Official 4BR Tier List v1.0 - Competitive Impressions

[williamsga555]

I feel both coins of the low-tier = interesting debate, genuinely. It makes for a pretty interesting dynamic and a lot of frustrating introspection.

On the one hand, I think Dedede's kit is very interesting, but undertuned. I've said before, but I think that Gordos are arguably the most interesting move in the entire game (shoutouts to Bonus Fruit as well). The prospect of playing as a stage control-centric super-tank with an intricate projectile is amazing to me. Ticks all the right boxes.

On the other hand, it does get frustrating to know that a simple counterpick (or full-on main switch, honestly) would make things so much easier all around. The number of times I'm incapable of punishing something because Dedede just doesn't have the mobility or frame data to manage it is taxing. There have been a few instances where I feel like asking "When do I get a turn to play the game?" because I find myself unable to get anything started. Those moments can really make you feel like you're wasting your time (and potentially talents!) through a stubborn refusal to give yourself a better chance to win.

Really, I think the main draw to keep with Dedede is that being so limited forces me to break bad habits and think creatively to even stand a chance. I know, I know, having more viable moves by definition allows for more flexible and creative play, but my mindset just won't allow me to do that. "Necessity breeds invention" is a very real adage, and it's what I'm plagued with. If given a character with reliable or "easy" tools to win with, I know for a fact I'm going to devolve into always choosing those options. They may be good options, but predictability is almost always punishable.

Kind of makes me think that this mental roadblock is a pretty hefty divider between good/great players and merely decent ones (like myself): the ability to tap into creative play even when you could get away without it.

 

[Nu~]

Bell -> Whatever kill move you want. Same sort of principle as ZSS.

Key word is consistent

 

[Kofu]

Key word is consistent

You also can't grab Paralyzer or use it against ZSS, Villager/Reflectors notwithstanding.

 

[juddy96]

IIRC Ally is still positive against Larry, and at least has a set win or two against Nairo. Him winning another large tournament is possible, but he does have to work on a few matchups. Fortunately for him, he's currently 4th seed at CEO (based on a now-deleted Juddy bracket). That means he gets ZeRo in semis (man, can you imagine someone rejoicing at that a few months ago?) and will likely only have to beat one of Nairo or Dabuz of he can stay in winners. Of those two, I think Nairo has a better chance of losing to weird stuff, which does hurt his chances a bit, since Ally has yet to beat Dabuz.

I never made a CEO bracket and I don't even know how to delete a bracket lol

 

[Nobie]

In terms of interesting play, having a versatile toolkit with strengths and weaknesses > Having options that cover everything at little cost > Being limited in multiple ways.

I don't know if Cloud truly needs Nerfs, but I think one solution would be to just put a timer on Limit Break. It can even be a generous one. The idea would be that it forces the onus onto Cloud to use his Limit effectively before it runs out, kind of similar to Monado.

 

[HeavyLobster]

And the fact that every special he has has obvious counterplay and lacks consistent kill setups

Dorf-Pac from the Dorf's side almost entirely consists of abusing counterplay to Pac's specials. He'd probably lose 30-70 without being able to boot around hydrant and the like. I don't really have much experience in that MU specifically, but even the really obvious and basic stuff you can do with hydrant/fruit is pretty scary.

 

[Mr. Johan]

Cloud Limit balancing idea: Limit doesn't fully fill up until someone hits Cloud.

He can charge the Limit all the way up to the near max, but he can't hit max until someone hits him.

No one would be forced to engage him, especially with a percent lead, and if Cloud decides to engage, he risks getting hit to get Limit activated, but then also risks getting sent offstage from the hit and be forced to use Limit UpB.


It would give Cloud control of the match, but at the same time somehow no control at all. At the very least, this sort of interaction would be unique.

 

[Djent]

I never made a CEO bracket and I don't even know how to delete a bracket lol

Oh...maybe it was on someone else's, or else you were just listed as an admin. But I distinctly remember seeing a tentative CEO seeding map.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

I don't think this game is balanced as people want to believe.

