Official 4BR Tier List v1.0 - Competitive Impressions

[Solfiner]

I enjoy playing the characters I like over winning personally, just how I am.

I think we should just respect people for playing whoever they feel like, top tier or not.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

"Lack of results for Peach"

Ling Ling got 13th at a pretty stacked regional soooo

Ewww @ looking at placement without considering the circumstances. Let's take a closer look at that:

1.) The competition was stacked but mostly within top 8 and to some extent top 12. But ~13th is already below that point and nothing that would be out of reach for a player of his skill.
2.) He beat Brawlins, Dark Blues and Leo to get 13th. As stacked as that tournament may have been, that's not exactly a run that somehow proves Peach's viability or anything close to it.
3.) Past a certain point raw placings really don't necessarily mean a lot. 13th at a "pretty stacked regional" sounds like a big deal but is honestly about on par with like 49th at a supernational like Genesis 3 [which is still pretty good, mind you].

 

[FallofBrawl]

Falco's neutral is overall bad. That's what happens when you combine slow mobility with an inability to camp. Villager is even slower than Falco but has a much better neutral because his camping ability makes up for it. Yes, Falco has good frame data and range, but again, he can't readily take advantage of that in most MU's. Again, I compare him to Meta Knight in that Meta Knight also has attack speed and range, but these are readily usable because his mobility stats allow him to quickly get close and threaten his opponent.

It's not impossible for Falco to get close, but it IS difficult. But that's not the whole issue: even when Falco gets in, his decent combo game is not enough to compensate for his weak neutral game.

Saying that the nerf to lasers didn't butcher Falco's neutral is a HUGE understatement. would've been significantly worse without his blaster. I know because I play him in Melee, and any one reputable will tell you the same thing. Playing Melee/Brawl Falco without lasers is like walking blindfolded. What did lasers do? They gave Falco an excellent tool for approaching, camping, pressuring, comboing, and edge-guarding. Is that balanced? No, but that's not my argument. But can you say it wasn't essential to his play style? Can you say that Falco can make do without lasers without being compensated? HELL NO. Was it his only option is neutral? No, but it was undoubtedly his most important (Shine was important, too, but again, that was a CQC option (lol), so it would be much less threatening without his projectile).

There are several characters who would have much worse neutral games if you nerfed only one or two moves. Melee/Brawl Marth's fair and d tilt were his two most important moves in neutral, and both were significantly nerfed in Smash 4. If you just gave Marth those two moves, he would without a doubt be a noticeably better character.

Heck, I'll use a more relevant example that I know:. What options does he have in neutral? Dash attack, dash grab, d tilt, dair, fsmash, and ftilt. Even though those are 6 moves, if you so much as nerfed dash attack by slowing it down, removing its disjoint, lowering its angle, or increasing its knockback--anything that negated it as an approach option and/or combo tool--he would be no longer be a top-tier, because you're removing the single most important tool in his neutral game by making it unsafe and/or ruining its combo potential which, in turn, removes a large part of his fear factor through worsening his punishing ability. A character could easily drop to low-tier if you only touched one move, and Falco is perhaps the single best example of that. The nerfs to his dair are minuscule next to the loss of his camping ability.

TL;DR Smash 4 Falco's neutral game was butchered mainly because he lost his projectile without any meaningful compensation.

While I agree with your points on Falco, most of the cast in smash 4 was also neutered from Melee and Brawl. Projectiles in smash 4 are pretty much nerfed in general, making longer ranged fighting less important in this game as compared to others, especially with the number of characters that have anti-projectile tools/designs in this game: (I'm sure I'm missing more)

While Falco lost a lot of things uncompensated, the rest of the cast also got watered down, making his neutral not as tragic as you make it up to be.

 

[MF Viewtiful]

This is the way it should be.

I don't understand people who want to win but stick to characters who aren't suited to win.

You're going to put hundreds of hours of playtime into a character just to go to a tournament and get Sheik'd by a player who may even be worse than you? Really?

