Official 4BR Tier List v2.0 - Competitive Impressions

[TheGoodGuava]

Even if the switch version gets changes, we wont have it for another 4 months. I'd rather talk about something meaningful, like how Mewtwo is secretly the best character in the game

 

[Das Koopa]

I'm thinking of multi-game characters and their relative statuses by game:

64 Vets:

Spoiler

- High in 64, Top in Melee, Mid in Brawl, High/Top in Smash 4
- Top in 64, Mid in Melee, Upper in Brawl, Upper in Smash 4
- High in 64, Upper/High in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- High in 64, Mid in Melee, Low in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid in 64, High/Top in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4
- Mid in 64, Low in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Top in Smash 4)
- Bottom in 64, Mid in Melee, Low/Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- Top in 64, Bottom in Melee, Mid/Low in Brawl, Low in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in 64, Low/Bottom in Melee, Low/Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in 64, Low in Melee, Low/Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in 64, Mid/Upper in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Low/Bottom in Smash 4
- Bottom in 64, Low in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Low in Smash 4

Melee Vets:

Spoiler

- Top in Melee, Top/High in Brawl, High in Smash 4
- Top in Melee, Mid/Low in Brawl, Top in Smash 4
- Top in Melee, Top/High in Brawl, Low/Bottom in Smash 4
- High/Top in Melee, Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid/Low in Melee, Mid in Brawl, Upper/High in Smash 4
- Low in Melee, High/Top in Smash 4
- Low in Melee, Mid in Brawl, Low/Mid in Smash 4
- Mid/Low in Melee, Low in Smash 4
- Bottom in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Low in Smash 4
- Bottom in Melee, Low in Smash 4
- Low in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4

Brawl Vets:

Spoiler

- Top in Brawl, Top in Smash 4
- God in Brawl, High in Smash 4
- Top in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Upper/High in Brawl, High/Top in Smash 4
- Mid/Upper in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid/Low in Brawl, Top in Smash 4
- Upper in Brawl, Mid/Low in Smash 4
- Mid in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4
- Low in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom* in Brawl, Low in Smash 4

So I'd say in terms of game design/meta pertinence, the most consistently disadvantaged characters are:



With relatively negative lifetimes for:

 

[Deleted member]

Even if the switch version gets changes, we wont have it for another 4 months. I'd rather talk about something meaningful, like how Mewtwo is secretly the best character in the game

Do all of your posts have to end up directing to something so black or white?

Mewtwo is very good (close to, or even top 5 surely) but I have a hard time envisioning him has the absolute best in the game.

 

[TDK]

Today, I came to the realization that and are the same character, but Palutena is much better. Why is this?

Similarities:
- Largely dysfunctional moveset with tools ranging from great to unusable

- Each have 1 great special (Warp and Farore's Wind), 1 useable special (Reflect and Nayru's Love) and 2 bad ones. Additionally, both their great ones are teleport recoveries and both their useable ones are reflectors with hitboxes.

- Defensive Style of play

- Polarizing :a: moveset (Palutena is better in the air with a weak ground game and Zelda has an extremely high-risk, high reward air game with a decent few ground moves)

- Throw combos for garunteed damage at low % and a kill confirm off of a DI read at high %.

- Really powerful raw moves that can kill really early but have problems, requiring a hard read or an absurdly tiny sweetspot to hit for them to work most of the time (or they're multihit)

- Bad projectiles

So with this in mind, why does Palutena work and Zelda not work? Are Palutena's non-awful moves better or more plentiful than Zelda's? Does Sakurai want to keep Zelda bad as to avoid changing the character but is free to do whatever with Palutena? What do you guys think?

From a design point, I think Palutena was modelled after Zelda seeing as Zelda uses the power of the goddesses while Palutena is a goddess, so it makes sense that she would be similar but more functional.

 

[Deleted member]

Today, I came to the realization that and are the same character, but Palutena is much better. Why is this?

Similarities:
- Largely dysfunctional moveset with tools ranging from great to unusable

- Each have 1 great special (Warp and Farore's Wind), 1 useable special (Reflect and Nayru's Love) and 2 bad ones. Additionally, both their great ones are teleport recoveries and both their useable ones are reflectors with hitboxes.

