SIMILAR ball-park of analogies.

Instead of comparing Project M to a MOBA why not compare it to another fighting game? Street Fighter 4 has had several updates including balance/mechanics changes as well as character additions and yet those folks were perfectly willing and able to make decent tier lists as the different versions came out. I don't see why we can't do the same.

 

[Rawkobo]

I've been around since 2.1, but didn't take it as seriously back then since I felt I was always winning/losing to OP or dumb options.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but I'm almost sure that sheik's melee dthrow wasn't in 2.1. I'm adamant that sheik was not good in either 2.5, 2.6, and 3.0. It wasn't really a problem with her, as much as it was the other characters. Sheik was dropped down in 3.02 because people learned what they were doing a little bit more, and the game started to get a whole lot of popularity, and a bunch of new characters.
I didn't mention anything pre 3.02, since a lot of characters still weren't in the game, making character relevancy hard to track.


Honestly, I feel like at this point of the game where everything is relatively balanced, I don't think that it's fair to disregard characters with high placings just because the player is good. You generally are supposed to be a good player to win tournaments guys, regardless of character. It confuses me that people are disregarding ness, links and ganon's wins, by saying "but they're just good" or "outplaying their opponent". If you have to be good with a character to reach high placings and have to outplay people, and are perfectly capable of it, then you're character is most likely fine aside from minor tweaks (yes, even ness).

I apologize for assuming otherwise. Most of the conversation you expressed stuff from 3.02 onward. I can agree that we would much rather look at the full cast rather than a smaller portion, even when that smaller portion still had tweaks and adjustments and existed within that same full roster with close to the same level of consistency, at least on the part of Fox.

Since 3.5, I've believed that the new intention was to make a player invest time into playing their character and matchups with their character in order to reach a level that allows for them to know and understand what makes them tick. And yes, a lot of what this comes down to is that the better players these days put more time and effort into the game and cultivating their abilities with their characters to succeed. It's essentially what I think of Junebug as a player; he loves PM and has stayed putting in those extra miles with Diddy and to a degree Ganon. It would be silly to disregard the results he's had and how he's affected Diddy.

But at the same time, not all characters get to share in this spotlight because of specific limitations they have. For example, Zard, I believe, looks to be a great character on paper, and European Smash results actually suggest that feeling such a way is completely reasonable. Yet...is he actually fine as a character? No, he has a lot to overcome if we look at the cast as a whole, and has quite an uphill battle in the North American metagame. With such dissonance between regions, how are we supposed to place any character if representation for them is lower in one part than the other?

Sure, Diddy could be top tier by this logic due to recent placings. Roy could also still be. But Fox still held quite the number of titles, especially during 3.5. To say he wouldn't even be in S-tier as @ frankxthexbunny suggested is a very bold claim and requires quite a lot of data, analysis, etc. that has been suggested we don't necessarily have all the time, due to the rapid developing nature of the game.

In a lot of ways, the "Fox problem" is a trap for both sides, because it is both entirely correct to say that he has stayed the test of time as one of the best characters in the game and a top contender for #1, and also to say that the amount of information we have about the game continues to change with updates to the point of leaving question marks all over the place. Is it really sensible, for example, that there are people whose A-tiers are at least half the cast, ordered or not?

 

[Deleted member]

3.5, wolf, sheik, lucario, rob, and roy were all on par or arguably better than fox.

as the only good sheik player, no. just no.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

I apologize for assuming otherwise. Most of the conversation you expressed stuff from 3.02 onward. I can agree that we would much rather look at the full cast rather than a smaller portion, even when that smaller portion still had tweaks and adjustments and existed within that same full roster with close to the same level of consistency, at least on the part of Fox.

Since 3.5, I've believed that the new intention was to make a player invest time into playing their character and matchups with their character in order to reach a level that allows for them to know and understand what makes them tick. And yes, a lot of what this comes down to is that the better players these days put more time and effort into the game and cultivating their abilities with their characters to succeed. It's essentially what I think of Junebug as a player; he loves PM and has stayed putting in those extra miles with Diddy and to a degree Ganon. It would be silly to disregard the results he's had and how he's affected Diddy.