It's like going to work in a really uncomfortable suit, because it's your favorite and you like the color, and sitting there for 8-10 hours just bearing it because hey, it's a really nice suit.

Screw that. Just wear something really comfortable and do your work like a badass.

Pick a ****ing Top Tier! It feels so good.

Would it be against the rules to link the Sanford Kelly "PICK A TOP TIER"? I read that last line in his voice.

 

[Mr. Johan]

God forbid someone finds a character that really clicks with them and brings about their best qualities as a player, regardless if that character is a top tier or not.

Why bother being a world-class musician when you could have been a heart surgeon or astrophysicist.



I speak as someone who used both Robin and Sonic starting out, and well after the patches that hit the latter. Over time, I just grew dispassionate over using Sonic, and just stuck to Robin mostly full time.

I dunno, I guess I feel more personally satisfied and driven by using the mid tier.

 

[NairWizard]

There's a huge difference between playing to the best of your ability with a given character and playing to win using a gimped toolset.

Keep in mind (though I figured this would be obvious because this is the competitive impressions thread) that I am referring to tournaments. Competitive gaming. Not friendlies, not For Glory, but tournament competition where your goal is (usually) to get as high of a placing as you can.

If you've just come to show off what your character can do, that's completely different, but don't be salty about not getting first because you got Sheik'd if that was your primary goal.

It's not that simple though. Sometimes top tier characters just simply do not mesh with your particular playstyle, or in other cases, you're flat out better at using lowered tiered characters.

I don't necessarily disagree with your viewpoint, but it would be more accurate to say that if you really wanted to succeed in tournament, then you should be using the highest tiered character that you can possibly play at your fullest.

The game requires the same fundamentals for almost every character though (or at the least you can group/bucket characters by archetype). If you're truly good at the game there's no reason you can't play at least half the characters in the cast given enough practice.

If a style of playing just bores you to the point of not wanting to play the game at all, there are reasonable alternatives. That's why I said "a top tier," rather than "Sheik." If you don't like Sheik's low-damage Needle-heavy playstyle, there's ZSS, Bayonetta, or MK. If you want great neutral on top of great reward, there's Cloud. If you want a super reactive, spacing-heavy, zoning character there's Rosalina (sorry Megaman/Pacman/etc. fans, but most of the heavy zoners get Sheik'd/have random problems in neutral).

Though I more or less agree with what you're saying.

I enjoy playing the characters I like over winning personally, just how I am.

I think we should just respect people for playing whoever they feel like, top tier or not.

The problem is with the bitterness that EL was talking about earlier in the thread. It's fine to play who you want, but it's just totally silly to complain about losing to top tiers after committing to your choice.

I understand and respect character loyalty. I've liked Pikachu since 64/Melee and tried to exploit his broken traits in this game as much as I could, but I have to do so much more work than my opponent to win games that it's just not worth the time investment if I want to compete at tournaments (admittedly I don't compete as often as I used to due to various health-related reasons, but forget about that for now). Basically, if you want to win, Pikachu should not be your choice.

Why bother being a world-class musician when you could have been a heart surgeon or astrophysicist.

lol, really? I can't even

How are these even remotely comparable situations?

"all things you could ever accomplish in life"

is not even marginally similar to

"all characters you could play in the same competitive video game"

 

[BTVolta]

Very interested in the next big tournament Reflex goes to. seems to be stalling and a great performance by him could respark some life back into the character

CEO should have all of Florida's Wario's show up (Lord Frieza, Black guy gamer, Snorley). I expect Frieza to make top 16 at most, but he should at least make it out of pools.

 

[Tri Knight]

With all the top/high tier characters in this game, it's really hard not to pick a character you like AND can actually realistically win with.

Even if your stubborn there's nothing wrong with a pocket character in case your main got pulverized.

 

[BunbUn129]

[

While I agree with your points on Falco, most of the cast in smash 4 was also neutered from Melee and Brawl. Projectiles in smash 4 are pretty much nerfed in general, making longer ranged fighting less important in this game as compared to others, especially with the number of characters that have anti-projectile tools/designs in this game: (I'm sure I'm missing more)

While Falco lost a lot of things uncompensated, the rest of the cast also got watered down, making his neutral not as tragic as you make it up to be.

The issue is he got watered down too much relative to the cast. The main issue isn't that they nerfed Falco's neutral, it's that they nerfed it without compensating. had their camping abilities (and in turn, neutral games) worsened, but they were compensated in either improved combo games (Beep-Boop and formerly Hoo-hah), and/or frame data to give them better CQC (ROB's nair auto-cancels in a short-hop). Falco's CQC didn't improve, and his new combos act as replacements to his chain-grabbing, not an actual improvement.

 

[FullMoon]

Eh, it's not like I'll be becoming any sort of top player myself so I'll just stay with the character I like the most since that's been working very well for me considering I place fairly well when there's any tournaments where I live.

I don't really feel like Greninja is holding me back, except maybe when I'm fighting Sheik, but I'm smart enough to know that I'm making things more difficult for myself for not playing a better character so I don't get salty.

And if anything else I do have a pocket Bayo to fall back on if Greninja really is not working.

 

[momochuu]

I felt like Greninja was holding me back from being as good as I should have been, so I play him only in friendlies for the most part now.

I've been told many times I'd win a lot more if I played a better character that I actually liked (I hate how sheik plays in this game) and it was true.

 

[Djent]

Provided that you enjoy winning and make it one of your primary goals, there is no level of aptitude for which picking weaker characters makes any sense. If you don't possess extraordinary amounts of natural talent, you'll certainly lose to someone who does and who picked a better character (and the combination of these factors means that it won't be pretty). If you do, then why not pick one that will actually win you majors?

Which segues nicely into my other point:

In both games, the high tier characters are viable at a regional level and below, but generally fizzle out before accomplishing anything notable at the national level without a secondary (the notable exception being Salem's Apex win with Brawl ZSS, but that was largely off MU inexperience IMO). I wouldn't say anyone from ZeRo's high tier is markedly less viable in Smash 4 than any former high tiers from their respective games.

I agree with your assessment of what "high tier" should mean. But with regards to ZeRo's list and viability, I'm not so sure. You're already getting into characters with -2 MUs by the end his top tier (and not just obscure ones either), which IMO is comparable to what the worst characters in Melee/Brawl high tier had to deal with. I don't think it will remain the case forever that so many characters are capable of doing well at the regional level. I hope I'm wrong.

"Lack of results for Peach"

Ling Ling got 13th at a pretty stacked regional soooo

But if you look at the talent outside of top 16, that's not a huge accomplishment. Better examples of results would be Umeki and SlayerZ. There's also Saj, who beat ANTi before switching to Bayo.

 

[Jalil]

Obviously picking a top tier is the smartest thing to do if you want to win but in reality you don't really want everyone to follow that advice. Yall're using it as more of a counter claim to people complaining about character matchups

 

[Das Koopa]

right, it was one (the most recent example) of Peach doing well, but seldom the only one

I feel like some people are creating an exaggerated backlash to Peach

Step 1: Character gets hyped for unjustified reasons
Step 2: Character, in some way or another, doesn't live up to hype
Step 3: Character is called bad, nonviable, etc, even if that character does passably or even well in high-talent regions

10$ says this will happen to Toon Link

Ewww @ looking at placement without considering the circumstances. Let's take a closer look at that:

1.) The competition was stacked but mostly within top 8 and to some extent top 12. But ~13th is already below that point and nothing that would be out of reach for a player of his skill.
2.) He beat Brawlins, Dark Blues and Leo to get 13th. As stacked as that tournament may have been, that's not exactly a run that somehow proves Peach's viability or anything close to it.
3.) Past a certain point raw placings really don't necessarily mean a lot. 13th at a "pretty stacked regional" sounds like a big deal but is honestly about on par with like 49th at a supernational like Genesis 3 [which is still pretty good, mind you].

Speaking of Genesis 3, SlayerZ got 17th and Umeki got 33rd.

 

[Locke 06]

Picking a viable character is important. If you find yourself complaining about how "underpowered" your character is or "overpowered" better characters are, you're not going to enjoy your stay in competitive smash.

However, picking a top X character is not needed. As long as you feel that the strengths of your character are strong enough to compete and that the weaknesses are small enough to work around, there's plenty of room to grow. Allowing your skill as a player shine is the most important thing imo; your character should ultimately be a medium.

The game is still stupidly young and the amount of growth from top players in the past half a year has been disgusting. They've also been playing the same characters since release (mostly looking at Dabuz, props to you sir) and not only developing their character, but the character's matchups.

"This matchup feels 7-3" now could be because you're just playing it wrong. -shrug- That's not a jab to anyone, because figuring out matchups is hard. But Dabuz went from thinking about trying Olimar vs ZSS to making Nairo think about someone else vs Rosa.

The more you learn, the more you learn you know nothing.

Re Peach: This character is good. Full stop.
Float is an incredibly powerful spacing tool. Her stage control is amazing. Her punishes are great (dthrow>damage). Her shield pressure has real frame traps.

Does she have weaknesses? Of course. It's not like I don't abuse them myself. But I would say that her strengths are strong enough to overcome her weaknesses on a regular basis.

 

[CHIEf]

Somebody once told Sol that Mac holds him back. He replied saying "I hold Mac back".

For the sake of the metagame, that's the mindset we need to have. The scene will die if everyone goes around thinking the top 10 are the only characters worth using.

 

[juddy96]

Provided that you enjoy winning and make it one of your primary goals, there is no level of aptitude for which picking weaker characters makes any sense. If you don't possess extraordinary amounts of natural talent, you'll certainly lose to someone who does and who picked a better character (and the combination of these factors means that it won't be pretty). If you do, then why not pick one that will actually win you majors?

Which segues nicely into my other point:
I agree with your assessment of what "high tier" should mean. But with regards to ZeRo's list and viability, I'm not so sure. You're already getting into characters with -2 MUs by the end his top tier (and not just obscure ones either), which IMO is comparable to what the worst characters in Melee/Brawl high tier had to deal with. I don't think it will remain the case forever that so many characters are capable of doing well at the regional level. I hope I'm wrong.

But if you look at the talent outside of top 16, that's not a huge accomplishment. Better examples of results would be Umeki and SlayerZ. There's also Saj, who beat ANTi before switching to Bayo.

As far as Peach goes, Ling Ling is 5th best imo (behind SlayerZ/Umeki, Kie, and Samsora)

 

[Y2Kay]

I wanted to use my 1,00th post talk about how dope greninja is, but whatever.


I did try the whole "Pick a Top Tier" montra, and it just didn't work out for me.

One time I tried to drop for

I remember thinking to myself, "Fox is okay, but I don't like how he moves in the air. I wish he jumped higher, and had better aerial mobility. I also don't like the lasers either, I wish they had some hitstun"

then I realized I disliked him because he wasn't greninja.

I understand that Greninja and Mewtwo may not be the best choices for winning, but I believe that with enough training and learning I think I can win. I honestly believe that I just need to become more capable to wield my characters, not necessarily wield more capable characters.

I don't think it's necessarily illogical to pick a high tier character as long as you know what you're getting yourself into. I had no idea at the time, but the time I've spent here has let me realize this. I'm not afraid of the challenge, and this road as a competitive smash player would require a lot of work anyway.

Sure, top tiers make it easier on yourself, but winning in a tournament with somewhat lesser characters isn't some insurmountable challenge. People shouldn't get so easily discouraged.

Also, picking someone besides Sheik can be considered illogical or setting yourself back unnecessarily, but doing something tough is just part of being human, honestly. No matter how badly you can try to convince people that top tiers will be the best route, there will always people who will try to prove you wrong. And you know what, that's how it should be!

If it wasn't for a few people being a little rebelious we wouldn't see amsa's or Salem's or istudying's . Our metagame needs some people foolish enough to spice it up some.

 

[BananaBake]

Someone tell the man to pick up Diddy.

I want Diddy to become the standarised counter-pick to Sheik.

Soon we are all gonna realise Diddy is future.

Yeah, but to be honest, Cloud, Mario and Diddy seem like the best contenders to beat Sheik. Or at least, they have the best chance to face up against her.

Funny how when Diddy was nerfed, we all thought he would suck, but now, he's still a really great character, just without the Hoo-Hah

 

[Cassio]

There's sort of a "rich get richer" affect when it comes to tier placement too. When Anti lost 0-3 to hyuga, between his sets he got tons of advice (without even asking) from Void, Zero, and other sheiks who have a ton of experience and with heavy development of their character. He won vs hyuga later that day. Thats a most extreme example but good popular characters receive this benefit in one way or another that enhances the gap in character strength.

 

[BananaBake]

right, it was one (the most recent example) of Peach doing well, but seldom the only one

I feel like some people are creating an exaggerated backlash to Peach

Step 1: Character gets hyped for unjustified reasons
Step 2: Character, in some way or another, doesn't live up to hype
Step 3: Character is called bad, nonviable, etc, even if that character does passably or even well in high-talent regions

10$ says this will happen to Toon Link



Speaking of Genesis 3, SlayerZ got 17th and Umeki got 33rd.

Ever heard of Mewtwo? Everyone thought after his release that the character was garbage and wouldn't make it. Now, he's slowly rising with all these buffs. I appreciate this post for sure

 

[Diddy Kong]

Funny how when Diddy was nerfed, we all thought he would suck, but now, he's still a really great character, just without the Hoo-Hah

Well it's not funny actually, Diddy just always had a very strong tool kit to work with. You cannot be a bad character with such amazing neutral, the Banana and Diddy's aerials and frame data. Sure, Hoo-Hah was easy to abuse, but Diddy still has very good reliable finishing options, as Banana > F Smash or D Tilt > U Smash. There was a time he was legitimately FAR worse than now, that was before the Smashes got KO power buffs, and shields where still overpowered. Diddy was getting shield grabbed for his life, but that's no longer the case. This is also why ZeRo dropped the character innitially.

Yes we true Diddy mains have had it rough, but tides have changed and I firmly believe that even with metagame monsters as , can still legitimately be considered a Top 5 character. I actually think he's a far stronger character than for example (who I think will drop soon). His only real competition for Top 5 spots are in which I only think is capable of beating Diddy for a Top 5 spot.

In fact, if I'd make a current Top 5 I'd say it's; . Following up, I'd say are also still going strong.

 

[Jams.]

Which segues nicely into my other point:
I agree with your assessment of what "high tier" should mean. But with regards to ZeRo's list and viability, I'm not so sure. You're already getting into characters with -2 MUs by the end his top tier (and not just obscure ones either), which IMO is comparable to what the worst characters in Melee/Brawl high tier had to deal with. I don't think it will remain the case forever that so many characters are capable of doing well at the regional level. I hope I'm wrong.

Would MUs like vs and vs be considered -3? I'm not very knowledgeable about Melee MU specifics and couldn't find matchup numbers from reputable sources, so please correct me if my understanding is wrong. I'm also not too familiar with the worst MUs of the 3 official Brawl high tiers despite having played Brawl competitively. Shame on me. =(

 

[BananaBake]

Following up, I'd say are also still going strong.

I feel you. Meta Knight and Bayonetta are going full steam ahead, and Fox is doing alright too. Rosa was kinda always going at her own pace, but still getting places

 

[Djent]

Jams. , my impression was that wins solidly (+2) vs. , though no worse than that. might actually have a +3 vs. , but if that were the case, I think we'd see more tertiary Peaches beating ICs mains. And when you watch stuff like M2K vs. Nintendude, it becomes apparent that you actually have to invest significantly in Peach before she becomes threatening to a top ICs player. So I think it's more likely at the hard end of -2 (kind of like Ness vs. Rosa in this game, come to think of it).

EDIT: but if L9999 actually plays Melee competitively, I'd take his word over mine.

 

[Diddy Kong]

I wanted to use my 1,00th post talk about how dope greninja is, but whatever.


I did try the whole "Pick a Top Tier" montra, and it just didn't work out for me.

One time I tried to drop for

I remember thinking to myself, "Fox is okay, but I don't like how he moves in the air. I wish he jumped higher, and had better aerial mobility. I also don't like the lasers either, I wish they had some hitstun"

then I realized I disliked him because he wasn't greninja.

I understand that Greninja and Mewtwo may not be the best choices for winning, but I believe that with enough training and learning I think I can win. I honestly believe that I just need to become more capable to wield my characters, not necessarily wield more capable characters.

I don't think it's necessarily illogical to pick a high tier character as long as you know what you're getting yourself into. I had no idea at the time, but the time I've spent here has let me realize this. I'm not afraid of the challenge, and this road as a competitive smash player would require a lot of work anyway.

Sure, top tiers make it easier on yourself, but winning in a tournament with somewhat lesser characters isn't some insurmountable challenge. People shouldn't get so easily discouraged.

Also, picking someone besides Sheik can be considered illogical or setting yourself back unnecessarily, but doing something tough is just part of being human, honestly. No matter how badly you can try to convince people that top tiers will be the best route, there will always people who will try to prove you wrong. And you know what, that's how it should be!

If it wasn't for a few people being a little rebelious we wouldn't see amsa's or Salem's or istudying's . Our metagame needs some people foolish enough to spice it up some.

With this mentality, I really hope / encourage / wish you keep on using & . I really think both characters hold a lot of potential, and I think that 's metagame is seriously underdeveloped ever since all the nerfs came along. And that's a shame. I think that his matchup really gets in the way, but in time as the metagame develops it'll probably become less of a hassle. vs is just a matchup players need to work with in order to realy shine. isn't a bad character, in fact, he's a great one. I am very interessted in seeing where characters as and also the likes of will turn out one day.

Remember one time we all thought was a bad character??

 

[L9999]

Would MUs like vs and vs be considered -3? I'm not very knowledgeable about Melee MU specifics and couldn't find matchup numbers from reputable sources, so please correct me if my understanding is wrong. I'm also not too familiar with the worst MUs of the 3 official Brawl high tiers despite having played Brawl competitively. Shame on me. =(

Peach Ice Climbers is complete garbage for IC and there is not a single reason or way the Peach player would lose if both players are equally skilled. The Peach player has too suck to lose.

Jams. , my impression was that wins solidly +2 vs. , though not any worse. might actually +3 , but if that were the case, I think we'd see more tertiary Peaches beating ICs mains. But then you watch stuff like M2K vs. Nintendude, and it becomes apparent that you actually have to invest significantly in Peach before she becomes threatening to a top ICs player. So I think it's probably at the hard end of -2 (kind of like Ness vs. Rosa in this game, come to think of it).

M2K tried to time out in an unloseable MU. His case is invalid.

Remember one time we all thought was a bad character??

In 3DS he was complete garbage. After being buffed he was just underdeveloped until Leo.

