Official 4BR Tier List v1.0 - Competitive Impressions

[Emblem Lord]

Nah we're just at that point where everyone is like "Yeah we beat Ryu" except not really at all lol.

Same thing happened with earlier

Dawg imma really need you to calm the **** down.

You are ruining my plans.

If people want to think everyone and their mom beats Ryu when all Ryu mains legit RUN into attacks and hit buttons when they are at DISADVANTAGE...imma need you to just let that ignorance rock.

Cool bruh?

Also about

How is he not low tier at least? What quality does he have that others dont do better?

 

[C0rvus]

But Will already defeated Mr.R (SSC I think) and Sheik has been nerfed now.

I feel DK will stay relevant in the meta just because of his punish, even if he loses many MUs in practice he only needs to win neutral a couple of times and he takes a stock. This makes him a volatile character that can explode or dominate pretty fast (Bowser feels similar but worse)

I also feel DKWill MU chart is a bit pesimistic or maybe he thinks of -3 as something more doable than I do. I agree with what has been said of DK beating Falcon though.

Yeah I just remembered that in Brawl, DK had some MUs that were really really awful (), so I think Will's metric seems a bit more harsh than most. But it's because he's experienced -4 or -5 MUs that he likely feels that these are -3. Just a thought.

 

[Ninety]

I suppose the meaning varies a bit if his -1 and -2 are 40:60 and 30:70 or 45:55 and 40:60. Because while it's flattering, I don't think DK has a 30:70 against Robin.

 

[NinjaLink]

Here's a question for you all: Do Smash players press buttons too much? Or, to phrase it in a more "Smash" way, do too many players spam moves without thinking (myself included)?

In fighting game commentary, you'll often hear that a player caught another player "pressing buttons." That means Player A decided to throw out a move without any sort of plan in mind, or at a moment where they would've been better off not doing anything, and then Player B immediately reacted to it and punished them for it, sometimes with big damage following.

Yesterday I was watching NinjaLink review Pound 2016, and he mentioned that he thinks too many Smash 4 players go on autopilot, and even showed examples from top players at Pound 2016, such as Tweek tossing out certain moves when there's no way they would have hit in those situations.

I decided to look at the Banning Bayonetta thread today, and @Ghidorah14 talks about how Bayo is the ultimate punish for players who press too many buttons: http://smashboards.com/threads/banning-bayonetta-in-tournaments.433725/page-2#post-21031285

The idea of whether or not Bayo should be banned aside (that's what the above thread is for!), is it the case that Smash 4 players in general have been too lax with knowing when to use AND NOT USE their attacks, and that Bayonetta's success in making players pay for pressing buttons is simply the most visible and immediate evidence of this?

Do we need to, overall as a competitive community, learn not to "press buttons," and are we Smash players more vulnerable to this than other FGCs?

I'm glad what I said is sticking to people.

 

[Flux0r]

Also about

How is he not low tier at least? What quality does he have that others dont do better?

My opinion on Falco does not really regard him highly, i honestly don't see him any higher than bottom 15, but his kit possesses some positive traits.

A neat combo game that racks up damage quickly at low percentages.

A highly versatile and deadly B-Air.

The best jumping prowess in the game.

That's what comes to mind. Don't get me started on his god-awful neutral though.

 

[Illuminose]

Can someone tell me the rest of Pikachu's "way more losing matchups?" Because they're not coming to me, and people keep saying "there's no way Pikachu's matchup spread is that good" without backing it up whatsoever. We've got, from ESAM:
4:6
4.5:5.5

Now who else beats Pikachu? Let's look at top tiers.
Generally argued in Pikachu's favor, pretty easy to see why because Pika doesn't really get comboed by Bayo stuff and Bayo is known to struggle vs shorter characters
Seen as even or slightly in Pikachu's favor; range differential is somewhat negated by the fact that Cloud must commit to specific timings on his aerials to even hit Pikachu & gets edgeguarded so easily; only reason some might say even is because cloud does have fairly good options vs quick attack
Typically viewed as slightly in Pikachu's favor because Pikachu deals with Luma pretty easily and edgeguards in this mu...Rosa typically gets more actual damage output off situations, espec when she trades, and kills more easily so it's not actually a blowout but pika still wins (even matchup at worst)
Diddy mains rank this as a slight losing matchup, and ESAM says the same, easy to see why with how much Pikachu can abuse Diddy in certain situations (especially off-stage); little evidence either way results-wise
Sheik won this overall because she killed Pika earlier, other aspects of the matchup were always pretty close; easily an even matchup after the patch, little evidence either way results-wise
Even, don't really see a need to elaborate; ESAM has a very positive record vs manny and a somewhat mixed but overall positive record against other sonics
Both Larry and ESAM say Pika wins this slightly (pika abuses fox so hard with combos and edgeguards so it's kinda easy to see), we could make the generous assumption that it's even if we want maybe; limited results, Larry and ESAM haven't played in tourney outside CEO & ESAM beats megafox easily
commonly accepted winning matchup for pika, edgeguards/multi hits/lack of mobility for ryu to combat jolt spam/qa (ESAM's record vs ryus is very good)
slightly in MK's favor before the patch...evenish now I'd assume
pretty reasonably even, ESAM vs ranai was 3-1 in ranai's favor with reportedly very close games if we want results (doesn't say that much), theory supports this

I don't see any reason thator would win either.

