Official 4BR Tier List v2.0 - Competitive Impressions

[The-Technique]

M2K played DK before he went to Cloud.

M2K used to dual main Mario and DK. He switched to Cloud very early on in his release, but that was long before he was ever considered a top tier.

 

[Dre89]

It's worse when people think you are being disrespectful by playing a low tier character, or not being serious. Nah I totally put dozens, if not hundreds of hours into this character and have used them since 64 because its just a prank bro.

At mid level play and lower at least, a lot of people severely underestimate the mental damage you can do to people when you get a lead with a low tier character. They start getting desperate, flubbing, complaining about a certain move even though the character is still bad overall. Sometimes it results in wins purely because of their frustration.

Personally I love playing low tiers because I believe it makes you better at fundamentals and you aren't relying on abusing certain moves in order to win.

But really its to watch some people have a mental breakdown when they lose.

Playing most low tiers isn't even a disadvantage unless you're at a high level of tourney play. Most low tiers tend to be simpler characters with more cheesy/binary options, so if anything they're easier to win with the lower the level of play because they punish hard but often don't have their weaknesses exploited properly in return.

It takes less effort to win on FG with Bowser than it does with Sheik. If a non high-level tourney player started learning Bowser and Shiek at the same time, it'd take awhile before their Sheik became more of a threat than their Bowser.

 

[Djmarcus44]

I keep seeing that people think you'd switch to ganondorf or charizard for quote en quote 'disrespect kills' but honestly I play zard because I invested so much time I literally can't play any other character competently. I tried playing Ludwig (one of the koopalings) and when I won I was asked if I was new since I simply spammed side b, I also tried using wii fit trainer, those fights never turned out well. It's only with zard that I have a 70% win record on FG.

I honestly feel the same way about Gunner. Whenever I think about the possibility of maining my secondary Cloud, I remember that Gunner has a better neutral (This is especially true at lower levels of play) and disadvantage state, and I have invested so much into Gunner's advantage state that my Gunner is better than my Cloud in pretty much every way. This is especially apparent when my Gunner does better against Foxes than my Cloud.

It's worse when people think you are being disrespectful by playing a low tier character, or not being serious. Nah I totally put dozens, if not hundreds of hours into this character and have used them since 64 because its just a prank bro.

At mid level play and lower at least, a lot of people severely underestimate the mental damage you can do to people when you get a lead with a low tier character. They start getting desperate, flubbing, complaining about a certain move even though the character is still bad overall. Sometimes it results in wins purely because of their frustration.

Personally I love playing low tiers because I believe it makes you better at fundamentals and you aren't relying on abusing certain moves in order to win.

But really its to watch some people have a mental breakdown when they lose.

That isn't always true with low tiers. In fact, some low tiers can encourage spamming because they don't have as many good options. This is especially true with low tier projectile characters. Even though I think that Gunner's tools are too good to be a low tier, my edgeguarding game with Gunner compared to my other characters is a good example of a way that a worse character can encourage poor habits. Gunner's flame pillar literally carries my edgeguarding game because I can spam it to keep people from grabbing the ledge, and the weak hit of flame pillar confirms into charge blast. This tactic doesn't encourage me to go offstage very often to edgeguard, and it makes my edgeguarding with other characters much worse by comparison.

FeelMeUp , for the Bayonetta matchup, I would also add in the ability to take advantage of Bayonetta's disadvantage state as one of the factors that can lead to doing well against Bayonetta. One of the reasons why I think that Gunner does well against Bayonetta is because Gunner can edgeguard her recovery better than a vast majority of the cast with flame pillar, charge blast, up smash, fsmash, fair, and dsmash, and Gunner's charge blast is good for punishing Bayonetta's landings (It is also a solid punish for Bayonetta's heel slide). When combined with the fact that Gunner walls out Bayonetta effectively in neutral, Gunner is definitely a character that can have an even matchup with Bayonetta (One of the determining factors of the matchup is the Gunner player's ability to use DI and SDI to reduce the effectiveness of Bayonetta's combo game).

 

[TDK]

I believe there's a player who was at first noteworthy for their D3 before they started focusing on Falcon and Mario. Big D perhaps? Forget the name.