But at the same time, not all characters get to share in this spotlight because of specific limitations they have. For example, Zard, I believe, looks to be a great character on paper, and European Smash results actually suggest that feeling such a way is completely reasonable. Yet...is he actually fine as a character? No, he has a lot to overcome if we look at the cast as a whole, and has quite an uphill battle in the North American metagame. With such dissonance between regions, how are we supposed to place any character if representation for them is lower in one part than the other?

Sure, Diddy could be top tier by this logic due to recent placings. Roy could also still be. But Fox still held quite the number of titles, especially during 3.5. To say he wouldn't even be in S-tier as @ frankxthexbunny suggested is a very bold claim and requires quite a lot of data, analysis, etc. that has been suggested we don't necessarily have all the time, due to the rapid developing nature of the game.

In a lot of ways, the "Fox problem" is a trap for both sides, because it is both entirely correct to say that he has stayed the test of time as one of the best characters in the game and a top contender for #1, and also to say that the amount of information we have about the game continues to change with updates to the point of leaving question marks all over the place. Is it really sensible, for example, that there are people whose A-tiers are at least half the cast, ordered or not?

I have a question, which changes the subject completely, between the nerfs and your claim (that i'd more or less agree with) that many characters were made specifically with spacies in mind, that is to say to do well against spacies, wouldn't that inevitably create a lot of bad matchups for the spacies putting them behind even further than if they were ignored?

EDIT: Just a thought experiment if you take this as an assertion I'm specifically making I swear to christ
EDIT EDIT: I don't know what it's like now, but I remember donkey kong really putting a hurting on spacies specifically due to his ridiculous punish game even though the rest of the cast he has a hard time handling. Similar case for DEDEDE and Bowser, both big fat useless characters who do well against rushdown pressure characters that you can combo (and no one else). I don't play fatties so I'm no expert at ths point, just once again this is something to be considered

 

[Rawkobo]

I have a question, which changes the subject completely, between the nerfs and your claim (that i'd more or less agree with) that many characters were made specifically with spacies in mind, that is to say to do well against spacies, wouldn't that inevitably create a lot of bad matchups for the spacies putting them behind even further than if they were ignored?

EDIT: Just a thought experiment if you take this as an assertion I'm specifically making I swear to christ

Not particularly, because it would imply that having options to deal with fast-fallers is the same as being designed to deal with fast-fallers. For example, it's perfectly feasible for someone like Sonic or Samus to have an even matchup against spacies because they have ways to deal with/combo fast-fallers fairly well, but that doesn't describe the matchup as a whole. When the matchup is even, it requires knowledge, on both ends, to try and win it. That much is clear.

So the answer would be, yes, assuming characters were designed to beat spacies and occurred more frequently, they would start forcing spacies down the list, even if they were the fulcrum that drove such design. But I would also say, as a side claim (which isn't what you asked, I know), that giving characters tools to deal with spacies isn't equivalent and doesn't necessarily make the matchup a losing matchup if the character retains many of the other problems in the neutral against them. You can improve punishes all you like, but having the stronger neutral does make quite a difference.

EDIT: I noticed the double edit and cite the last paragraph as an answer to it. One could argue that Zard/Bowser have the tools to fight spacies reasonably well, and assuming they are the crux of the metagame, they should be much higher. But there are a slew of limitations that go with both of those characters if you listen to mains of them talk. Sure, they have unprecedented potential assuming perfect play, but they both, once again, still have uphill battles. Spacies have been agreed to not have those same issues assuming perfect play, because their abilties are much less limited as a whole. Some are still limited, like Falco and Wolf to a degree, but not being a big body/requiring a grab for everything is a big boon that gives them more dominance in the theoretical matchup.

The other problem with the "Fox problem" is that saying he's either the best or nowhere close to the best doesn't really account for other characters and how they interact with one another. Especially since the matchup chart is 1681 squares deep.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

Not particularly, because it would imply that having options to deal with fast-fallers is the same as being designed to deal with fast-fallers. For example, it's perfectly feasible for someone like Sonic or Samus to have an even matchup against spacies because they have ways to deal with/combo fast-fallers fairly well, but that doesn't describe the matchup as a whole. When the matchup is even, it requires knowledge, on both ends, to try and win it. That much is clear.

So the answer would be, yes, assuming characters were designed to beat spacies and occurred more frequently, they would start forcing spacies down the list, even if they were the fulcrum that drove such design. But I would also say, as a side claim (which isn't what you asked, I know), that giving characters tools to deal with spacies isn't equivalent and doesn't necessarily make the matchup a losing matchup if the character retains many of the other problems in the neutral against them. You can improve punishes all you like, but having the stronger neutral does make quite a difference.

well sure but say you win neutral 30 percent of the time, but you can easily capitalize 120% better, you have a net win do you not? Think of it like melee's peach marth. Marth wins neutral about 80% of the time against peach, but he HAS to win neutral that percent and capitalize optimally to win, because Peach's punishes take a larger chunk of marth's "life" once the punish starts since he dies way faster. For this reason people sometimes call the matchup more or less even with debates from both ends as to who has the slight edge. If donkey kong gets what is effectively a wobble out of a grab, he only has to win neutral 4 times to win the set, while fox has to win neutral a lot more often (not that he doesn't have the tools to do so)

 

[Rawkobo]

well sure but say you win neutral 30 percent of the time, but you can easily capitalize 120% better, you have a net win do you not? Think of it like melee's peach marth. Marth wins neutral about 80% of the time against peach, but he HAS to win neutral that percent and capitalize optimally to win, because Peach's punishes take a larger chunk of marth's "life" once the punish starts since he dies way faster. For this reason people sometimes call the matchup more or less even with debates from both ends as to who has the slight edge. If donkey kong gets what is effectively a wobble out of a grab, he only has to win neutral 4 times to win the set, while fox has to win neutral a lot more often (not that he doesn't have the tools to do so)

But DK also has to work as many times as Fox wins neutral harder to win the neutral per the nature of his design. Getting an optimal grab is not simple on a theoretical top level when both characters are supposed to have their maximum available options.

That's the nature of why Fox's neutral tends to be slated as the best. Sure, you might have to win neutral a bunch of times against a character to actually get around to killing them, but when you have incredibly versatile options that let you change the style of neutral based on matchup, you are overwhelmingly more likely to get that successful win in neutral that you need over other characters that lack that versatility for their neutral, or lack thereof.

The quantity of neutral wins is a lot more damning than defending if those same options keep many characters that require less wins in neutral to take a stock at a disadvantage.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

But DK also has to work as many times as Fox wins neutral harder to win the neutral per the nature of his design. Getting an optimal grab is not simple on a theoretical top level when both characters are supposed to have their maximum available options.

That's the nature of why Fox's neutral tends to be slated as the best. Sure, you might have to win neutral a bunch of times against a character to actually get around to killing them, but when you have incredibly versatile options that let you change the style of neutral based on matchup, you are overwhelmingly more likely to get that successful win in neutral that you need over other characters that lack that versatility for their neutral, or lack thereof.

The quantity of neutral wins is a lot more damning than defending if those same options keep many characters that require less wins in neutral to take a stock at a disadvantage.

So best neutral makes for the best character, you'd say, punishes or no? Or am I oversimplifying

 

[Rawkobo]

So best neutral makes for the best character, you'd say, punishes or no? Or am I oversimplifying

One could simplify it down to that. I would say there haven't been characters with a comparable array with options yet.

I would also argue that as you said, this game is young even with three years under the belt, and that we have yet to see the development of perfectly viable characters reach a peak. There could be a better neutral that just hasn't been expressed yet.

EDIT: In the simplified context you proposed here, I tend to bring up Smash 4 Roy. Character has fantastic punishes and could very well be a strong, viable character on the upper part of the list. But he's not very likely, perhaps even hardly so, to be the best character in that game due to the nature of his neutral being little to nothing. Having a neutral in the first place helps your placement move up, based on observations of the metagame over the years.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

As for neutral games, the characters with the best neutral I'd say are (besides the species who I just am not going to touch right now for obvious reasons) Lucario still, Wario, Samus, Tlink diddy, roy, rob, and sonic. Pika has a really nice neutral too and I don't know enough bout mewtwo's but I"m sure it's pretty strong as well. Falcon confuses me but it's obvious he's incredibly strong, though I think his neutral is still about baiting at the end of the day, as well as reads. I'm really curious about squirtle's neutral but I don't think anyone knows a damn thing about squirtle so whatever.

If someone question's wario I chose him because of how it easy it is for him to reset back to neutral, which I spose isn't the same thing, but I think wario is incredible. I don't know about metaknights neutral but I get the feeling it's not as good as his punishes.

 

[InfinityCollision]

It's kinda hard to make a character with good neutral and notably bad punishes in PM's engine, just by virtue of what goes into having a good neutral. It'd take a bit of work to achieve that and the result would likely feel pretty terribad to play.

I guess what I'm saying is that there's a strong correlation between strength in neutral and tier placement as a natural product of the game's mechanics. Neutral ties in heavily with a lot of fundamentally good traits and there's rarely enough of a discrepancy in the punish game to outright reverse that trend. The combination of strong neutral with easy and early kill confirms on the other hand is potentially a different story - oh hi Captain Falcon, I didn't see you walk in.

 

[frankxthexbunny]

It's kinda hard to make a character with good neutral and notably bad punishes in PM's engine, just by virtue of what goes into having a good neutral. It'd take a bit of work to achieve that and the result would likely feel pretty terribad to play.

I guess what I'm saying is that there's a strong correlation between strength in neutral and tier placement as a natural product of the game's mechanics. Neutral ties in heavily with a lot of fundamentally good traits and there's rarely enough of a discrepancy in the punish game to outright reverse that trend. The combination of strong neutral with easy and early kill confirms on the other hand is potentially a different story - oh hi Captain Falcon, I didn't see you walk in.

Yeah the best sorta thing you can do is decrease your damage to the point where a 5 hit string only does like 50 percent or give them no recovery/edgeguarding capabilities

 

[Rawkobo]

As for neutral games, the characters with the best neutral I'd say are (besides the species who I just am not going to touch right now for obvious reasons) Lucario still, Wario, Samus, Tlink diddy, roy, rob, and sonic. Pika has a really nice neutral too and I don't know enough bout mewtwo's but I"m sure it's pretty strong as well. Falcon confuses me but it's obvious he's incredibly strong, though I think his neutral is still about baiting at the end of the day, as well as reads. I'm really curious about squirtle's neutral but I don't think anyone knows a damn thing about squirtle so whatever.

If someone question's wario I chose him because of how it easy it is for him to reset back to neutral, which I spose isn't the same thing, but I think wario is incredible. I don't know about metaknights neutral but I get the feeling it's not as good as his punishes.

A lot of the characters you mentioned are a lot higher up the list. But there is one thing I sort of missed out with that simplification.

Once you have the characters with the best neutrals in a group, what divides them is what follows logically, which is how good their punish game is as well. That cuts a lot of the characters you mentioned down to a good top 4/5, with, at least in my opinion, Fox being within it alongside Wolf in some place, albeit I'll admit it could possibly be not in the #1 spot.

 

[Nausicaa]

In fact, there are a lot of characters that had ridiculous designs in 3.02 of all patches that have completely fallen off the radar...and yet, as far as I can tell through practice and experimentation, should be perhaps rated much higher than they are. In particular, I think people are sleeping a lot on Sonic because Wizzy stopped playing, and then the top tier player dropoff for the character goes pretty deep, if I'm just being honest based off of observation. I'm no expert, but Sonic has some pretty disgusting lack of representation that I hope to maybe see rectified at Paragon LA or other events.

It's lack of development that leads to the realm of possibility of Fox being worse than top 3. But when people are making tier lists, it's a screenshot of the current period. Melee was also this way, and it's currently contributing to the discussion that Marth might be third best in the game, simply because of the new cultivation of his metagame making his Sheik matchup surprisingly better than it used to be at a top level, as well as being an arguable check to Fox's dominance these days.

I agree that a year from now, one could say the development of characters' metagames may have changed the course of things. And yes, until PM starts being much more of a complete picture, which involves a lot of implementation, examination, etc., it's hard to say that we know for certain that such things are the case. I should indeed watch my language with "unquestionable;" of course it's questionable. But again, that's implying it's also unreasonable to act off of what we already know, even if we don't know everything.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't say that the characters you mentioned are quite on the levels of development to be better than Fox at a top, top level. Because top level in this game requires quite the understanding of matchups, which few people have on Fox let alone other characters of this game. But they certainly try, and that's important.

Here's where some things get funny.
I mentioned in an earlier post, how 4 Top players (like... TOP players) from Melee, came into PM, and for over 2 years (2 whole years, no less, probably a couple more months even), played Wolf basically like a copy-pasted Fox.

They were trash. I called them out for being trash. Told them all exactly why they were struggling, why what some of what they were doing worked, what they were both applying and not applying, every little nuance of their games was COMPLETELY observable in the right light. They didn't seem to have any idea what they were going for or what direction they were about to go.
*that's probably the key point there really

There were also very average players basically playing the same way, and they were barely ANY trashier than these TOP (TOP) Melee players were with the character for 2 entire years of game-play and development.

Wolf hasn't changed very much with any of the patches. Some change, not much.
Result? Game-play today looks very different than it did from those players then (literally every publicly commonly view-able player for 2 years). Nothing changed, what is known as bread-and-butter game-play has.

Yet somehow (magic) the way the 'good Wolf players' play the character TODAY is exactly word for word the STARTING POINT of how I described Wolf to be optimally played from day 1. Literally the first month of 2.1 this was starting to happen. In many upon many discussions with each of them, some more than others, and even full lengthy threads because of how bad they were.
There's a link to something in this thread for a TINY piece of something.

double post because this deserves a post of its own

[URL]http://www.smashmods.com/forum/threads/dat-wolf.4486/

[/URL]

They still do things worse than they could, and worse than I did back then let alone if I played now, and yet for all of 2.1 and earlier patches, Wolf was consider quite bad. Not even mid-tier kind of thing. In a game where characters were generally a bit worse than they are today even after some of the recent fat-trimming.

Was Wolf bad? No, we know that now. Was it a time-stamp of our current state-of-play? Only if what was very observable was ignored due to paying attention to things in a very specific manner (key point comes here) WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING what that way-of-looking at the character even was.


Another example, Sonic as you mentioned.
Everything you said, spot-on.
Funny note, 2.1 Sonic was considered bad. He's worse now than he was then, and this is the worse Sonic has ever been.
He's still solid.
I doubt anybody today has any idea how much of a beast Sonic actually was, because again, it was observing things in a certain light. Result? Usually something being jank or losing to hit-boxes or some other side-effect on the surface.

Tier-Lists are hard.
Balance is harder.

A: You and I are on a similar wavelength I think but you're further along (which I would guess is the same thing as being further back to you) than I am I'd say. I do have a question though: What if they do it as well? If you can reach flow, and you have that advantage of oneness with your intentions, doesn't the advantage disappear the moment your opponent reaches it as well? then it's almost as if neither had done so, it'd be back to relying on one's familiarity with tech and fundamentals would it not?

B: would you ever consider playing with me? This isn't a social thread, but if you would shoot me a message.

What do?

Follow the link to this quote and read it if you like. Might tickle your fancy.
This post is a bunch of stuff about the end-game of Smash. There are very few who both understand this intellectually AND experientially.
The posts around it are roughly about the same topic too.

PEWPEW SMASHYPOO

Everyone is learning everything they can about swimming, but never actually learning how to swim.
All each of us needs to do is learn to swim and there's no more drowning. It's a fun world to live in.