Sure the gap between top tiers and low/mid tiers is smaller than ever but at the biggest tournaments, the top 4 STILL usually consists of nothing but top/high tier characters with very few exceptions. And with multiple players to boot so the "it's the player, not the character" argument doesn't really work.

It's no wonder players are dropping their mains for Cloud.

 

[wedl!!]

I don't think this game is balanced as people want to believe.

Sure the gap between top tiers and low/mid tiers is smaller than ever but at the biggest tournaments, the top 4 STILL usually consists of nothing but top/high tier characters with very few exceptions. And with multiple players to boot so the "it's the player, not the character" argument doesn't really work.

It's no wonder players are dropping their mains for Cloud.

...that's how tiers work, dude.

People who want to win will almost always go to the best characters so they can, you know, win.

 

[HeavyLobster]

I don't think this game is balanced as people want to believe.

Sure the gap between top tiers and low/mid tiers is smaller than ever but at the biggest tournaments, the top 4 STILL usually consists of nothing but top/high tier characters with very few exceptions. And with multiple players to boot so the "it's the player, not the character" argument doesn't really work.

It's no wonder players are dropping their mains for Cloud.

The fact that characters outside the top 10 ever make top 4 at a major is noteworthy. How often do characters outside of top 10 do that in Melee/Brawl? Can't think of any examples of anyone even coming close outside of AMSA's Yoshi.

 

[SaltyKracka]

The fact that characters outside the top 10 ever make top 4 at a major is noteworthy. How often do characters outside of top 10 do that in Melee/Brawl? Can't think of any examples of anyone even coming close outside of AMSA's Yoshi.

This is because Brawl and Melee (in roughly that order) were incredibly poorly balanced. That Smash 4 is not so poorly balanced (after a year+ of patches and DLC) is indeed to the dev team's credit, but the congratulatory backslapping about how the balance is so great and we are all so happy with it and it could never get better gets old after a while.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

...that's how tiers work, dude.

People who want to win will almost always go to the best characters so they can, you know, win.

If you are implying it's like this for all games, you are mistaken. In other games mid tier characters CAN win majors.

Smash players are so used to horrible balance slightly less but still terrible balance is considered golden.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

I consider Palutena bottom tier along with the rest of the characters who don't have anything close to a full moveset. Palutena is also probably the most extreme example you could've picked: she's a character with very niche specials, tilts and smashes but then a few really good moves like dash attack, bair and fair. You might as well use Sonic as an example of top tier moveset versatility, and without all the nerfs he's gotten, it would be even worse.

I do agree that whereas top/high tier movesets are mainly split into really good, good and average moves, mid/low tiers can have the same kind of imbalance, just swapped into good, average and bad moves. Yet the reason they're not that good usually lies in their mobility stats and/or a lack of options in disadvantage rather than bad movesets, and you can't ignore the fact that top tiers have always become more versatile when they've been nerfed. Most of them are in a really good state now in this regard, but we should remember that it wasn't always this way.

Doctor Mario, D3, Falco, and G&W need help in neutral too.

On the other hand, whereas a few low tiers have been appropriately fixed (Marth/Lucina, Mewtwo, Samus to an extent), most have been "fixed" by creating imbalances in their movesets (Ike, DK, Bowser) by making one option really stand out from the rest relative to pre-buff versions of said characters.

Sure, there's the argument of buffing every move to the same insane level of the best moves in the game, (never heard this argument ever) but why would that make the newly buffed moves powerful? The best moves have only ever been powerful because the majority of moves in the game aren't like that. If they were, we would call all of them normal or average. It's a completely silly discussion. It's easier to create balance by nerfing a few moves than buffing 500, and the end result would still be the same, balance. Power is ****ing relative. You either have balance or you have power, you can't have both because balance removes relativity. The only power that should be kept at the cost of balance in my opinion is every character having a couple or few moves/attributes that makes them stand out from the rest.