- Defensive Style of play

- Polarizing :a: moveset (Palutena is better in the air with a weak ground game and Zelda has an extremely high-risk, high reward air game with a decent few ground moves)

- Throw combos for garunteed damage at low % and a kill confirm off of a DI read at high %.

- Really powerful raw moves that can kill really early but have problems, requiring a hard read or an absurdly tiny sweetspot to hit for them to work most of the time (or they're multihit)

- Bad projectiles

So with this in mind, why does Palutena work and Zelda not work? Are Palutena's non-awful moves better or more plentiful than Zelda's? Does Sakurai want to keep Zelda bad as to avoid changing the character but is free to do whatever with Palutena? What do you guys think?

From a design point, I think Palutena was modelled after Zelda seeing as Zelda uses the power of the goddesses while Palutena is a goddess, so it makes sense that she would be similar but more functional.

Palutena has mobility, Zelda doesn't.

Palutena also has the mechanic of invincible moves you literally cannot challenge, so there's that.

Simple why Palutena is more viable than Zelda with these two main things really. Palutena also has a way better grab because of said mobility and with it being less laggy.

 

[TheGoodGuava]

Do all of your posts have to end up directing to something so black or white

Its the fastest way to get off of irrelevant/overly discussed topics like NX changes or Marth vs Lucina. That or to get people to respond with information that I'm too lazy to go digging through character boards for

 

[Y2Kay]

Wouldn't go to as far to say Palutena is functional necessarily. Though it is undeniable that Palutena is more viable, her positive attributes are heavily centered around her aerials. The strength of her aerials compared to her grounded moves are so lopsided, I wouldn't call her design "healthy" or an example of good game design.

 

[Deleted member]

Wouldn't go to as far to say Palutena is functional necessarily. Though it is undeniable that Palutena is more viable, her positive attributes are heavily centered around her aerials. The strength of her aerials compared to her grounded moves are so lopsided, I wouldn't call her design "healthy" or an example of good game design.

Well, nobody said it was an example of good game design.

Her good moves are just really ****ing good, and her best players abuse that.

 

[TDK]

Wouldn't go to as far to say Palutena is functional necessarily. Though it is undeniable that Palutena is more viable, her positive attributes are heavily centered around her aerials. The strength of her aerials compared to her grounded moves are so lopsided, I wouldn't call her design "healthy" or an example of good game design.

It really isn't good game design, no.

But at the same time, you can't say and are bad because they have bad smashes. While Palutena has a lot more bad moves than just three, her good moves are really, really, really good.

 

[Krysco]

With my ability to go to tournaments in Ottawa soon approaching, I reconsidered who to focus on again and decided Mewtwo but after hearing how awful his Diddy mu was, I asked in the Diddy boards and pretty much got told that, yeah, it's awful. I do recall reading posts here (or rather, the old cci) suggesting that perhaps camping with Shadow Ball might make it..less awful at the very least but just in case, I'm gonna see about having Pika as a secondary. If not then either Mario or Cloud.

I personally don't think Mewtwo is the best but I do think he has potential to be up there. Mostly because of his infinite. I'm honestly not sure why it hasn't become a widespread thing for Mewtwos yet. ICies grab stuff in both Melee and Brawl became their entire meta. Same goes for Falco and his blaster and for Brawl, his grab game too. Prepatch MK was focusing pretty much entirely on his ladder combo. DK focuses mostly on grabs for damage and Ding Dong for kills. Similar situation with prepatch Luigi. And yet with Mewtwo, he has an infinite (if it isn't true, I've never heard any claims or seen proof) that starts around 30% iirc that only 3 characters are immune to and it can start from 3 different options that can all be done OoS. It's because of the infinite that I initially dropped the character because I didn't want to focus on a character that was going to focus solely on 1 strategy but it never happened.

Anyways, may as well ask here since there's more than just Diddy mains here, anyone's thoughts on the Mewtwo v Diddy mu and the Pika v Diddy mu?