This link goes to some stuff about how some of it applies to players on an individual level. There was a previous discussion before this one that is linked in a post in the conversation somewhere too..

PEWPEW PIKACHU

Those 2 things have helped a lot of people, top-end players to scrubs, newbies to vets. Figure you might enjoy it.
It's the same stuff, different words.












Edit: On-topic

Samus is better than Fox
Has a worse neutral and worse punishes and worse pace controlling and edge guarding and recovery and stock finishing and rock paper scissors game and combo string diversity and efficiency and positioning options and everything.

Why is she better?

 

[foxygrandpa]

as the only good sheik player, no. just no.

Are you going to explain why? Or should we stop speculation and just talk about how good we all are?

 

[Nausicaa]

Are you going to explain why? Or should we stop speculation and just talk about how good we all are?

As probably the only player who's beaten Mango with Melee Sheik in an MM who's posting right now.
No, just no.

@ Rawkobo fixed the link to the Wolf thing I mentioned up there. It was linking to a general area, now it's in the right spot.

 

[Tomaster]

the only good sheik player.

I'd take u in the dittos... MM me.

 

[Ripple]

Did Frank just say that DDD and DK do well against rush down heavy characters aiming at spacies specifically?

Absolutely not. Sorry

The only reason people thought DDD could beat fox was because DDD doesn't care about laser camping. He can't handle rush down at all having the worst shield in the game

Edit: in also surprised how no one puts ddd in best neutral category. I can practically ignore everyone else's except falco and Toon link

 

[frankxthexbunny]

Did Frank just say that DDD and DK do well against rush down heavy characters aiming at spacies specifically?

Absolutely not. Sorry

apology accepted

 

[Manaconda]

I'd take u in the dittos... MM me.

Did you just get rid of the $100 part? lol

Follow the link to this quote and read it if you like. Might tickle your fancy.

I'll bite. Where's the link to the quote?

Edit: Found it. I'm an idiot, lol.

 

[Nausicaa]

Did you just get rid of the $100 part? lol



I'll bite. Where's the link to the quote?

Hit the orange arrow pointing upwards beside the name in the quote.

For example, it says Manaconda ^
Click the ^

Both of the quotes I linked are different conversations, might be more ^'s to follow in there even.
DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE! XD

 

[Jonyc128]

Yeah, because it's not like Fox currently dictates the metagame of the upper 8 in Melee or resulted in PM making changes so that characters were capable of dealing with fast-fallers efficiently if they blatantly refused to learn matchups and outplay in PM's setting.

Oh, wait, that's exactly what happened. Pardon me, I had a bit of memory loss.

Look, I understand what you're trying to get across, and I agree that Fox does in fact have a lot of checks now in PM, and has had them since his tweaks in 2.6 and onward. A lot of characters have been experimented with and buffed/nerfed depending on how they work out, and this had led to some of them either being borderline broken or borderline useless. But that doesn't actually refute Melee top tiers being good, nor does it prove that they're overrated. It's a mod that's constantly getting refined, and since 3.5, I've felt like this game is heading in a much better direction than it was before in terms of handling balance and providing characters with much needed mixups, punish game tweaks, etc.

This is a game of matchups, so I understand that now that Fox actually has a few questionable matchups around the cast that it suddenly raises the question, "Is Fox actually the best character in the game?" As a matter of fact, yes, in 3.02, Fox was not the best character game. But he was still one of the best characters in the game.

In fact, this has been relevant since he was playable in the game. Even with certain absurdities showing up like 2.1 Ike, 2.5 Sonic, 2.6 Ivysaur, etc., he's stayed relevant within the top 3 or top 5 of the game. In 3.5, he was unquestionably the best character in the game, since most if not all characters were scaled down to quite a degree. He was the best character in the game even when his matchup with Roy was questionable.