Where are all these bad matchups. I'm calling bull**** on this idea that Pikachu has all these bad matchups people want to say exist. There aren't random high tiers or mid tiers that beat him. Making sweeping general statements about Pikachu's losing matchups because it "isn't possible" is awful reasoning, but accepted in this thread for whatever reason.

 

[sedrf]

you say people underrate the characters in response to people overrating said characters.

 

[ligersandtigons]

You can force him to move with z dropped metal blade, which can do like 30 damage if he takes it wrong, and does similar amounts of shield damage.

And he has to approach... through constant pellets. That sucks when you have a hurtbox the size of his, but to make matters worse you basically ruin his chance of doing a landing aerial if you hit a pellet while he is holding towards you (so basically pellets make it hard to land a bair specifically) since it turns him around, and he isn't gonna hit a fair. Dash attack is meh for being buffered after pellets, you should either be retreating or have hit a nair hitbox... I'm not gonna go too into the MU now.

Crash bomber can set up free aerials, which is really deadly for DK to take free Uairs. Leaf shield + Grab close range is easier to hit than most of Jr's options as it covers a bunch of stuff, and the throws do lots of damage then make him regain ground...

I mean, I know you weren't suggesting that Bowjow actually belongs there, but I'm just saying I don't think those things are the reason.


I'd really like to know the reasoning. Its probably inconsequential because a losing MU is a losing MU, and you have to outplay your opponent to win... But I don't understand how Megaman of all people is easier to deal with as a zoner than BowJow as a hybrid Zoner... whatever he is.

Bowser Junior does have a poweful juggle game, and mechakoopas used intelligently can cover ground in a unique and powerful way.


But I'd bet mega does more damage per game with his uair than Bowjow, if this MU is played optimally.

arent will and tweek from the same area? will probably has worse experiences with jr. than he does with mega man.

 

[Luco]

you say people underrate the characters in response to people overrating said characters.

People 'underrating' and 'overrating' characters is a circular trend in this thread, it tends to come down to who's more 'meta' at the time. As amazing as the S-tier posters of this thread are, it's a bit disheartening that whatever they say becomes the word of the thread. "Duh, Shaya and Solidsense established that Pika is an over-rated mid tier with no kill confirms. You must be dumb for thinking Pika is any good." (Then if the same two posters suddenly established why Pika is actually top tier, BAM queue "you must be dumb for thinking this character is bad. They have EVERYTHING going for them!")

Of course, the posters here that do that level of research and understand the game to that level SHOULD be listened to, but the point I'm trying to make here is people are more parrot-like than they seem, and too much of the 'critical thinking' that goes on in this thread is old news established by peeps 150 pages ago and isn't brought up to date until the SAME posters turn around and bring a post that changes everyone's viewpoints again.

The very post I'm making is just a repetitive old analysis of the circular nature of this thread. Half the concepts I'm talking about right now could be made into memes at this point.

It's important to do as much research as you can if you want to break that trend.

 

[Chalice]

Just for neat trivia, I asked Abadango on his previous stream what his top 10 characters were but he ended up listing off top 13 so....

Also note that they aren't in order of best to bottom of the best. These are just the characters he listed that he thinks are the best currently

 

[valakmtnsmash4]

Just for neat trivia, I asked Abadango on his previous stream what his top 10 characters were but he ended up listing off top 13 so....

Also note that they aren't in order of best to bottom of the best. These are just the characters he listed that he thinks are the best currently

I'm interested on knowing his reasoning for Mewtwo and Lucario.

 

[Pancracio17]

especially lucario, komokirir also lists him as even for cloud where players here list him as a -2. Lucario in japan is a mystery to me.

 

[Chalice]

I'm interested on knowing his reasoning for Mewtwo and Lucario.

Well he kinda won Pound 2016 with Mewtwo sooooo......

As for Lucario I'm not entirely sure. I know he has 2 good players in Japan so they might be influencing his opinion. His match up with Sheik is pretty good but other than that I'm not entirely convinced. I could see him as the bottom of the this list of top 13 but that's already stretching it.

 

[Yoshister]

Just for neat trivia, I asked Abadango on his previous stream what his top 10 characters were but he ended up listing off top 13 so....

Also note that they aren't in order of best to bottom of the best. These are just the characters he listed that he thinks are the best currently

Lucario top 13?

Interesting. I really want to know why.

Also, I feel like some idiot is gonna ask "Why is Mewtwo Top 3?!?!"

I will laugh if that happens.

 

[Chalice]

Personally, I would imagine the order to be like this:



I can't decide if Rosa should go in front of Cloud but otherwise, based on results and previous tier lists etc, this makes the most sense to me

In terms of Abadango's top 13 anyway

 

[bc1910]

I'd hope that list isn't in order because Lucario is nowhere near 5th. Not even top 20 IMO but eh, we can at least agree that 5th is a no-no.

 

[Chalice]

I'd hope that list isn't in order because Lucario is nowhere near 5th. Not even top 20 IMO but eh, we can at least agree that 5th is a no-no.