 

[ARISTOS]

Well, nobody said it was an example of good game design.

Her good moves are just really ****ing good, and her best players abuse that.

Yeah Palutena's design is pretty poor.

She's an incredibly linear character with a very strong kill confirm, which is really all that holds her together and makes her even a bit of a threat.

Such a shame because she's our first staff character in Smash but there's almost nothing to the moveset whatsoever.

 

[TDK]

Our first hammer character primarily used his forehead, though...

Spoiler

 

[L9999]

I really want evidence for Diddy vs Mewtwo. I have not heard that MU being won by M2 in ages. If the "logical" solution in the MU is "camp with shadow ball" why hasn't any M2 done such thing at top level? MUs held at a worse spot have been won before so the evidence is there to prove it is doable.

For the footstool disable infinite and any for that matter can be done only by robots. You have to pull that with pressure and at "random" because if not it gets predictable. The other M2 players haven't caught up yet. My respects to robots like Kameme and Umeki for pulling stuff like that when they want.

 

[TheGoodGuava]

Mewtwo is good for the same reason Sheik, Bayo, and Diddy are good. He has tools to deal with everything you can throw at him and he excels in every aspect of the game. His semi infinite (I say this because SDI turns it into a 50/50) is just icing on the cake.

 

[Y2Kay]

The Mewtwo infinite is definitely within the capability of a human. Doing the the Nair - FS - Disable isn't hard (with the right button set up / practice). Landing the Nair with that perfect spacing to get the foot stool out of it is when it gets tricky. Abadango is able to pounce on these rare oppurtunites with a high success rate.

The only thing stopping high level Mewtwo mains from performing the infinite on people in tournament is their pride, not their fingers.

 

[BSP]

can't charge in the air either. I guess and were too OP and needed a nerf but and didn't (sarcasm smh).
A lot of design choices are very strange and illogical. can store a needle charge but 's bow and 's phantom can't. 's Din's fire causes freefalling. 's Bullet climax, 's shadow ball and 's Limit charge can be shield canceled but Zelda/Link's projectiles can't. 's KO punch gets hit out of him and grants no stat bonuses but 's limit only is lost when he's KOed and makes him the fastest air character in the game and heavier.

Cloud didn't and still doesn't make sense to me design wise. The F4 jumpsquat with that massive sword, along with the ground speed, and stupid air speed is just hilarious icing on the cake.

Anyway, is switch smash actually confirmed or is this just speculation?

 

[Y2Kay]

Cloud didn't and still doesn't make sense to me design wise. The F4 jumpsquat with that massive sword, along with the ground speed, and stupid air speed is just hilarious icing on the cake.

Anyway, is switch smash actually confirmed or is this just speculation?

Apparently Super Smash Bros, along with other Wii U favorites like Mario Kart and Splatoon, are getting special "Director's cut" versions. Judging from this, it's safe to assume we'll be getting new content for smash 4 soon. Whether that be game changing for our meta or not remains to be seen.

 

[TheGoodGuava]

Not even ****posting here but I would love to see how Snake would turn out in Smash 4

 

[TDK]

if there's anything I want out of a Switch port it's for to be meaningfully buffed. Not just a random KB upgrade to fair that would actually make her worse.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Today, I came to the realization that and are the same character, but Palutena is much better. Why is this?

Similarities:
- Largely dysfunctional moveset with tools ranging from great to unusable

- Each have 1 great special (Warp and Farore's Wind), 1 useable special (Reflect and Nayru's Love) and 2 bad ones. Additionally, both their great ones are teleport recoveries and both their useable ones are reflectors with hitboxes.

- Defensive Style of play

- Polarizing :a: moveset (Palutena is better in the air with a weak ground game and Zelda has an extremely high-risk, high reward air game with a decent few ground moves)

- Throw combos for garunteed damage at low % and a kill confirm off of a DI read at high %.