You don't understand. It's what characters are able to do. Name a character in mid/low tier land that don't hold critical flaws, doesn't do crappy damage, or don't die in a couple hits due to horrible disadvantage. Characters really aren't that good; they're just mediocre.

You might think now that the characters would feel more powerful if they did more damage for instance, and they would compared to now, but when everyone did that you'd quickly get used to it and hope for the same over and over if you didn't learn yet.

 

[wedl!!]

I'm not saying this game has "amazing balance" or whatever (there's power gaps) but tiers exist for a reason.

Plus, Smash 4 has 55 characters (3 wrongfully jailed), so seeing someone outside of the upper echelon characters is made even more unlikely.

 

[JustSomeScrub]

Now hold on. A character doesn't need to have all 23 of their moves to be excellent to be considered a good character.

Look at Melee Puff. Has plenty of terrible moves, still considered top tier.

I don't think Palutena is low tier just because her tilts suck. Her aerials are excellent as is her recovery.

 

[BSP]

Bell -> Whatever kill move you want. Same sort of principle as ZSS.

You'd think this would be the solution, yet Pac's opponents still often live to 150%+ unless they fall victim to something dumb that they probably could've avoided. Bell is great on paper and pretty stupid at the ledge, and probably part of the reason why the dev team doesn't think he needs buffs to secure KOs better. Unfortunately, it's stuck on Pac.

If I'm fighting him and I'm worried about a potential bell KO, it's not hard to stay out of its travel arc / attack or catch it once he throws it / keep blocking anyway because Pac can't do much to you in shield.

It'd be a different story if Pac could consistently force people to the ledge / offstage for shielding, but nope. He either takes the "safe" route and does 7% + returns to neutral, or risks a eating a combo / death / smash attack to the face.

Pac's ledge game can be quite scary if he has time to set something up...but he can't get that time consistently vs someone who knows his limitations, and even then he's not KO'ing until 130%+. The only way he can force you offstage long enough to set something up for blocking is to pivot grab you since F and Dthrow don't really send people anywhere.

Well he doesn't exactly have the best kill power or the most vast array of killing options in the game either.

Missed this. IMO, his notorious killing problems stem from a combination of his garbage grab and Trampoline sending people upwards. Between Fruit, Trampoline, hydrant, and ledge trumps, Pac can do some sick ledge traps that KO at somewhat reasonable %'s (although they do have holes, pac can KO you for trying to exploit a hole if he reads it).

However, since his grab is so bad and trampoline doesn't launch people offstage, he can't consistently use this trap potential. That's why everyone lives to 150%+ against him if they're smart and just keep blocking / look out for getting pivot grabbed. Seriously, he's one change away from having his KO troubles mitigated immensely (trampoline launching horizontally). Or if he had Toon Link or Link's grab, I think he'd scrape high tier easily because he'd then have an option you need to at least respect because it's going to put you in a bad spot.

 

[Greward]

If you are implying it's like this for all games, you are mistaken. In other games mid tier characters CAN win majors.

Smash players are so used to horrible balance slightly less but still terrible balance is considered golden.

Even if a certain mid tier character appear and wins a major, we would just call him a top tier and move on lol.


The game is currently very balanced for Smash standards but it's not that noteworthy outside of smash standards.

There's some "good" characters, a few "don't play this" characters, and some that we're not exactly sure how good they actually are, but why play them when you can actually play a good character?

The current patch is good, I'd still like to see minor buffs to the obvious top tier characters and some buffs to crap characters that nobody plays, but if we are to stay as we are, we're good to go.

The best players will most certainly play the best characters available, and that's how it is. You can't blame the low tier players from switching to a top tier (Cloud). Even if the game was more balanced, a lot of people would go for the top tier, and that's just how competitive games are. Once someone feels that their character choice is limiting their results, it's time to say goodbye.

 

[Trifroze]

Baby_Sneak you made your post difficult to quote, but:

"You don't understand. It's what characters are able to do. Name a character in mid/low tier land that don't hold critical flaws, doesn't do crappy damage, or don't die in a couple hits due to horrible disadvantage. Characters really aren't that good; they're just mediocre."