If you had read my post fully you would have noticed that I said that it WAS NOT listed in order

 

[Trifroze]

Can someone tell me the rest of Pikachu's "way more losing matchups?" Because they're not coming to me, and people keep saying "there's no way Pikachu's matchup spread is that good" without backing it up whatsoever. We've got, from ESAM:
4:6
4.5:5.5

Now who else beats Pikachu? Let's look at top tiers.
Generally argued in Pikachu's favor, pretty easy to see why because Pika doesn't really get comboed by Bayo stuff and Bayo is known to struggle vs shorter characters
Seen as even or slightly in Pikachu's favor; range differential is somewhat negated by the fact that Cloud must commit to specific timings on his aerials to even hit Pikachu & gets edgeguarded so easily; only reason some might say even is because cloud does have fairly good options vs quick attack
Typically viewed as slightly in Pikachu's favor because Pikachu deals with Luma pretty easily and edgeguards in this mu...Rosa typically gets more actual damage output off situations, espec when she trades, and kills more easily so it's not actually a blowout but pika still wins (even matchup at worst)
Diddy mains rank this as a slight losing matchup, and ESAM says the same, easy to see why with how much Pikachu can abuse Diddy in certain situations (especially off-stage); little evidence either way results-wise
Sheik won this overall because she killed Pika earlier, other aspects of the matchup were always pretty close; easily an even matchup after the patch, little evidence either way results-wise
Even, don't really see a need to elaborate; ESAM has a very positive record vs manny and a somewhat mixed but overall positive record against other sonics
Both Larry and ESAM say Pika wins this slightly (pika abuses fox so hard with combos and edgeguards so it's kinda easy to see), we could make the generous assumption that it's even if we want maybe; limited results, Larry and ESAM haven't played in tourney outside CEO & ESAM beats megafox easily
commonly accepted winning matchup for pika, edgeguards/multi hits/lack of mobility for ryu to combat jolt spam/qa (ESAM's record vs ryus is very good)
slightly in MK's favor before the patch...evenish now I'd assume
pretty reasonably even, ESAM vs ranai was 3-1 in ranai's favor with reportedly very close games if we want results (doesn't say that much), theory supports this

I don't see any reason thator would win either.

Where are all these bad matchups. I'm calling bull**** on this idea that Pikachu has all these bad matchups people want to say exist. There aren't random high tiers or mid tiers that beat him. Making sweeping general statements about Pikachu's losing matchups because it "isn't possible" is awful reasoning, but accepted in this thread for whatever reason.

I like how results matter when they're in Pikachu's favor but not when they're against him, and it's always ESAM vs whoever with no regards to player skill differences. You have to be able to separate the players from the characters, otherwise ZSS, Sheik, Rosalina, Mario, Diddy, Fox and probably ****ing DK can be argued to have better matchup spreads than Pikachu by only using results of their best players and by using biased theory where the opponent's weaknesses and your strengths are emphasized while your weaknesses and your opponent's strengths are barely mentioned (if at all). The whole community really should start showing more frustration at this type of selling.

"But then Pikachu can't kill them before they kill Pikachu" could be added at the end of literally each of those descriptions except Sheik. Sheik simply outranges Pikachu really hard in neutral which can also be said for most of the characters you listed. Having to get close to the opponent to do anything, not being able to kill consistently and being light yourself matters a lot. When your opponents convert much more safely than you and get more out of those conversions you likely need more than edgeguarding, QA and Pikachu stuff to win the matchup.

 

[Peppermint1201]

Regarding Lucario, I actually don't think Motsunabe has *that* many great results, but he has several, way more than anything Lucario has done in the states. Specifically, it would not surprise me if this set: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs_zy3Mv_uY has left a large imprint on their perception of Lucario, as well as Motsunabe's victory over KEN from Losers' at the same tournament: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f82nhEfIDM. I also disagree with Lucario being among other, more agreed-on top 10 threats, but regional differences justify it somewhat, especially considering that Japan operates (operated?) on best-of-three which masks unusual/inconsistent characters that command matchup experience such as Lucario.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Motsunabe has gotten 1st and like 3rd or 4th recently. Japan also has Mow, Tsu and Gomamugytia.

But I agree they overrate Lucario a bit now.

 

[Trifroze]

I still think Lucario's comeback factor is way too good for him to completely drop out of viability, although I think it's unreasonable to categorize him with those characters. I'd drop him in with the likes of Falcon/Greninja/Ike/Yoshi/DK etc. Lucario's neutral is good enough that it doesn't in any way prevent him from utilizing his actual strengths, so on every stock where he's the one making the correct guesses and managing to stay alive at high percents, he can outdamage/kill the opponent with often less than half the effort, but then sometimes the opponent makes the right guesses instead and Lucario can't do all that much.

 

[Illuminose]

I like how results matter when they're in Pikachu's favor but not when they're against him, and it's always ESAM vs whoever with no regards to player skill differences. You have to be able to separate the players from the characters, otherwise ZSS, Sheik, Rosalina, Mario, Diddy, Fox and probably ****ing DK can be argued to have better matchup spreads than Pikachu by only using results of their best players and by using biased theory where the opponent's weaknesses and your strengths are emphasized while your weaknesses and your opponent's strengths are barely mentioned (if at all). The whole community really should start showing more frustration at this type of selling.

"But then Pikachu can't kill them before they kill Pikachu" could be added at the end of literally each of those descriptions except Sheik. Sheik simply outranges Pikachu really hard in neutral which can also be said for most of the characters you listed. Having to get close to the opponent to do anything, not being able to kill consistently and being light yourself matters a lot. When your opponents convert much more safely than you and get more out of those conversions you likely need more than edgeguarding, QA and Pikachu stuff to win the matchup.

Why don't you argue specific matchups instead of continuing to spout bull**** about a character you clearly don't understand, or just can't discuss properly? This post isn't even substantiative, just a poor attempt at a callout that doesn't accomplish much. There is significant theory backing the matchups I talked about (guess what, I didn't decide to go over everything in one post, just very brief something) and you decided to go off on the same tangent that everyone else goes off on. The fact that people think this is a good post just goes to show the mindset that exists in this thread, which is non-substantiative and a biased pack mentality.

With that said, let's clear some misconceptions.

#1 is that Pikachu absolutely struggles with characters that have outrange him. How often do you see people talk about Mario's range like it's the worst thing in the world? You don't. The reason is because, and it's the same with Pikachu, is that most of the characters where this would pose an issue are exploitable in other ways that make this almost irrelevant. They don't have the frame data to deal with Quick Attack, they get edgeguarded, they get outspaced and whiff punished easily (thanks great mobility!), they get comboed, whatever. All of these matchups vs sword characters and other outranging characters, bar literally Ness and G&W are balanced out into either Pikachu's favor or even territory by these traits. Because, y'know, range doesn't dictate the whole matchup. It tells you very little about how characters interact beyond basic information about their hitboxes. The notion that simply having bigger hitboxes will make you do well in the matchup is exceptionally flawed.

Another is that Pikachu for whatever reason has a lacking neutral game. Pikachu's neutral game is really good. He is notoriously difficult to hit, has great ground mobility, can beat a lot of options with sh fair and space with it/dtilt pretty effectively, and has a good projectile, all on top of the most versatile mobility tool in the game. An underlooked and underdeveloped aspect is that Pikachu can actually play pretty damn passively, but ESAM is known for his aggression. Even ESAM states in his matchup video that the optimal way to play some of these matchups is safer and campier, but we don't see as much of this in practice. This is because Pikachu has a decent projectile, good spacing tools, a non-committal and very good foxtrot, and pretty much can't get cornered, straight up. You're rewarded less for winning neutral exchanges because Quick Attack doesn't care about losing positioning or getting thrown in the air, and Pikachu is difficult to combo. It doesn't help that ESAM decides to land with some of the dumbest stuff on the planet, but Pikachu is legitimately very good at landing. This is why Pikachu is actually solid at getting a lead and keeping it, because he usually gets more off winning neutral exchanges than his opponents and has the tools to play pretty non-committal. Just because ESAM throws out a charged up smash in neutral every few seconds doesn't mean it's a good idea. Pikachu requires and has tools to exhibit a lot more patience than this; it shows because ESAM is at his best when he plays non-committal and picks options that let him do that. When all you do is run off the stage and pick risky options, you get punished. I think NAKAT exhibits more of this than ESAM, but doesn't push things as far in other aspects of his game and also just isn't as good as a player/Pikachu in general.

Here's what I'm trying to say with this post: try to look at the things people present to you and deconstruct them instead of simply accepting them. Pikachu is deemed overrated for pretty much no real reason other than "sucks vs range" (lol), "can't kill," and "ESAM overrated him." People in this thread are actually saying Greninja is better than Pikachu, pretty much based off nothing other than a hunch and a couple people thinking maybe Greninja is a little underrated. Meanwhile iStudying got decimated at Pound and the character pretty much only sees success at more local and regional European events for the most part. Come on, lol. We've been through this before. Despite a myriad of flaws in his play, ESAM continues to place well and rack up notable wins by almost exclusively using a character that people in this thread are actually calling a low high tier. Other characters don't even have close to the same level of scrutiny. Ryu, Ness, right, we just assume stuff when their matchup spreads are actually bad, but we have a character with a legitimately good matchup spread and so much hate is placed on him. It's a toxic mindset.

 

[Y2Kay]

and both go even at least with

I will be straight up with you guys: the first 30 seconds of the match really sucks. the lil' bugger can just zip in a deal so good damage. with his combos. It doesn't feel like a good match up.

But then, you're about 45 seconds to a minute into the match, and then the tables have honestly turned on Pikachu. As stated earlier, Pikachu's kill confirms suck, for kill confirm standards. Pikachu will have a hard time nabbing the kill if you know how to avoid them. Pikachu maybe great at lower percents, but when both him and the opponent are at ~90 - 100%, Pikachu's frailty really begins to show.

and are great stock finishers in these scenarios. Pikachu is seriously lacking in during money time. Pikachu, I feel, is way too dependent on being able to snag that first stock.

However, I believe Pikachu's strengths are still good enough for him to stay in the top 15. I don't think he'll drop past top 25, unless a bunch of low tiers get the Mewtwo/Ike treatment in later patches.

Yeah, this has been said before, but I decide to stick up for my mains this time around. They don't lose to Pikachu in my opinion.