 

[C0rvus]

Remember what people used to say about X? Yeah, they suuuuure look stupid now. Oh boy, do am I feeling myself right now for having the currently "valid" opinion. **** the haters.
^^
Not a fan of these sorts of posts. Not trying to put anyone specific on blast, but these aren't really constructive posts at all. They are also kind of hypocritical. I think we should focus on the present and look towards the future. Nothing wrong with being excited about the characters you enjoy, but let's try to keep things a little less petty.

re: Picking a top tier:
I think step number 1 is figuring out why you're playing this game, and what you want to get out of it. Results? Glory for your favorite character? Just need a social outlet? Whatever it is, this is pretty relevant to your character choice. It can also be pretty hard to pin down, but I think everyone wants to have some fun when they play. I dunno about you guys, but winning is a bit more fun than losing, at least to me. As much fun as I have with Jigglypuff on some days (and I definitely do lol), I stopped bringing her to tournaments a long time ago.
Lately I've been watching more top/high level play, and I can certainly see that reaching that point looks like a lot of fun. Zinoto's Diddy Kong, Dabuz's Rosalina, and others are a lot of fun to watch. makes me think "Boy, I'd like to do that." Meanwhile, I love me some Dath gameplay, but a lot of the time I watch his Robin at work in some tough matches and all I can see is the struggle. His play is very impressive, and he does well. But it doesn't look like as much fun.
I still am not sure what I want from this game, but picking a good character looks much more alluring to me, which I think reflects a change in my mentality. I still have bits of scrub left in me, but when it's time to plug in my controller and square off with another human being, I'd rather have confidence in my character so I can get right into playing the game with my opponent.
Just some recent reflections. I still want to play Duck Hunt every time I see him do well though lol.

 

[ZeGlasses!]

's buffs definitely had an impact, but the main thing that really helped MK's viability was the tweaking of vectoring. He was actually a mediocre character because a lot of his dash attack setups and the like didn't work because you could vector out of them. Same with and his throw combos.

 

[Raziek]

How on earth did I forget that. And I've watched it a lot as well. Used to watch a ton of Nova Scotia smash 4 because of Raziek specifically. Cool to see it play out in another region.

I'm late to this, but yeah, neither of them knew the matchup at all.

Dath figured it out faster, and it's also 6-4 Robin advantage primarily because of the disparity in how early they get their kills.

The strange thing to me was how many discs Dandy got away with. That move is NOT safe. Not even close.

 

[FallofBrawl]

Which two high-mid tier characters do you think covers MUs across the board for this game the best?

I personally think the best combo is or

 

[Jalil]

Which two high-mid tier characters do you think covers MUs across the board for this game the best?

I personally think the best combo is or

I think greninja and lucario is a good combo.

 

[Jaguar360]

Which two high-mid tier characters do you think covers MUs across the board for this game the best?

I personally think the best combo is or

Greninja really works out well with the other high-mid tier Pokemon, Lucario especially. Yoshi could pair well with most of the other high-mid tiers as long as Diddy's not an issue for them. Lucario also seems like a good partner for pretty much everyone.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Somebody once told Sol that Mac holds him back. He replied saying "I hold Mac back".

For the sake of the metagame, that's the mindset we need to have. The scene will die if everyone goes around thinking the top 10 are the only characters worth using.

No, the scene will die a helluva lot faster with people complaining about said top 10 characters and not doing anything about it. And yes, there is a difference. The kinda **** I'm talking about goes on in here all the time.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Diddy Kong]

I think greninja and lucario is a good combo.

MewSquared uses a combination of IIRC. I think this works wonders. And I also think are all about equally viable, and cover up matchups nicely.

 

[Nobie]

MewSquared uses a combination of IIRC. I think this works wonders. And I also think are all about equally viable, and cover up matchups nicely.

Incidentally, are what Gibus uses.

 

[Yikarur]

Mewtwo is actually a really good character. If Zero had 28 characters as a high tiers, I'm pretty confident Mewtwo is among the high tiers as well.
And I don't think Greninjas metagame is underdeveloped. He just isn't as good as a character (lower high tier among 28 high tiers still) and all of his gimmicks won't help him in the long run. (and the Sheikproblem of course)

 

[outfoxd]

I switched to a top tier I genuinely like, get better results and then Dandy blows his way to a top 8, making me feel terrible about switching off Dog.

Some of us just have Catholic level guilt we have to come to terms with.

At least i plan to use DH for Mks (switched to Rosa)

 

[FullMoon]

Really you can just pair Greninja with any character that does decently against Sheik and you're golden.

 

[Shaya]

Keep in mind (though I figured this would be obvious because this is the competitive impressions thread) that I am referring to tournaments. Competitive gaming. Not friendlies, not For Glory, but tournament competition where your goal is (usually) to get as high of a placing as you can.

If you've just come to show off what your character can do, that's completely different, but don't be salty about not getting first because you got Sheik'd if that was your primary goal.

Just a reminder to everyone, and [because they're there in front of me] some of those on the last page ( Chainz , CHIEf , Jalil , Johan ).
That this is the reality.

You can say that it's not your character holding you back but yourself (which is almost always true, but that neglects that a character with more options enhances every part of your game mentally and will help you get better at the game faster).
But if you aren't going to tournaments.... your character loyalty virtually means nothing.
And in an even more crude tone, the likelihood your opinion on these character's capabilities mean very little too.

Sol is an exceptional player, tempered under the scolding heat of one of the most competitive smash regions in the US (frequent 100 man locals is something even NY/NJ and Socal struggle with).
And he has vision with his character as well, because he's been directly involved in the reality of what he's doing.
Furthermore the option spread and contrasting abilities of this character is unique within the cast. Yes even when considering your mid/low pick, if that character reflects your best set of skills then they're likely your best choice to remain with (until you feel you've exhausted the limits of these skills).

There are surely other examples, and perhaps every player can argue their snowflake is another Little Mac or [arguably] Robin. But you enjoying them and wanting to stay with them is a choice you need to realise is an objectively poorer choice for MOST people to logically take.

A potentially clearer analogy similar to the one from Johan...
If you're an amazing student and get through final high school exams with comparably 95-99th percentile grading, you have near limitless options in your future through tertiary studies, but you will still need to continue to work your ass off to achieve any such possibility.
You could become a doctor, a lawyer, and astrophysicist, possibly get a scholarship at Cambridge University and get to sit in a lecture with Stephen Hawking or something.
However, you still have a choice, and the choice you take is your own and you will have to live with it. Many people would prefer to go for their passion (teaching, music, the arts in general, or in this newer world: competitive gamer), maybe they do not anticipate being able to handle the workload and responsibilities necessary to become a doctor [a ****ton], or perhaps they didn't and later on wish they went for something that more suited them rather than people's expectations. People can often regret these decisions because they're virtually locking themselves into something and going down a path they can't just flip flop over from another to.
Either way, you're a brilliant person and can achieve in most areas you put your mind to. If you want to work just as hard as the math-nerd string theorists do but with the strings of a guitar, who knows what the result could be [and if no one ever so brilliant wanted to dedicate themselves to the such things the world would be a much sadder place indeed].

Fortunately Smash is a much fairer microcosm than the real world.
Just like Stephen Hawking is unlikely to tell Kanye West he's wasted his life (and vice versa) due to their relative successes (but we all know who's had a larger impact on the world), a tournament going player is not going to tell a Little Mac main to give up without reason. The reason usually being their own frustrations, their own losses and generally their imaginations have been exhausted (for the time being at least). These players do NOT get upset at the act of people telling them to stop disadvantaging themselves (unlike the response we see saying this to players who don't go to tournaments), because those players aren't naive and know what they're getting themselves into.
Until you've been through these conditions, not only are you misleading others on the merits of your decisions, but also yourself.
Just like how a Sheik player isn't allowed to complain about things being hard, neither is the low/mid tier player (this is how it is in essentially every scene I've been connected to).
Either way, through participation in competitive environments both types of players are able to understand the quintessential struggle of improvement and are able to relate and share similar feelings and experiences. But just because someone who spectates a sport (watches streams sometimes) and perhaps kicks a ball around (plays for glory) does not by itself give them an understanding of the athlete's condition.