- Really powerful raw moves that can kill really early but have problems, requiring a hard read or an absurdly tiny sweetspot to hit for them to work most of the time (or they're multihit)

- Bad projectiles

So with this in mind, why does Palutena work and Zelda not work? Are Palutena's non-awful moves better or more plentiful than Zelda's? Does Sakurai want to keep Zelda bad as to avoid changing the character but is free to do whatever with Palutena? What do you guys think?

From a design point, I think Palutena was modelled after Zelda seeing as Zelda uses the power of the goddesses while Palutena is a goddess, so it makes sense that she would be similar but more functional.

I can near guarantee you that Palutena was not based on Zelda.

Seriously, a lot of these similarities are reaching at best, over simplifying at worst.

Can we please stop saying that two characters who are very different are the same character but one is a little better?

You don't even play Zelda and Palutena in the same way.

 

[The-Technique]

I can near guarantee you that Palutena was not based on Zelda.

Seriously, a lot of these similarities are reaching at best, over simplifying at worst.

Can we please stop saying that two characters who are very different are the same character but one is a little better?

Besides, you don't even play Zelda and Palutena in the same way.

Oh my God, yes. Thank you. Zelda's gameplay is nothing like Palutena's. Zelda has piss poor horizontal hitbox coverage combined with snail-like mobility. The only thing that redeems Zelda in this game are her good OOS options, situational KO confirms, and potentially explosive reward if the opponent DIs incorrectly.

 

[Sleek Media]

Can anyone explain why Bayonetta isn't easily crushing the #1 spot? I don't want to sound scrubby here, but I feel like there is something going on with the character when I struggle with random FGs that just spam ABK and WT. She has half a dozen ways to start a combo that does anywhere from 20-60%, and can kill from around 20%. Your only chance is SDI, and even that gives you less than a 50/50 since she can see which way you are going. Edgeguarding her is almost impossible, and she has a pretty good camp game too. And of course her counter is at least a free half charged smash, sometimes TWO. Yes, I can beat random FG Bayo scrubs, but it never feels good, and I never feel like I'm in control even if I get a big lead. Why aren't more people using her?

 

[SJMistery]

Because she isn't that dangerous anymore since the 1.1.6 nerf , original that's what most people think. She is potentially helpless against well-aimed projectile spamming.

 

[ARGHETH]

Because she isn't that dangerous anymore since the 1.1.6 nerf , original that's what most people think. She is potentially helpless against well-aimed projectile spamming.

I mean...Bullet Climax still exists.

 

[Fenny]

Because she isn't that dangerous anymore since the 1.1.6 nerf , original that's what most people think. She is potentially helpless against well-aimed projectile spamming.

This is a myth at this point. Having Bullet Arts that you can cancel at any time and a neutral B that cancels out most projectiles on contact helps her case, but also the fact that she can literally run through projectiles or freeze you with Witch Time. Next thing you know she's in your face and you're taking 30% minimum.

Only Shiek can camp her out effectively tbh, and people don't needlecamp much.

She's defo not the best character by any margin at all though. You still have characters like Shiek, Diddy, M2 and Sonic with the brilliant neutral that she lacks, on top of safety and good to great reward off their options.

 

[SJMistery]

I think the shots are too weak to stop most charged projectiles, and that is discounting the awfull angle of shooting, but you have the experience so i'll shut up.

And yeah , BWitch Time is really annoying . I wish that counter was as situational as Greninja's (IE only useful against really laggy attacks due to low stun time, strict timing-reliant laggy startup and most importantly Shield weakness). I know that a noob should never give advice, but eye for eye, fire against fire. If Bayoneta comes, mash the counter attacks. Counters are generally too fast to block them with Witch Time, and if the Witch Time takes effect, the invincibility frames of counter área also enlarged, giving you a crucial chance against her charged Smash attacks.

 

[Bowserboy3]

"helpless" might be a bit of an over exaggeration there, but yes, projectiles can give her a little bit of trouble.

Yes, while Bullet Climax does exist, it's not actually that great at (grounded) long range, like almost every other projectile in the game (due to it's slanted angle).

Luckily for Bayonetta, when she gets past the wall of projectiles, she has all the tools to make up for it when she's up close. It's not like, say, Ganondorf, who struggles with projectiles, and when he gets in, he'll likely just get one or two hits in.