 

[bc1910]

Here's what I'm trying to say with this post: try to look at the things people present to you and deconstruct them instead of simply accepting them. Pikachu is deemed overrated for pretty much no real reason other than "sucks vs range" (lol), "can't kill," and "ESAM overrated him." People in this thread are actually saying Greninja is better than Pikachu, pretty much based off nothing other than a hunch and a couple people thinking maybe Greninja is a little underrated. Meanwhile iStudying got decimated at Pound and the character pretty much only sees success at more local and regional European events for the most part. Come on, lol. We've been through this before. Despite a myriad of flaws in his play, ESAM continues to place well and rack up notable wins by almost exclusively using a character that people in this thread are actually calling a low high tier. Other characters don't even have close to the same level of scrutiny. Ryu, Ness, right, we just assume stuff when their matchup spreads are actually bad, but we have a character with a legitimately good matchup spread and so much hate is placed on him. It's a toxic mindset.

How is 25th with solo Greninja decimated? iStudying ran into Greninja's two worst MUs early in bracket, and had been beating K9 in friendlies. And though I don't want to make this an excuse, he was badly jetlagged.

ESAM only got 17th with solo Pikachu. He used Corrin to beat Nakat and get 13th, and also used Corrin against Ally. Pre-top 16 I don't know to what extent ESAM was backing Pikachu up with his secondaries, but I know he used Yoshi in pools.

Don't call others out for chatting **** about a character they know nothing about if you're gonna do it yourself.

 

[Jucchan]

Speaking of Japanese lists:
Nasubi's Wario MU Chart

HIKARU's Donkey Kong MU Chart (From top to bottom: Disadvantage, Slight Disadvantage, Even, Slight Advantage, Advantage, I don't know yet)

Comparing HIKARU's MU chart to DKWill's: Overall, HIKARU's list is much more optimistic. HIKARU thinks DK solidly beats Greninja, while Will thinks it's even. While HIKARU thinks DK beats Robin, Link, Samus, and Palutena slightly, Will says the opposite. According to Will ZSS is one of DK's worst matchups, but HIKARU thinks it's even. Pikachu and Olimar are -2 according to Will, but even according to HIKARU.

 

[FullMoon]

Wario losing to Greninja is news to me

As is DK being +2 on Greninja.

 

[Y2Kay]

Why don't you argue specific matchups instead of continuing to spout bull**** about a character you clearly don't understand, or just can't discuss properly? This post isn't even substantiative, just a poor attempt at a callout that doesn't accomplish much. There is significant theory backing the matchups I talked about (guess what, I didn't decide to go over everything in one post, just very brief something) and you decided to go off on the same tangent that everyone else goes off on. The fact that people think this is a good post just goes to show the mindset that exists in this thread, which is non-substantiative and a biased pack mentality.

First of all . . .

Calm Down.

With that said, let's clear some misconceptions.

#1 is that Pikachu absolutely struggles with characters that have outrange him. How often do you see people talk about Mario's range like it's the worst thing in the world? You don't. The reason is because, and it's the same with Pikachu, is that most of the characters where this would pose an issue are exploitable in other ways that make this almost irrelevant. They don't have the frame data to deal with Quick Attack, they get edgeguarded, they get outspaced and whiff punished easily (thanks great mobility!), they get comboed, whatever. All of these matchups vs sword characters and other outranging characters, bar literally Ness and G&W are balanced out into either Pikachu's favor or even territory by these traits. Because, y'know, range doesn't dictate the whole matchup. It tells you very little about how characters interact beyond basic information about their hitboxes. The notion that simply having bigger hitboxes will make you do well in the matchup is exceptionally flawed.

Pikachu does struggle with swords, and Mario's range isn't that great. You're when you say range doesn't make it an auto win for character's with disjoints, but having disjoints against pikachu is very meaningful in the match up. Pikachu, and to a lesser extent mario, don't do as well against sword characters than other high tier characters.

Pikachu does have a noticable weakness to disjoints. His moves don't have a lot of range, and are generally unsafe on block.

Another is that Pikachu for whatever reason has a lacking neutral game. Pikachu's neutral game is really good. He is notoriously difficult to hit, has great ground mobility, can beat a lot of options with sh fair and space with it/dtilt pretty effectively, and has a good projectile, all on top of the most versatile mobility tool in the game. An underlooked and underdeveloped aspect is that Pikachu can actually play pretty damn passively, but ESAM is known for his aggression. Even ESAM states in his matchup video that the optimal way to play some of these matchups is safer and campier, but we don't see as much of this in practice. This is because Pikachu has a decent projectile, good spacing tools, a non-committal and very good foxtrot, and pretty much can't get cornered, straight up. You're rewarded less for winning neutral exchanges because Quick Attack doesn't care about losing positioning or getting thrown in the air, and Pikachu is difficult to combo. It doesn't help that ESAM decides to land with some of the dumbest stuff on the planet, but Pikachu is legitimately very good at landing. This is why Pikachu is actually solid at getting a lead and keeping it, because he usually gets more off winning neutral exchanges than his opponents and has the tools to play pretty non-committal. Just because ESAM throws out a charged up smash in neutral every few seconds doesn't mean it's a good idea. Pikachu requires and has tools to exhibit a lot more patience than this; it shows because ESAM is at his best when he plays non-committal and picks options that let him do that. When all you do is run off the stage and pick risky options, you get punished. I think NAKAT exhibits more of this than ESAM, but doesn't push things as far in other aspects of his game and also just isn't as good as a player/Pikachu in general.

You're not wrong, but literally no one is saying that.

Here's what I'm trying to say with this post: try to look at the things people present to you and deconstruct them instead of simply accepting them. Pikachu is deemed overrated for pretty much no real reason other than "sucks vs range" (lol), "can't kill," and "ESAM overrated him." People in this thread are actually saying Greninja is better than Pikachu, pretty much based off nothing other than a hunch and a couple people thinking maybe Greninja is a little underrated. Meanwhile iStudying got decimated at Pound and the character pretty much only sees success at more local and regional European events for the most part. Come on, lol. We've been through this before. Despite a myriad of flaws in his play, ESAM continues to place well and rack up notable wins by almost exclusively using a character that people in this thread are actually calling a low high tier. Other characters don't even have close to the same level of scrutiny. Ryu, Ness, right, we just assume stuff when their matchup spreads are actually bad, but we have a character with a legitimately good matchup spread and so much hate is placed on him. It's a toxic mindset.

Again, literally no one said this. No one in this thread argued greninja is better than pikachu. And how is getting 25th at a stacked national tournament the same thing as being decimated? Hyperbole much? Ness and Ryu's match up spreads aren't bad either, they're just fine.

We all know ESAM's play is less than perfect. We can't just assume that an optimized Pikachu is top 5, when one doesn't even exist. Once ESAM get's his Pikachu problem sorted out, then we'll talk.

 

[ARGHETH]

While HIKARU thinks DK beats Robin, Link, Samus, and Palutena slightly, Will says the opposite.

This is likely because Will has Robin experience, while I'm guessing HIKARU doesn't. Will had a 3-hour training session of sorts with Raziek (online), and by the end of it used Sheik to see how much easier the neutral was.

Again, literally no one said this. No one in this thread argued greninja is better than pikachu.

Maybe he getting it confused with all the people wondering if Mewtwo was better than Pikachu...

 

[Y2Kay]

Maybe he getting it confused with all the people wondering if Mewtwo was better than Pikachu...

Well in that case his argument is still moot because Mewtwo (obviously) outperformed Pikachu at POUND 2016

 

[Game7a1]

Nasubi's Wario MU Chart looks... off. I don't know much about the character other than the basics (some MUs do look right from that standpoint), but I can assume Lucario is a volatile matchup (Given the Rocks, Papers, or Scissors tag he has). His MU spread looking dead even is the most suspect thing that sticks out (maybe because most MU spreads posted here about a higher, tier character leans towards a positive, winning average). Maybe he's uncertain about some matchups?

 

[Vyrnx]

ESAM only got 17th with solo Pikachu. He used Corrin to beat Nakat and get 13th, and also used Corrin against Ally. Pre-top 16 I don't know to what extent ESAM was backing Pikachu up with his secondaries, but I know he used Yoshi in pools.

Esam used Yoshi in one game in pools, and Corrin in two poor MUs. Esam used a secondary at this tournament and didn't go solo Pika, but your post sort of implies that opting for Corrin instead of Pikachu makes Pikachu less viable, when I don't think a secondary in one or two scenarios is good evidence for [whatever lowish Pikachu placement]. He didn't go solo Pikachu, but he did use Pikachu in probably over 90% of his matches.

Esam lost to second and third place, and in spite of some poor games, I think it was a pretty good showing from Esam. iStudying of course did great, and knocking 25th with solo Greninja is stupid, but it's sort of weird that you praised 25th and then went on to criticize Esam's 17th. Both results are good, and both players lost to other great players and poor MUs (except ZSS/Marss, who outplayed Esam hard). I really think Pika's results are way too heavily criticized, when Esam still places reasonably well and beats some amazing players. Other border high tiers would love Pika's results via Esam, but with Esam/Pika, his results are seen as a "weakness".

On the other hand, it's silly that Illuminose seems to be going by Esam's MU chart, like Pika only loses to Mario, Ness, and G&W, and treating these opinions objectively. Also that he is glossing over Pika's range and killing issues. Not saying Pika is top 10, but some of the people here saying Pika is mid tier are really stretching it.

 

[ARISTOS]

isn't mid tier
He isn't top tier

Why does this character lead to so much salt literally nothing has changed

 

[Peppermint1201]

Kinda curious why Nasubi has ROB-Wario as 50-50, when I'm confident that ROB wins the matchup to some degree, a statement echoed by 8bitman. Wario can eat gyros, but ROB can still use them somewhat if he catches Wario off-guard. Sometimes bite eats laser but usually laser bypasses it -- if someone could explain how the bite-laser interactions are determined that would be great. Wario's mostly-high-knockback aerials limit his abuse of ROB's disadvantage to fair for the most part and his laggy uptilt and upsmash hinder this as well. ROB's myriad of kill options allow him to safely dispatch of Wario's stocks and clip his comeback potential, and exceptional keep-away game prevents wafts, not to mention ROB's close-combat tools which outclass Wario's.

 

[Vyrnx]

Why does this character lead to so much discussion literally nothing has changed

Pika discussion is a good thing IMO.

Pika had so much good theory, amazing results, and was widely perceived to be top 5 a year ago, and now the discussion is all about why these things aren't true/the amazing results don't happen anymore. Pika is a great debate ground for which pros and which cons matter most, especially since the same arguments and conclusions can sometimes be applied to other characters.

There's also massive opinion disparity, ranging from Esam's opinions to some really negative opinions, so naturally there is a lot of debate, and it's usually good debate except when one side assumes they are right.

 

[Peppermint1201]

Pika's "good theory" is often cited.

What is it?

 

[Trifroze]

Why don't you argue specific matchups instead of continuing to spout bull**** about a character you clearly don't understand, or just can't discuss properly? This post isn't even substantiative, just a poor attempt at a callout that doesn't accomplish much. There is significant theory backing the matchups I talked about (guess what, I didn't decide to go over everything in one post, just very brief something) and you decided to go off on the same tangent that everyone else goes off on. The fact that people think this is a good post just goes to show the mindset that exists in this thread, which is non-substantiative and a biased pack mentality.

With that said, let's clear some misconceptions.

#1 is that Pikachu absolutely struggles with characters that have outrange him. How often do you see people talk about Mario's range like it's the worst thing in the world? You don't. The reason is because, and it's the same with Pikachu, is that most of the characters where this would pose an issue are exploitable in other ways that make this almost irrelevant. They don't have the frame data to deal with Quick Attack, they get edgeguarded, they get outspaced and whiff punished easily (thanks great mobility!), they get comboed, whatever. All of these matchups vs sword characters and other outranging characters, bar literally Ness and G&W are balanced out into either Pikachu's favor or even territory by these traits. Because, y'know, range doesn't dictate the whole matchup. It tells you very little about how characters interact beyond basic information about their hitboxes. The notion that simply having bigger hitboxes will make you do well in the matchup is exceptionally flawed.

Another is that Pikachu for whatever reason has a lacking neutral game. Pikachu's neutral game is really good. He is notoriously difficult to hit, has great ground mobility, can beat a lot of options with sh fair and space with it/dtilt pretty effectively, and has a good projectile, all on top of the most versatile mobility tool in the game. An underlooked and underdeveloped aspect is that Pikachu can actually play pretty damn passively, but ESAM is known for his aggression. Even ESAM states in his matchup video that the optimal way to play some of these matchups is safer and campier, but we don't see as much of this in practice. This is because Pikachu has a decent projectile, good spacing tools, a non-committal and very good foxtrot, and pretty much can't get cornered, straight up. You're rewarded less for winning neutral exchanges because Quick Attack doesn't care about losing positioning or getting thrown in the air, and Pikachu is difficult to combo. It doesn't help that ESAM decides to land with some of the dumbest stuff on the planet, but Pikachu is legitimately very good at landing. This is why Pikachu is actually solid at getting a lead and keeping it, because he usually gets more off winning neutral exchanges than his opponents and has the tools to play pretty non-committal. Just because ESAM throws out a charged up smash in neutral every few seconds doesn't mean it's a good idea. Pikachu requires and has tools to exhibit a lot more patience than this; it shows because ESAM is at his best when he plays non-committal and picks options that let him do that. When all you do is run off the stage and pick risky options, you get punished. I think NAKAT exhibits more of this than ESAM, but doesn't push things as far in other aspects of his game and also just isn't as good as a player/Pikachu in general.

Here's what I'm trying to say with this post: try to look at the things people present to you and deconstruct them instead of simply accepting them. Pikachu is deemed overrated for pretty much no real reason other than "sucks vs range" (lol), "can't kill," and "ESAM overrated him." People in this thread are actually saying Greninja is better than Pikachu, pretty much based off nothing other than a hunch and a couple people thinking maybe Greninja is a little underrated. Meanwhile iStudying got decimated at Pound and the character pretty much only sees success at more local and regional European events for the most part. Come on, lol. We've been through this before. Despite a myriad of flaws in his play, ESAM continues to place well and rack up notable wins by almost exclusively using a character that people in this thread are actually calling a low high tier. Other characters don't even have close to the same level of scrutiny. Ryu, Ness, right, we just assume stuff when their matchup spreads are actually bad, but we have a character with a legitimately good matchup spread and so much hate is placed on him. It's a toxic mindset.

If I got this right, you're criticizing me for having a problem with people making one sided matchup arguments and not separating players from characters at all when bringing up results to back up whatever they argued. That's literally what your first post was, and to be honest while this other post is much more informative it still fails to acknowledge Pikachu's flaws and just shrugs them off.

You attempt to cancel out the lack of range or kill power by saying that Pikachu dominates in other areas to make up for it, and on the next breath you say that this domination in other areas is what makes Pikachu super amazing (i.e. "3 losing matchups the worst of which is 4:6" amazing). But no, Pikachu's strengths don't make Pikachu particularly good because he needs them to make up for those weaknesses we just acknowledged.

These weaknesses are what I brought up to balance out the content in your post. I didn't say Pikachu's neutral isn't good (don't know if that was even aimed at me though) nor did I say that having bigger hitboxes means you beat Pikachu, that'd make me the equivalent of what I'm trying to fight against here. Pikachu is a good character, but the lack of range, killing aerials, reliable kills off of grabs and light weight are all fundamental weaknesses that play a part in every single matchup of his the same way his strengths do. His strengths don't make them disappear or automatically make up for all of it and then some. Is there any possible chance ESAM's inconsistency has anything to do with Pikachu's inconsistency killing and surviving? There clearly is, yet these weaknesses are always shrugged off as if it's something that doesn't matter if you "just play well enough".

I disagree with several notions that you made in this latter post, particularly fair beating out options or Pikachu being hard to combo. Pikachu's fair doesn't have as much range or disjoint as you probably think, and it's absolutely terrible at trading because of its low damage multihit properties (and Pikachu hates trading to begin with). What comes to Pikachu being hard to combo, his hurtbox is pretty bad in tumble because of his tail which causes a lot of attacks to connect easier than they would otherwise (this is the only reason Pikachu is one of the characters Falcon's dthrow to knee is guaranteed on at specific percents), and while thunder can potentially let Pikachu out of some strings it's a far more risky and unreliable combo break option than what many other characters have.

Shield and lingering hitboxes negate and stuff out QA respectively (though it is a great "outta here" option), dash into shield negates and punishes Pikachu's rising aerials (fair is realistically the only aerial he can mix up the timing of that is pretty safe, but like said earlier it loses to trades hard), dash into shield and SHAD negates and punishes (full hop) thunderjolt (you did say it's only decent though which it is, so I'll give you that), shield negates and punishes Pikachu's smash attacks / DA / ftilt that he often has to resort to, and if Pikachu grabs you out of shield you're really not going to get hurt particularly badly unless you're a character with bad landing options and/or recovery. Any other character can keep taking those grabs for quite a long while and it's been seen again and again, with Pikachu often dying before the percentage gets high enough for him to get the kill, so I don't agree he's non-committal or that he gets out more for winning neutral exchanges unless it's vs characters that don't matter in the context of this conversation.

The only time every character is susceptible to high damage from Pikachu is when they're at low percents, and it happens once a stock if it does happen at all (most of the time it does). After that Pikachu's damage output per conversion on a character with decent disadvantage isn't all that good, but he needs a lot of damage to seal out stocks unless he wants to go for risky options that can hurt him just as much as they benefit him. Again rather than saying Pikachu is amazing because he's relatively hard to hit, I'd say that at least he's relatively hard to hit.

His fox trot is alright, but not among the fastest ones and suffers from the same problem as ZSS; his hurtbox drags quite far behind him in his initial dash so he ends up being caught by attacks if he tries to dash away in pressure. Pikachu's mobility in general outside of QA's burst isn't particularly great either (especially in the air) and his falling aerials are Bowser level in terms of lag, so again, instead of QA being this amazing boon to the character he actually needs it.

Not saying Pikachu isn't good character, but I think you need either way stronger results or way stronger theory to justify his worst matchups being 45:55, 45:55 and 40:60 which is a straight up ridiculous claim as of now.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Pika's "good theory" is often cited.

What is it?

I suspect it's simply that he's small + fast, with Quick Attack as a get out of disadvantage free card similar to Flip Kick, Bouncing Fish, etc. Given Smash's emphasis on mobility, it may simply be hard to imagine Pikachu being bad in the context of theorycraft. He does tick a lot of the right boxes.

 

[TheGoodGuava]

My opinion on Falco does not really regard him highly, i honestly don't see him any higher than bottom 15, but his kit possesses some positive traits.

A neat combo game that racks up damage quickly at low percentages.

A highly versatile and deadly B-Air.

The best jumping prowess in the game.

That's what comes to mind. Don't get me started on his god-awful neutral though.

The only thing that he really isn't "good" at is playing the neutral. While he has some safe moves he is super limited by his lack of mobility and his projectile is pretty bad, however a frame 3 reflector is great for anti-zoning

His combo game and edgeguarding gives him a nice advantage state and being able to use his frame 4 bair and a frame 3 nair to break combos is pretty nice. He also has his side special to get him out of some tight situations.

He has great tools and a weakness in the neutral to balance it out, I honestly can't see him lower than mid tier

 

[HeavyLobster]

The only thing that he really isn't "good" at is playing the neutral. While he has some safe moves he is super limited by his lack of mobility and his projectile is pretty bad, however a frame 3 reflector is great for anti-zoning

His combo game and edgeguarding gives him a nice advantage state and being able to use his frame 4 bair and a frame 3 nair to break combos is pretty nice. He also has his side special to get him out of some tight situations.

He has great tools and a weakness in the neutral to balance it out, I honestly can't see him lower than mid tier

His recovery tools are pretty lousy. They're worse versions of Fox's, which is not a good thing. Being a fastfaller makes him combo-prone as well.

 

[Vult Redux]

I don't understand how Bowser Jr can be a worse MU than Megaman, what does he have that Mega doesn't in this MU? Maybe Karty stuff at the ledge is scary? But dair is better here. And he isn't that much heavier even. I would really like to hear a DK main or Bowjow main to justify how how BJ beats DK worse than Megaman, im curious.

I don't know how the MM-Dk matchup plays out but this match helps give a (rough) picture of the DK-Jr matchup. take it with a grain of salt because imo Will shows some inexperience with the matchup (e.g. Jr's sideb/dair is a lot easier to deal with than this set makes it appear).

Having the opportunity to play vs the top Jr. probably influenced his judgment about the matchup.