Big D still very much plays Dedede, but he does also use other characters like Falcon and Mario to back him up, which I definitely respect.

 

[|RK|]

Playing most low tiers isn't even a disadvantage unless you're at a high level of tourney play. Most low tiers tend to be simpler characters with more cheesy/binary options, so if anything they're easier to win with the lower the level of play because they punish hard but often don't have their weaknesses exploited properly in return.

It takes less effort to win on FG with Bowser than it does with Sheik. If a non high-level tourney player started learning Bowser and Shiek at the same time, it'd take awhile before their Sheik became more of a threat than their Bowser.

This is actually a really good point - and of course, there are some top tiers with easily accessible tools (Cloud, Mario) and some low tiers that have tools that are hard to access (Shulk).

I've been reading "Masher to Master" recently, and one thing the writer mentions is that in Street Fighter II (I think), if you played Ryu vs Blanka(?), you'd come away thinking Ryu was worse. Yet at top levels of play, Ryu is the better character.

Returning to Smash - pretty much all of the top tiers - regardless of how difficult they are to play - has some sort of panic button. Sheik, complex as she is, doesn't have to think much about how to mix up her recovery or escape a juggle situation. Sonic doesn't have to worry about recovering either. Etcetera. From that perspective, it's very much a disadvantage.

 

[verbatim]

Not playing top tier is fine. Not playing top tier but still claiming a desire to attain victory is what blows my mind.

That is an interesting mentality for someone who doesn't play a "potential best character".

 

[Trifroze]

Wanting to win isn't just some binary decision you make, there are different levels of it. Probably (just about) everyone tries to balance the desire to win with the desire to play an interesting character, and some have an easier choice with that because the character(s) they find interesting are also really good.

but yeah you can't claim you're 100% serious about winning when you play Ganon

 

[bc1910]

Getting a little existential but as a species, our desire to "not lose" is far greater than our desire to win. We are what's known as "loss averse". This has been proven in various economic experiments by people such as Dan Ariely. Framing the exact same scenario as a monetary gain or loss can change people's choices.

The difficulty in applying this to Smash is that winning and losing is binary. You can't "not lose" the match without winning it and vice versa. You'd think that even when subconsciously playing to "not lose", we would all pick top tier because it's still the most effective way to avoid losing.

Since you still get "competitive" people playing low tiers, one explanation centres around the fact that many low tier heroes justify their losses by blaming the character, vocally or not. Studies of the human ego have also shown that we tend to credit ourselves when we do something well and blame external factors and/or factors outside our control when we lose or do something badly. The excuses come out because our strongest desire is to "not lose", rather than win, and we can justify our losses to ourselves by blaming the character.

I don't generalise across all low tier players, but many of them try to have their cake and eat it too by playing a low tier and avoiding blame when they lose. I'm sure we've all encountered such players.

 

[Shady Shaymin]

ayyy welcome back Trifroze

 

[SaltyKracka]

Wanting to win isn't just some binary decision you make, there are different levels of it. Probably (just about) everyone tries to balance the desire to win with the desire to play an interesting character, and some have an easier choice with that because the character(s) they find interesting are also really good.

but yeah you can't claim you're 100% serious about winning when you play Ganon

That's not to say people who play low or bottom tier characters don't want to win. The desire for victory is, like all others, a weighting factor in our decision-making processes.

See: The desperate desire for balance patches to shake things up.

 

[ThePokéYoshi]

There's also the matter of playstyles. If your playstyle perfectly fits a low tier and you suck with every top tier, then maybe that low tier is actually your best chance at winning.

 

[teddystalin]

There's also the matter of playstyles. If your playstyle perfectly fits a low tier and you suck with every top tier, then maybe that low tier is actually your best chance at winning.

Which playstyles exist in low tiers with no equivalent among high and top tiers though? If you're good with Shulk, that should translate well to Marth or Cloud. If you're loving Falco, why not give Ryu a try? It's okay to play a character because you're emotionally attached to them, but there are enough viable characters that the style excuse rings a little hollow. If you aren't good with any of them, it's probably a matter of fundamentals, not playstyle.