Bayonetta doesn't get used in my opinion as much at top level because there are still characters more reliable/overall more consistent, or ones with less "negatives" (every other level of play, she's just as dominant, if not more used than others currently). While Bayonetta can turn the tables in her favour with a couple of well used moves, characters like Sheik for example have as much (while admittedly differently geared) combo potential, better neutral game, a (marginally) better MU spread, a recovery that rivals Bayonetta's, and more speed, which means a lot in general. Diddy has arguably one of the best, if not the best neutral game in the game (or at least the best tool for neutral: Banana), still solid combo potential, banana confirms, banana combos, etc etc.

Even in the secondary/counterpick character department, there are characters that shine better than Bayonetta in that department there too (Mewtwo and Cloud spring to mind).

What's more, while we can all harp on that Bayonetta is the new up and coming thing, but in the face of that, while improving, she's still not dominant at top level, like Sheik, Diddy, Mario, Sonic, and heck you could even argue ZSS, for example.

Bayonetta is fantastic, but like anything, I think we need a little more "proof" or "evidence" for her worthy of being used over those other characters, the ones that have already established themselves as consistent threats at top level. That's all I think it boils down to; the fact that those 5 characters (for example) have already been solidified as some of the most consistently threatening characters at top level.

That, and that they have existed since day 1, and Bayonetta hasn't, so the argument of "why would I drop a character I have been using nearly two years to learn a new one?"

We can keep saying "Bayonetta's X option is so strong" etc, but the fact is that Bayonetta is still relatively new; we don't know the true full effectiveness of her, and we don't quite know how other characters and players can deal with her. Characters like Sheik and Diddy have been established in this department since release, near enough, so we know full well what they can do. Bayonetta is still young, so it's easy to blow up what she can do.

(just to clarify, I'm not saying we are doing, but it's a very real possibility - the character and the counterplay aren't fully developed yet).

 

[bc1910]

It's oddly satisfying to finally see Greninja above Pikachu.

It's correct too, of course.

 

[Sleek Media]

I mean mechanically why is Bayo not top tier? I know she doesn't have as much representation. The whole "loses to projectiles" thing is fantasy. With aerial abk as an option, how does she not quickly break a projectile wall? Why does Shiek's frame data or Diddy's Diddy stuff matter more than Bayo's ability to end a stock at 20% if she just pays enough attention to see which way you DI? She even has incredibly safe tools in neutral that rival the best Shiek and Diddy have (wt oos, divekick are both safe on shield, incredibly fast, and start her combo game). Is there a really common MU where she gets gimped really easily somehow? What's keeping her down?

 

[Yikarur]

But she is top tier?..

 

[Bowserboy3]

But she is top tier?..

Sleek Media is likely referring to the latest 4BR tier list (at least I hope you are).

Edit: Actually, even then, she's still top tier on that (A tier is "Top - Low"), so yeah, I'm unsure where you're basing your "why isn't she top tier?" questions. Maybe you mean, "why isn't she top 5?", for example?

 

[SJMistery]

Simple, ABK has relatively low damage outfit, meaning almost all charged projectiles outpriotitize it. The Water Shuriken is particularly useful thanks to a huge hitbox, quick charge slow speed and trapping ability that can take Bayoneta down for a counter combo.

 

[TheGoodGuava]

Bayonetta is just as unbalanced as the other top tiers, calling her anything short of top tier is dumb at this point. It's also dumb that were still using things like "top 5" at this point when there are at least 7 or 8 characters that are all around the same power level and all go even with each other with a few random debatable 45:55s thrown in. What matters now is who wins the most tournaments

 

[bc1910]

I'm thinking of multi-game characters and their relative statuses by game:

64 Vets:

Spoiler

- High in 64, Top in Melee, Mid in Brawl, High/Top in Smash 4
- Top in 64, Mid in Melee, Upper in Brawl, Upper in Smash 4
- High in 64, Upper/High in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- High in 64, Mid in Melee, Low in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid in 64, High/Top in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4
- Mid in 64, Low in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Top in Smash 4)
- Bottom in 64, Mid in Melee, Low/Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- Top in 64, Bottom in Melee, Mid/Low in Brawl, Low in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in 64, Low/Bottom in Melee, Low/Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in 64, Low in Melee, Low/Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in 64, Mid/Upper in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Low/Bottom in Smash 4
- Bottom in 64, Low in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Low in Smash 4

Melee Vets:

Spoiler

- Top in Melee, Top/High in Brawl, High in Smash 4
- Top in Melee, Mid/Low in Brawl, Top in Smash 4
- Top in Melee, Top/High in Brawl, Low/Bottom in Smash 4
- High/Top in Melee, Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid/Low in Melee, Mid in Brawl, Upper/High in Smash 4
- Low in Melee, High/Top in Smash 4
- Low in Melee, Mid in Brawl, Low/Mid in Smash 4
- Mid/Low in Melee, Low in Smash 4
- Bottom in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Mid/Low in Smash 4
- Bottom in Melee, Low in Smash 4
- Low in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in Melee, Bottom in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4

Brawl Vets:

Spoiler

- Top in Brawl, Top in Smash 4
- God in Brawl, High in Smash 4
- Top in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Upper/High in Brawl, High/Top in Smash 4
- Mid/Upper in Brawl, Mid/Upper in Smash 4
- Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Mid/Low in Brawl, Top in Smash 4
- Upper in Brawl, Mid/Low in Smash 4
- Mid in Brawl, Bottom in Smash 4
- Low in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom in Brawl, Mid in Smash 4
- Low/Bottom* in Brawl, Low in Smash 4

So I'd say in terms of game design/meta pertinence, the most consistently disadvantaged characters are:



With relatively negative lifetimes for:

Toon Link isn't a Melee vet. He's different enough from Young Link to be considered a Brawl newcomer.

Doc isn't consistently disadvantaged. He's 11th on the Melee tier list. Not sure why you put him as Mid/Low and Luigi as Mid when Doc is 2 spots higher. Mario is also pretty good in every game, he's just been screwed by physics/game mechanics/more ridiculous top tiers in every iteration except Sm4sh. There's nothing wrong with how the character is built.

Puff is more consistently disadvantaged than most; she's pretty bad in 64 and bottom tier in Brawl/Sm4sh. She's only good in Melee by a happy accident. Her risk/reward ratio and obscene hitboxes are nowhere near as good in any other game and they don't seem to have been intended.

 

[Deleted member]

Puff is literally in the middle of the 64 tier list, and considering 64 has pretty good balance overall she isn't "pretty bad". Happens to get decent results too.

Also nah, Brawl Mario was pants. Quite literally could not kill, poor recovery, and his worse air speed made him so much more susceptible to disjoints.

 

[bc1910]

Puff is literally in the middle of the 64 tier list, and considering 64 has pretty good balance overall she isn't "pretty bad". Happens to get decent results too.

Also nah, Brawl Mario was pants. Quite literally could not kill, poor recovery, and his worse air speed made him so much more susceptible to disjoints.

Puff is pretty bad in 64. "Bad" is relative. And no, 64's balance is not good. Pikachu is either the most or second most busted character in the series' history. Anyone below Fox is really not worth using.

I'll reconsider what I originally said and say that Mario is bad in 64 too.

He's okay in Brawl though. Not great, but his design works and I wouldn't call him "consistently disadvantaged" because of it. Again, he's screwed mostly by the game mechanics and more ridiculous top tiers. Bear in mind that killing is generally a nightmare in Brawl no matter who you're playing, outside of some specific MUs (for example where MK sub-30 gimps are easy).

 

[Wintermelon43]

Puff is bad in 64. "Bad" is relative. And no, 64's balance is not good. Pikachu is either the most or second most busted character in the series' history. I disagree slightly with the official tier list, but as it is, anyone below Yoshi is really not worth using.

I'll reconsider what I originally said and say that Mario is bad in 64 too.