You're talking about something completely different. Some have complained about the nerfs top tiers have received to their strongest tools and I'm saying (along with almost everyone else) that those nerfs are a good thing. Nerfed top characters didn't become low tiers who can't do anything, and current low tiers shouldn't become top tiers with new overtuned tools. They should become what the top/high tiers are right now.

 

[Pyr]

Now hold on. A character doesn't need to have all 23 of their moves to be excellent to be considered a good character.

Look at Melee Puff. Has plenty of terrible moves, still considered top tier.

I don't think Palutena is low tier just because her tilts suck. Her aerials are excellent as is her recovery.

Every character has great moves for one reason or another. That includes Zelda, Jiggs, and yes, Palutena's up-air, b-air, f-air, and nair. That said, there is more to it then "how many moves does a character use?"

Really, it boils down to:

What does this character's kit allow them to do on a fundamental?
How can each individual move be used?
How many of those moves mesh well with the overall kit?
How well does it do the above?
What are the shortcomings of the kit? Are they significant?
How does all of this fit into the region's/country's/world's overall metagame at this time?
Is there a character with the same overall kit, but with better moves and options that meshes better with the metagame?


And that's just for the moves a character has. Actual placement is an entirely separate issue. But the answers to every question there can change as metagames develop and time passes.

Again, not as simple as "do they use all their moves or not?" There is so, so much more context to be had when determining if a character's moves make them good.

 

[Trunks159]

If you are implying it's like this for all games, you are mistaken. In other games mid tier characters CAN win majors.

Smash players are so used to horrible balance slightly less but still terrible balance is considered golden.

You're not giving players like Nairo, Zero, Dabuz, Ally, Larry, etc any credit for being just good.

Just try to remember that our tier list is substantially defined by the characters our top players use.

 

[Blobface]

Nothing about nerfing inherently takes away fun. Nothing about buffing inherently adds fun either. If you want to call out specific nerfs and buffs as unfun that makes sense, but acting as if the act of balancing itself takes away fun is silly.

On another topic, I do think M2K is right when he says people don't edgeguard Cloud enough. What does Cloud do if you're below him to his right? It seems to me that any of the options he could use (fastfalling a Nair or Fair) are poor. Assume you, the edgeguarder, still have your double jump.

 

[Ghostbone]

You're not giving players like Nairo, Zero, Dabuz, Ally, Larry, etc any credit for being just good.

Just try to remember that our tier list is substantially defined by the characters our top players use.

Top players specifically pick characters that are good.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

Baby_Sneak you made your post difficult to quote, but:

"You don't understand. It's what characters are able to do. Name a character in mid/low tier land that don't hold critical flaws, doesn't do crappy damage, or don't die in a couple hits due to horrible disadvantage. Characters really aren't that good; they're just mediocre."

You're talking about something completely different. Some have complained about the nerfs top tiers have received to their strongest tools and I'm saying (along with almost everyone else) that those nerfs are a good thing. Nerfed top characters didn't become low tiers who can't do anything, and current low tiers shouldn't become top tiers with new overtuned tools. They should become what the top/high tiers are right now.

My apologizes, I misconstrued some stuff :/

 

[BSP]

Nothing about nerfing inherently takes away fun. Nothing about buffing inherently adds fun either. If you want to call out specific nerfs and buffs as unfun that makes sense, but acting as if the act of balancing itself takes away fun is silly.

On another topic, I do think M2K is right when he says people don't edgeguard Cloud enough. What does Cloud do if you're below him to his right? It seems to me that any of the options he could use (fastfalling a Nair or Fair) are poor. Assume you, the edgeguarder, still have your double jump.

Double jump over you with his stupid air speed for a swordsman and turn the tables on you :\

If Cloud doesn't have his jump, jump -> aerial him and hope he doesn't airdodge through / call you out and Fair spike you.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Double jump over you with his stupid air speed for a swordsman and turn the tables on you :\

If Cloud doesn't have his jump, jump -> aerial him and hope he doesn't airdodge through / call you out and Fair spike you.