 

[ThePokéYoshi]

Which playstyles exist in low tiers with no equivalent among high and top tiers though? If you're good with Shulk, that should translate well to Marth or Cloud. If you're loving Falco, why not give Ryu a try? It's okay to play a character because you're emotionally attached to them, but there are enough viable characters that the style excuse rings a little hollow. If you aren't good with any of them, it's probably a matter of fundamentals, not playstyle.

Yeah, this is probably true of course, it was more of a hypothetical idea I had. Although I'd say there are some characters (not necessarily low tiers) that are so unique there is no real equivalent, like Peach, Pac-Man, Little Mac or Olimar.

 

[Luco]

Yeah but I doubt you can complain when you're making all the money from beating everyone in your country using ganon like a certain member of this thread does... :D

 

[chaos11011]

Which playstyles exist in low tiers with no equivalent among high and top tiers though? If you're good with Shulk, that should translate well to Marth or Cloud. If you're loving Falco, why not give Ryu a try? It's okay to play a character because you're emotionally attached to them, but there are enough viable characters that the style excuse rings a little hollow. If you aren't good with any of them, it's probably a matter of fundamentals, not playstyle.

I can really see this. I play Duck Hunt and I've realized his tools translate well when playing Diddy. Use banana like gunmen. Trap ledge in similar ways. Space with FAir and go for grabs. Both even kill with utilt on occassion!

However, Can is such a unique move with no real equivalent. The diverse capabilities of both offense and defense are amazing. But yeah, if I wanted to switch to a top tier (other than Sheik), Diddy would probably be my best choice.

 

[|RK|]

Getting a little existential but as a species, our desire to "not lose" is far greater than our desire to win. We are what's known as "loss averse". This has been proven in various economic experiments by people such as Dan Ariely. Framing the exact same scenario as a monetary gain or loss can change people's choices.

The difficulty in applying this to Smash is that winning and losing is binary. You can't "not lose" the match without winning it and vice versa. You'd think that even when subconsciously playing to "not lose", we would all pick top tier because it's still the most effective way to avoid losing.

Since you still get "competitive" people playing low tiers, one explanation centres around the fact that many low tier heroes justify their losses by blaming the character, vocally or not. Studies of the human ego have also shown that we tend to credit ourselves when we do something well and blame external factors and/or factors outside our control when we lose or do something badly. The excuses come out because our strongest desire is to "not lose", rather than win, and we can justify our losses to ourselves by blaming the character.

I don't generalise across all low tier players, but many of them try to have their cake and eat it too by playing a low tier and avoiding blame when they lose. I'm sure we've all encountered such players.

Yeah - it's obnoxious. I think one of the biggest markers for whether you're playing to win or not is how much you're complaining. Xian tweeted a while back that complaining is a good way to vent, but do it too much and you start to believe your own lies. If you really believe it's not possible to win with your character, but you still play them? Not really "playing to win."

Which playstyles exist in low tiers with no equivalent among high and top tiers though? If you're good with Shulk, that should translate well to Marth or Cloud. If you're loving Falco, why not give Ryu a try? It's okay to play a character because you're emotionally attached to them, but there are enough viable characters that the style excuse rings a little hollow. If you aren't good with any of them, it's probably a matter of fundamentals, not playstyle.

I was going to say Kirby, then I remembered that Sonic is basically a superior Kirby. There are some small things that would be lost in the transition, of course. But I suppose the overall playstyle is pretty similar. This game is actually really good with the diversity of top tiers.

EDIT: Mannnn, I keep telling the Ganon players that are looking to switch to a high tier to play Ryu. No one listens...

 

[TheRabidChipmunk]

Which playstyles exist in low tiers with no equivalent among high and top tiers though? If you're good with Shulk, that should translate well to Marth or Cloud. If you're loving Falco, why not give Ryu a try? It's okay to play a character because you're emotionally attached to them, but there are enough viable characters that the style excuse rings a little hollow. If you aren't good with any of them, it's probably a matter of fundamentals, not playstyle.

This seems like a pretty interesting topic of conversation, actually. Like, if you enjoy [low tier], you might enjoy [high tier]. If you enjoy Ganon, you might enjoy Ryu. That sort of thing.