What we understand about Fox from Melee can be applied to this game, because that's how he was inserted. That's the base model the PMDT inserted into the game and maintained until 2.6. That's the character that got his shine nerfed and still maintained full steam in the top 3 into 3.02. That's the character that survived up-smash nerfs and became one of the best Melee top tiers alongside Sheik in 3.5.

And that's because nothing's been done to his neutral, which many people have said, time and time again, is the best of all characters. In most fighting games, the neutral plays a huge role in determining how things play out, so you tend to be in a good place if you have a character with a fantastic neutral. Fox has that and a punish game that rivals some of the best punishers between all the patches of PM that there have ever been.

Our vision of the character might be a little flawed because there are matchups Fox has a bit of a tougher time with in this game, and there is a lot to be learned about the game as a whole. But your vision is also flawed if you're actively ignoring that Fox has the best collective traits of any character rolled into one simply because there are characters that may have some awkward design changes.

Show me a character with more consistent relevancy between every patch that isn't either Fox or, barring 3.02, Sheik.

Maybe Mario? From what I can remember he's always been a great character, 3.02 just brought to light some of his overbearing qualities. Fireballs for days, bull**** dair hitbox, ridiculous recovery options. Even though he had those qualities nerfed, he's stilled remained an incredibly solid character albeit he's not seen as much as say Fox, Diddy, Sheik etc

 

[Tomaster]

Did you just get rid of the $100 part? lol

Yea I figured it wasn't enough... Us Playing over 100$ would be like goku and vegeta having a battle over an ice cream cone.

 

[Nausicaa]

incredibly solid character

Did you just call in the most TERRIBLY FORMATTED GUIDE IN THE HISTORY OF ORANGE?!?!?!

With Mario, you have what you need to cover every angle at any time. The tricky part comes with the way he doesn’t cover anything excessive amounts for very long, so it takes constant awareness and proper activity to be as solid as Mario can be. Since you have the potential to have access to what you need at any given moment, the only time you don’t have access to those tools is when you’re being hit. When you’re not in the process of being hit, you can handle anything. Naturally, this means one thing. Safety first.

Mario isn’t a walling character, or a lock-out or lock-down character. He’s not built like a tank or evasive character either. Despite all this, he can create a very profound form of solidity. This comes from the way he’s built to be functional when he has access to all of the necessary tools to cover anything, to be at full capacity. To do this, it’s simple enough. Play him solidly. Play like you’re a block, a fortress, a tank, a rock. When you’re playing like a solid chunk of earth, then your tools are all accessible, but most importantly, they won’t be taken away from you. Your opponent won’t be able to make your tools inaccessible, and this means you’ll be at fully capacity.

You have the tools to do this, and this protects all your other tools. How it works, is utilizing the core and essentials of what Mario has to become impenetrable while still active. Never overextending, but still very extendable. He’s loaded with everything from hard hits to soft hits, quick attacks to slow attacks at all different angles and ranges. He’s mobile in all ways at all times. All of these in effect guarantees an unbreakable foundation. The only time this isn’t guaranteed is when he breaks it himself. So don’t break it.

Stay grounded, as that’s where you have more access to all your tools. If you overextend with full jumps or get caught out of position off stage, on platforms or while approaching, you’re taking unnecessary risks. You don’t need to take major risks if you’re enforcing yourself as a rock while you move. Mario is most threatening when he’s at full capacity, not when he’s in the process of committing to only some part of his game.

On the ground, you have more directional control due to your dash dance, short hops and wavedash all being very effectively functional and quick. This leaves room to evade or approach whenever you need to. If you’re in the process of other actions simply to cover yourself, you’ll leave gaps where you can be approached more easily or you’ll miss chances to approach. If you have total control over your directional speed at all times, you’re much harder to penetrate.

Mario has a lot of offensive options out of his shield with solid aerials and his grab, so using your shield as an approach is something that’s important to be familiar with. Your burst speed can get you to where you need to be, but it won’t be often that approaches are guaranteed since he doesn’t shine at forcing openings, he can simply take them when they’re there. So shielding may often be the best thing to fall back on in an uncertain situation.