You can position yourself so his Fair won't hit you, neither will his Dair, but you can still hit him.

Either that or it was you could airdodge Fair on reaction and then punish him for it. Or he airdodges in which case you punish him on reaction.

Basically what M2K pointed out is that against Cloud, you can position yourself in a way where he must react first, and then you can punish accordingly.

 

[Ghostbone]

Cloud will just jump over you and dair lol.

 

[Mr. Johan]

The important part M2K and others forget is that Cloud is still moving towards the stage as he commits to an aerial or airdodge. It's not like his momentum comes to a dead stop. And with that airspeed of his, unless the interceptor has just as good airspeed, their chance of attack is going to be with an attack that sends him back to the stage anyway.

You can't just hang back and try to hit them away from that position either, because no Cloud is going to use their hit that early. They'll just wait until they get close, and then do a defensive maneuver.

It's not that Cloud has good airspeed, it's that he's got giant hitboxes to cover him as he coasts along, and the fact you must respect those giant hitboxes also means that airdodging for free is a viable option. Once he gets past your body, his mission's complete. Hell, hitting him from behind may even give him Limit to really screw you over as you look to recover yourself.

 

[FeelMeUp]

While I was reading what M2K said in the document I found myself thinking "Thank god I main Sheik" over and over again. The strategy he outlined is possible for less than a handful of characters. You're boned if you don't play Sheik, Pika, MK or w/e because edgeguarding him is so absurdly implausible.

 

[C0rvus]

I don't think this game is balanced as people want to believe.

Sure the gap between top tiers and low/mid tiers is smaller than ever but at the biggest tournaments, the top 4 STILL usually consists of nothing but top/high tier characters with very few exceptions. And with multiple players to boot so the "it's the player, not the character" argument doesn't really work.

It's no wonder players are dropping their mains for Cloud.

People are dropping their mains to play better characters, instead of mid-low tiers? I mean, if they think they can do better but their tool is holding them back, it makes sense that you would choose a better tool. Basic tenet of playing to win. Players who evolve into a better mindset and become proficient at the game are going to crave more than mid tiers can give them.

The top 4 tends to be filled with good characters because they are good characters being used by good players. Of course this is the case. If we found that some random mid tier was cropping up in relevant results in top 8s or 4s or winning stuff, they probably aren't mid tier.

 

[Das Koopa]

If you are implying it's like this for all games, you are mistaken. In other games mid tier characters CAN win majors.

Smash players are so used to horrible balance slightly less but still terrible balance is considered golden.

I'm sure this is the case in other fighting games, but no mid-tier will ever win a Melee major solo unless all of the top players stop playing.

 

[PK Gaming]

I consider Palutena bottom tier along with the rest of the characters who don't have anything close to a full moveset. Palutena is also probably the most extreme example you could've picked: she's a character with very niche specials, tilts and smashes but then a few really good moves like dash attack, bair and fair. You might as well use Sonic as an example of top tier moveset versatility, and without all the nerfs he's gotten, it would be even worse.

I do agree that whereas top/high tier movesets are mainly split into really good, good and average moves, mid/low tiers can have the same kind of imbalance, just swapped into good, average and bad moves. Yet the reason they're not that good usually lies in their mobility stats and/or a lack of options in disadvantage rather than bad movesets, and you can't ignore the fact that top tiers have always become more versatile when they've been nerfed. Most of them are in a really good state now in this regard, but we should remember that it wasn't always this way.

On the other hand, whereas a few low tiers have been appropriately fixed (Marth/Lucina, Mewtwo, Samus to an extent), most have been "fixed" by creating imbalances in their movesets (Ike, DK, Bowser) by making one option really stand out from the rest relative to pre-buff versions of said characters.

Sure, there's the argument of buffing every move to the same insane level of the best moves in the game, but why would that make the newly buffed moves powerful? The best moves have only ever been powerful because the majority of moves in the game aren't like that. If they were, we would call all of them normal or average. It's a completely silly discussion. It's easier to create balance by nerfing a few moves than buffing 500, and the end result would still be the same, balance. Power is ****ing relative. You either have balance or you have power, you can't have both because balance removes relativity. The only power that should be kept at the cost of balance in my opinion is every character having a couple or few moves/attributes that makes them stand out from the rest.

You might think now that the characters would feel more powerful if they did more damage for instance, and they would compared to now, but when everyone did that you'd quickly get used to it and hope for the same over and over if you didn't learn yet.

Disregarding the fact that I flatly disagree with the assertion that Palutena is bottom tier (who has the results and kit that prove otherwise), how does any of what you've just said prove that that low tiers who (use most of their moveset) are inherently more interesting to watch than high tier characters? Your post didn't convince me, because it's entirely subjective. There are high tier characters that bore me (Sheik, ZSS) and there are high tier characters that do not (Diddy, Cloud). There are low tier characters that have kits that intrigue me (Roy, Ganondorf), and low tier characters that do not (Jigglypuff). It's entirely subjective. Trying to insinuate that low tier characters somehow have movesets that are "way more" entertaining to watch because they have to work harder seems really pointless to me. If anything, many of them are poorly designed and are therefore more frustrating to watch in competitive play.

As an aside, I can't believe you're insinuating that Ike has imbalances in his moveset, despite being one of the viable characters with the least amount bull****. And then you place Mewtwo in the "fine" section despite having actual imbalances in his moveset. I disagree. I super disagree.

 

[Shady Shaymin]

"This game is so well balanced, look at how many tournament viable characters we have!"

"Mid tier mains are dropping like flies for Cloud? Tough love. I mean this IS a competitive game y'know, these people want to win. Besides, nerfing is bad because it ruins the fun, and we shouldn't nerf anymore because the game is perfectly balanced."

 

[Scrubtorights]

What would be the best character or the raw frame data needed to fight Cloud on the ground so that they won't have to be in the air with Cloud and his strong aerials? Is there also any character in the cast that is able to fight Cloud the best with out gimps or the least amount of gimps? Besides Sheik of course.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

I just think we need to make everyone strong (no crippling weaknesses, and powerful, but fair strengths). Constantly nerfing the top tiers (if we have to nerf cloud, which we shouldn't, a compromise could just be some KB off of LCS or endlag) and ignoring characters who need buffs (there's like +15 characters that need something) isn't the way to go. That's all Ima say unless I'm challenged on this.

What would be the best character or the raw frame data needed to fight Cloud on the ground so that they won't have to be in the air with Cloud and his strong aerials? Is there also any character in the cast that is able to fight Cloud the best with out gimps or the least amount of gimps? Besides Sheik of course.

Try diddy.

 

[Shady Shaymin]

I don't care whether cloud is nerfed or not and it's clear that many of you don't want that. Forget about patches. My point was that if you all take pride in playing a balanced meta, then Cloud is inherently bad because of the sheer amount of characters he beats vs the characters he loses to. In the switch-heavy meta, Cloud is not only the ultimate counterpick, but he is near impossible to counterpick. He hinders the viability of other characters far more than do Fox, Diddy, ZSS, or even Sheik. In fact, his matchup spread is even comparable to pre patch sheik, albeit slightly worse.

If you think Cloud is fun to play or you don't want him changed, fine. But don't then come to CCI and sing about this game's impeccable character balance.

 

[Trifroze]

One thing worth giving thought to is that mid tiers literally can never win anything big. If they do it they're automatically labeled high or top tier "and probably always should've been so it doesn't count as a mid tier win". In addition there are only so many big tournaments that can be won, only so many top players that can pick characters, and thus only so many top tiers.