That said, what high tier do you think plays most like King Dedede?

 

[Baby_Sneak]

Pretty sure PAC-man has no equivalent. His item is unmatched.

If snake somehow became secret DLC, that's the only way PAC will have an equivalent

 

[T4ylor]

TheRabidChipmunk I mained D3 until recently. The best characters that play like him are probably Diddy, Lucario, and Rob since they have good grab games and can ledge trap well. I never enjoyed that aspect of him so I switched to Pit for his grab game, multiple jumps, and slow air speed (which I was accustomed to). Later made the switch to Zard because I find him more enjoyable.

 

[TDK]

Yeah but I doubt you can complain when you're making all the money from beating everyone in your country using ganon like a certain member of this thread does... :D

Mad respect to Adom for this.

 

[FeelMeUp]

If you guys had to make a top 5 based on how strong a character is overall in a Crew Battle/Doubles, what would it look like?

 

[DanGR]

Maybe something like this: Cloud, Mario, Mewtwo, Sheik, Lucario.

 

[|RK|]

Maybe something like this: Cloud, Mario, Mewtwo, Sheik, Lucario.

Is Mewtwo that great in doubles? I'd have to put Lucas in there, solely because of how perfect his synergy with Lucario is.

 

[FeelMeUp]

I think Mewtwo is dumb good in Crew Battles, personally.
Also of the belief that Mario/Cloud+Cloud/Mario/Sheik are the best non-gimmick teams in the game.
Unsure on Mario Sheik and Cloud Cloud specifically, though.

 

[DanGR]

Is Mewtwo that great in doubles? I'd have to put Lucas in there, solely because of how perfect his synergy with Lucario is.

I 100% agree with everything FeelMeUp said. I'll add that I think Mewtwo is too good in crews to be out of top 5 overall. But honestly, crews and doubles are so qualitatively different that I have a hard time combining the two metas into one list.

 

[Nu~]

Pac-Man in doubles is kinda fun. He's anti-synergy: the character for the opposing team.

If you team him up with a character who can kill easily and take full advantage of his tools, it gets gross.

 

[blackghost]

If you guys had to make a top 5 based on how strong a character is overall in a Crew Battle/Doubles, what would it look like?

for doubles mario cloud villager ryu lucina stand out to me for doubles.

top tiers that either are bad or inconsistent in doubles are marth, bayo, zss, and rosa. all require a lot of control or time to execute thier gameplan. if sam cant get bayo to work in doubles thats a strong indication.
(here comes the call outs for marth)

 

[Envoy of Chaos]

I 100% agree with everything FeelMeUp said. I'll add that I think Mewtwo is too good in crews to be out of top 5 overall. But honestly, crews and doubles are so qualitatively different that I have a hard time combining the two metas into one list.

What makes Mewtwo super good in Crews? Isn't it just essentially singles but with player/character oriented counter picks? I know Mewtwo is simply good overall which is probably why but what makes him even better for Crews in particular? Genuinely asking

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

I wanna put Shulk and Lucario on the same team. Imagine max rage over 100-200% Sjljulk with max rage and aura Lucario. Add in Shulk's jump, shield, and smash arts I can see the rage being abused and salt flying from the enemy team.

Thank paradigm for the idea!

 

[Vyrnx]

Moves like bair and flip/boost kick at all times + teammate giving her more setups + mobility + general hecticness of doubles = lots of jank = good for ZSS

See: Marss is one of the best doubles players (and sometimes Nairo's ZSS but might as well just go Cloud)

Can't really comment much on crews, but neither Nairo nor Marss have been particularly impressive at them recently.

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

This article was posted today featuring Erico about Shulk. I reccomend to check it out to help clear out a lot of misinformation regarding Shulk.

https://smashboards.com/threads/backroom-pass-now-its-shulk-time.444409/

 

[valakmtnsmash4]

Sjljulk

How do you unlock this character?