When a shield approach doesn’t work, you need to get out in the most efficient way that returns your options so you can stay solid STAY SOLID STTTAAAAYYY SOOLLLIIIIDDD. Make sure shielding and wavedashing out is very natural. You want to keep mobile both to approach and evade, but when there’s a chance you’ll be caught by something as you pressure them, you need to make sure it’s not taking away your options for long, if at all.

While staying grounded, you have access to your greatest offensive tool, grabs. Grabs will lead to more on a universal level than almost anything else Mario has. This gives you more control of positioning than any other tool since it leaves you options after connecting one. The more you can keep your options open while on offense, the better, since Mario thrives on options. Grabs have plenty of flexibility and make a good foundation for the following potential damage output.

Mario has a solid aerial game to go along with his ground game. All his aerials have decent range and can hit hard to follow up. They’re all useful in different ways in short hops too. If the opponent commits to something in means of approaching you or countering your approach, you might have the option of catching them with an aerial. Be fluent using all of your aerials in short hops, as approaches or backing away, and from your shield to counter or punish after successful baits.

Always be ready to take opportunities when the come up. Stay close to your opponent and close in on them but don’t leave openings. Your presence alone will be a solid offense if you’re staying mobile without leaving any cracks for them.

Keep in mind at all times during the neutral game that keeping all of his options at the ready is the greatest priority. Without a rock foundation, the functionality of his flexibility is weakened simply for being at risk. Those tools are all ready for Mario whether you play like a solid dense block or not, so playing with the intention of not letting the opponent have any chances isn’t going to hinder your own chances. It will only insure you’ll get your chances. By staying grounded, you’re never loose from options.

Given that Mario has so many options for everything but doesn’t excel in too many areas, it’s necessary to be able to meld all of his tools together fluently while in full motion. A comfort with all the nuances and intricate variations of how he can move and what he can do during those movements are what will keep you threatening the opponent, as this is what defines his offense. This is the natural state of Mario, but is only possible when he’s safe to use it, so the foundation is needed before his potential offense can always be maxed. To be at maximum potential once he has the option, all transitional tools are needed to go from the neutral game onward.
When the foundation is solid and all his options are function with fluidity, his offensive out put comes into play.
The threat of Mario comes a lot from being an agile and adaptable fortress of flexibility. What makes this side of him threatening is all the tools he has accessible when those criteria are met.

Mario solid

 

[Warhawk]

The combos are still brain dead simple for fox, you just do upthrow >whatever you want, on every shine go for the jab reset and that's a free falling upair>whatever if I don't tech his frame 1 move.

I know that this isn't the point of your post, but I'm more curious on this particular situation and choice and wanted to get another opinion of it. I always avoided the jab reset as out of grounded knockdown shine as Fox and thought that its use should be avoided. The falling uair reward for getting it is amazing, but if you're opponent SDIs up and nairs you in the face then you've not only dropped your advantageous situation but given the opponent the chance to reverse it on you. I always felt Fox should downtilt out of a shine knockdown instead and at worst take his advantageous positioning from the hit. Do you think that the reward justifies the risk with the jab reset or am I additionally unaware of something in PM that makes it better?

 

[Deleted member]

I'd take u in the dittos... MM me.

no.

Are you going to explain why? Or should we stop speculation and just talk about how good we all are?

i would prefer the latter yes.

 

[Nausicaa]

Edit: in also surprised how no one puts ddd in best neutral category. I can practically ignore everyone else's except falco and Toon link

I love how everyone can ignore his neutral, but he can ignore neutrals just as hard back.
Anti-meta much?
I think some people were catching on to why the Ooze gets a separate tier.

It's that jank (odd) tier (kid) in the list (family) that nobody wants to talk about but that we all accept.

 

[Tomaster]

no.

I'd back out too if I were in ur place

 

[Manaconda]

Umbreon doesn't accept donations.

Edit: So I like comboing Bowser in training mode because it's kind of fun for trying out new characters. Is there something about Bowser I don't know that allows him to only put a hitbox on one side of his Fortress?

http://imgur.com/Z2akW9Y