He's okay in Brawl though. Not great, but his design works and I wouldn't call him "consistently disadvantaged" because of it. Again, he's screwed mostly by the game mechanics and more ridiculous top tiers. I wouldn't say he's notably bad at killing; other characters are just much better at it. Bear in mind that killing is generally a nightmare in Brawl no matter who you're playing, outside of some specific MUs (for example where MK sub-30 gimps are easy).

Didn't Isai win one of the biggest 64 tournaments using just Puff? I highly doubt she was bad if she could reach 1st at a national.

 

[bc1910]

Pretty sure Isai has won huge tournaments using characters worse than Puff.

The man is a God at 64.

He's kind of an anomaly when it comes to actually trying to rank characters.

 

[Das Koopa]

Toon Link isn't a Melee vet. He's different enough from Young Link to be considered a Brawl newcomer.

Considering the significant changes other Melee vets (and eventually Brawl vets) went under I decided to list the character in the same vain. Either way, Young Link has a tiny niche in Melee and his successor is good in both Brawl and Smash 4, leaving the more mobile variant of Link consistently viable by comparison.

Doc isn't consistently disadvantaged. He's 11th on the Melee tier list. Not sure why you put him as Mid/Low and Luigi as Mid when Doc is 2 spots higher.

While Hax doesn't extrapolate on Doc's issues, he states that Ganondorf and the Mario clones are both terrible and provides some brief comments on characters:

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sp0s22

Also referencing SmashG0d's very detailed tier list that puts Doc quite low;

https://smashbl0g.wordpress.com/2016/06/05/my-2016-melee-tier-list-v2-0/

The general opinion of Melee players and Luigi's prominence among at least a few high-level players versus Doc's complete lack of play at the top level after Shroomed dropped him compelled me to follow the logic that he's effectively a low tier. Luigi and Yoshi are bordering on this to begin with.

Mario is also pretty good in every game, he's just been screwed by physics/game mechanics/more ridiculous top tiers in every iteration except Sm4sh. There's nothing wrong with how the character is built.

I feel like the quality of how a character is built and whether or not they're "good" is entirely relative to the rest of the cast. If that's the case, Mario definitely has a pretty rough ride across the Smash games.

Puff is more consistently disadvantaged than most; she's pretty bad in 64 and bottom tier in Brawl/Sm4sh. She's only good in Melee by a happy accident. Her risk/reward ratio and obscene hitboxes are nowhere near as good in any other game and they don't seem to have been intended.

Wangera got 3rd at GENESIS 3 in Smash 64 with and won Kanto 2016. Far from bad. In fact, a lot of mid/low tiers have success in 64 beyond Isai occasionally using them.

I agree she's good in Melee by happy accident, since almost everything that made her good as a glass cannon was stripped away by game mechanics in the following titles.

 

[Nobie]

So I managed to ask Earth about what goes into choosing Corrin over Pit (because he uses both characters), and his response was basically, Earth will use Pit against just about any character and opponent, but he'll consider switching if he feels like the opponent was able to make the comeback a little too easily. He also pointed out that he's been using Fox more than Corrin now.

I was interested in this idea of Pit doing well during a match but having victory snatched away, so I asked him if he thought Pit is a character who's vulnerable to comebacks/upsets. Earth's response was that he believes Pit is generally good, with his neutral and his ability to net KOs being his strengths, but that even when he goes even/advantaged over other characters in the neutral, characters like Bowser, DK, and Meta Knight all have things that can just turn the match around. He thinks you could lock someone down perfectly with projectiles and neutral as Pit, but it's hard to be consistent in a Bo3 format.

The picture this paints to me is that Pit is pretty much a kind of low/medium risk, low/medium reward character, and as much as the word loses meaning, this is probably where the idea of "honest" comes from. I think what it probably should mean (and what people might be thinking but have trouble finding the words for) is that an "honest" character is rewarded relatively well for their actions, but not to the extent that a couple of right decisions can completely turn the match around. There is some risk in making the right choices, but a risk that can be overcome by being smart. I don't think it's wholly tied to viability, as others have said. For example, I don't think anyone would call Ganondorf an honest character, even though he's considered a low tier.