Seriously, the smashboards article is great to clear up misinfo on shulk

 

[blackghost]

Moves like bair and flip/boost kick at all times + teammate giving her more setups + mobility + general hecticness of doubles = lots of jank = good for ZSS

See: Marss is one of the best doubles players (and sometimes Nairo's ZSS but might as well just go Cloud)

Can't really comment much on crews, but neither Nairo nor Marss has been particularly impressive at them recently.

zss primarily functions with grabs and up air strings. neither of which works very well in doubles overall. mars is a very good player but as nairo shows just going cloud is a clear better option.

 

[FeelMeUp]

What makes Mewtwo super good in Crews? Isn't it just essentially singles but with player/character oriented counter picks? I know Mewtwo is simply good overall which is probably why but what makes him even better for Crews in particular? Genuinely asking

M2 only has 2-3 definite character counterpicks against him at this time and nairstool/footstool disable along with the ridiculous amount of damage he does is extremely abusive for both stock cleaning and sweeping through other players.
In a situation where has 3 stocks and, say, a only has 1 the M2 only really has to rack up 40-60% on the Marth for the game winning scenario to open itself up.
He also has a stupendous camp/defensive game after you've gained the stock lead and is fairly difficult to CP map-wise.
I wouldn't be surprised if he were a top 3 CB character.

 

[Shaya]

ZSS is pretty good in doubles, she has the mobility, KO power and set up ability to cinch games.
Her shortfall in doubles are essentially swords and Diddy. She can't impose her will or force things against swords in general, but in doubles it's quite apparent. If your team mate's in trouble against Cloud, ZSS risks dying trying to save you - this is a fatal flaw.
She can perform amazingly still, but the team mate's character has to be able to set the pace (i.e. has a sword / needs to function in double's neutral 1v2ish). You can't really do ZSS + Mario against Cloud + anyone because you're just accentuating both of their shortfalls, but Ryu and ZSS can do amazingly disgusting things because they can both dominantly zone the ground and air in unison and will kill things ridiculously fast (this is still a niche team fyi - strong utility teams like those with Mario, Sheik or Sonic can make you qq).
Oh yeah, she also needs to have a team mate that covers for her constantly and consistently. Raw Boost Kicks and Flip jumps will win games in a way no other character can muster except Limit Cloud.

She's niche but one of the strongest niche characters (more relevant than Lucario overall I'd say to compare 'niche' chars).

 

[Nathan Richardson]

In crews where would zard fit in all this? I know his attacks punch through one character and keep going so he can hit multiple characters in a single attack but I don't know much more then that.

 

[FeelMeUp]

zard sucks and is a punching bag in teams.
his big strengths are made much more difficult while also having less reward.
most, if not all superheavies are trash in doubles because their niche is sorta invalidated by team combos.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

zard sucks and is a punching bag in teams.
his only niche is made much more difficult in the fact that sitting on stage and holding b is very rarely an option in doubles.
most, if not all superheavies are trash in doubles because their niche is sorta invalidated by team combos.

I'd have been triggered in that post but superheavies are always combo food so i'll concede that point at least.

 

[|RK|]

zard sucks and is a punching bag in teams.
his big strengths are made much more difficult while also having less reward.
most, if not all superheavies are trash in doubles because their niche is sorta invalidated by team combos.

Shouldn't superheavies have an easier time in doubles? Especially those with grab confirms? Damage goes up more quickly, and they don't have to worry about being juggled forever thanks to a partner. Team combos are also much more situational, whereas a partner could easily distract one opponent while you shell shock the other.

Plus, since your partner can save you from prolonged disadvantage, you also get to be an amazing stock tank.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

Shouldn't superheavies have an easier time in doubles? Especially those with grab confirms? Damage goes up more quickly, and they don't have to worry about being juggled forever thanks to a partner. Team combos are also much more situational, whereas a partner could easily distract one opponent while you shell shock the other.

Plus, since your partner can save you from prolonged disadvantage, you also get to be an amazing stock tank.

You also have to take into consideration that the two might not be able to pull off their team combos properly every time. I didn't think about this. You're assuming a two on one but between rock smash (major superarmor), fly (anti-air applications and super armor) not to mention all three smash attacks (ridiculous range and KB) all zard needs is a teammate who can stun (M2 please!), and you suddenly have a team who can easily set you up for early stock losses.