Disregarding the fact that I flatly disagree with the assertion that Palutena is bottom tier (who has the results and kit that prove otherwise), how does any of what you've just said prove that that low tiers who (use most of their moveset) are inherently more interesting to watch than high tier characters? Your post didn't convince me, because it's entirely subjective. There are high tier characters who use most of their moveset that bore me (Sheik, ZSS) and there are high tier characters that do not (Diddy, Cloud). There are low tier characters that have kits that intrigue me (Roy, Ganondorf), and low tier characters that do not (Jigglypuff). It's completely subjective. Trying to insinuate that low tier characters somehow have movesets that are more entertaining to watch because they have to work harder seems pointless to me. If anything, many of them are poorly designed and are therefore frustrating to watch.

As an aside, I can't believe you're insinuating that Ike has imbalances in his moveset, despite being one of the viable characters with the least amount bull****. And then you place Mewtwo in the "fine" section despite having actual imbalances in his moveset. I disagree. I super disagree.

What's interesting and what isn't is indeed entirely subjective. I think my post convinced you just fine. I'd like to think we don't always have to say "in my opinion" after every sentence just to make sure everyone understands we're not claiming something is objective, especially when we never even mention that word. Variety by itself, however, is less likely to desensitize you than simple repetition by itself is. A bunch of other things play a part, like how watching DK fish for a grab the entire match can still be hype because of the whole upset factor behind it, but more options being available always yields higher capability for something being interesting than less options being available do.

Palutena is possibly the least scary character for me to fight against personally (without customs of course), and she does not have the kit nor the results that offer good reasons to think she isn't in the bottom ~20% of characters. There are no arguments to be made for Palutena that can't be made for just about every other character in the game.

Ike's neutral consists of grab, jab, fair, bair and dtilt, and his advantage consists of throw combos. His smashes are terrible (utilt, ftilt and dash attack are basically his smashes) and his specials are all either strictly recovery moves or niche in their usage. "Bull****" has nothing to do with anything, as I'm talking about straightforward gameplans here. Mewtwo isn't perfect but he's a more versatile character.

 

[Nobie]

"Mid tiers can't compete in Smash 4."

*A perceived mid tier starts doing well in tournaments*

"Oh my goodness, could this character be high/top tier?"

This happens over and over again in this danged game. Mewtwo was seen as a mere mid tier even after the buffs. Fast forward, and now Mewtwo is being listed as a possible Top 10 character.

Mega Man is viewed as a mid tier at best, Kamemushi starts beating down Japan, suddenly "Mega Man top tier???"

Marth gets some buffs, people are still "Ehhh, he's functional now I guess." What now?

It's like characters are only allowed to be mid tier if they're low tiers people have been underestimating.

Edit: Just realized Trifroze said what I wanted to say. All I'll add to this is the idea that this sort of thinking is why theory vs. results isn't as clear-cut as people pretend it to be.

 

[Strong-Arm]

Id say if I were to nerf Cloud I would add maybe a tiny bit more of charge time to limit, reduce KB on LCS, and shrink a few hitboxes. Hes not that insane or bonkers, but as a Cloud player Ill admit that I largely want some nerfs to him because 1. I do think LCS is dumb sometimes, and 2. (this is the main reason) I get really tired of all the constant hate and criticism that people throw at us. Sure I think some parts of him are overtuned but I dont think hes ruining the meta or toxic.

 

[Nu~]

Id say if I were to nerf Cloud I would add maybe a tiny bit more of charge time to limit, reduce KB on LCS, and shrink a few hitboxes. Hes not that insane or bonkers, but as a Cloud player Ill admit that I largely want some nerfs to him because 1. I do think LCS is dumb sometimes, and 2. (this is the main reason) I get really tired of all the constant hate and criticism that people throw at us. Sure I think some parts of him are overtuned but I dont think hes ruining the meta or toxic.

This^^

I agree that he's overturned, but he's no brawl MK. People will always switch to top tiers if becoming the best is their main goal. The only reason they switch to cloud so often is because he's the easiest top tier to use.

It's sad to see mid tier mains like Raziek lose faith in their character and pick up cloud, but their thirst for winning surpassed their passion for their character. That's totally understandable.