You completely missed the point. I never said Marth was inconsistent. We're talking about the consistency of kill options.What is this notion of Marth being inconsistent? It doesn't make sense in this time, right now. Perhaps way back when it did, but.....like, for real, what more does the character have to do to prove his consistency? Like, what else he gotta do, win 5 supermajors? Also yes she has OBJECTIVELY less options, 1 vs Marth's 2 (sour + tipper) per move. You can argue subjectively, but objectively? There's less. Like, I'm gonna be real:
Marth as inconsistent is an excuse. If you as a player prefer Lucina in certain matchups (whether it is empirically better or not), go ahead and argue that, but Marth as inconsistent shouldn't even be an argument anymore.
You are also completely missing the point, sadly. Yes, Marth's kill options become relevant earlier. But that does NOT mean Lucina is *lacking* kill options. The person I quoted gave specific examples of *removed* options. It is not a semantic argument. Please read that in conjunction with my response.Seems like you're missing the point entirely or are purposely trying to keep things going fruitlessly by spinning a semantics argument.
Sheik's ftilt kills at like 200% with rage. We don't really talk about it as a kill option, although it is.
Just as nearly everything is a kill option in sudden death.
Thing is, sudden death conditions are 0% of competitive play.
Sheik not killing you until ftilt works is a minuscule amount of the time, 5% at most (at top level similar player skill, like never?).
How much longer are Marth's kill options relevant in comparison.
It's significant.
EDIT: Your example doesn't take into account anything that Lucina gains. It's basically "it is removing a kill option because it kills later at the tip." And that's great and all, but it's disingenuous IMO.
Last edited: