Official 4BR Tier List V3 - Competitive Insight & Analysis

[P!NkN!Nj@]

No mean to derail the thread, but I honestly wonder why people think Yoshi should drop any further on the future tier list:
He has strengths that generally outweigh his weaknesses, a good matchup spread for a character of his tier and let alone for one that is "on the drop", and lastly decent tournament results and placings despite his rarity and subpar representation. Also, there has nevertheless been a clear cut reason for why Yoshi should drop, with the main reason (lack of representation) being counterbalanced by his solid results and placings as of late, such as Seth's placing of 25th out of 2,000+ people in Super Smash Con 2017 as well as 5th out of about 200 people in Ignition 200. Therefore, Yoshi should at least be on the upper half of the tier list. Having said that, I'm pretty new to this thread, so correct me if I'm wrong about anything that I said above.

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

EDIT: Good thing Sakurai messed up because otherwise the franchise would have immediately died. S4 for GC sounds distasteful af

Can you go into further detail on this? I do not think Smash Bros would be dead if Melee was not competitive at all.

Melee was made with veteran smashers in mind so I can understand why the game is so tech heavy, has increased fall speed, one person only ledge mechanics that disable opponents to auto-snap the ledge if someone is already grabbing it, and bad recoveries.

The skillset isn't different at all, in fact you need less overall skill to get by in S4 since there is no technical barrier while melee, PM, and Smash 64 requires both technical and mental capacity to be a good player. The fact that significantly lower skilled players can somehow knock out higher skilled players is a terrible sign of this game. Just look at all the goddamn upsets.

The lack of execution requirements only makes existing qualities more apparent than usual

My take on this: "The lack of execution requirements only makes {bad habits} more {noticeable} (or easily seen) than usual.

 

[R3D3MON]

Honestly it simply sounds like you're salty because high skilled players aren't always coming in first in every game they play in and you're trying to figure out the reason why and are blaming the game itself for it. Which is pretty crazy, so players like Zero and Dabuz aren't allowed low placements?

So do you regard every counter argument as salt? Because your "evry technik in meyley is a glitch lmao" sounded pretty dumb to me.

So are you saying a game that denies consistency is a good thing? That's a clear design failure, imo.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

So do you regard every counter argument as salt? Because your "evry technik in meyley is a glitch lmao" sounded pretty dumb to me.

So are you saying a game that denies consistency is a good thing? That's a clear design failure, imo.

I never said 'every technique is a glitch' just wavedashing which isn't so much a glitch as a quirk in the engine that was overlooked (and was patched, which every competitive smasher didn't like) thing is the consistency issues aren't so much on the game as the player themselves as Nintendo Galaxy already explained (multiple times). Yes I can see how the abuse of the rage mechanic can make a game quote en quote 'inconsistent' we had a massive argument one time about whether or not rage was wrecking the game and that whole thing turned into a debate. Because execution isn't as important in sm4sh as in other titles people who focused solely on that were getting beat, then there was the balance patches which aren't being released anymore.

 

[Bowserboy3]

If, come the next tier list, ZSS doesn't rise up to where she deserves to be, even if we go by Nairo alone, then I will be very angry. In no way do I see why she doesn't deserve to be above the likes of Mario, Marth and Mewtwo, at the very least.

And I am a big advocate for Marth, many of you may know, but I think him dropping slightly is fair, if not needed. I never thought he should have been ranked 10th place in the first place. I always said ZSS and Ryu should have been above him; while this holds true for the former, the latter is still questionable.

However, I still think his hit will be small, because aside from ZSS and Ryu, I don't really see any characters outright deserving being ranked higher than him without being too opinionated on certain characters. Purely on a MU basis, I don't see why anyone lower than him would deserve to be ranked above him. Lowest I'd like to see him drop is around 12th place. I also expect to see Lucina rise to be beside him. Whether or not he should be classed as "top tier", I don't know, but that's for the tiering system to change. I still think Marth is deserving of being in the upper crust of the tier list. If he rises, then I think there's something wrong. 10th I feel is fine for him.

The problem with Marth's placement is that there are so many other "wobbly" characters around him; Mario, Ryu, even Mewtwo these days. These four I feel are all slightly better than the likes of Corrin, MK etc, but you could make an arguement for ranking them in any order. Maybe shortening the top tier and classifying them as "high tier" is in order?

And in terms of other character changes, notable ones I can think of that I'd like to see rise include Bowser and DK for obvious reasons, Luigi (guy is ranked way too low for my liking, also had a decent time since the last list), and of course Samus. Personally think Samus would be better off in Robin's spot, as a mid-tier right now (basically from 41 -> 34). She's really damn solid, has her own Smash 4 jank to stand out (which most characters need; I'm referring to Shinespark btw), and has the occasional results to back her up.

---
Also, as of late, I've started feeling really positive about Samus, but the post about her above is my "fair/level headed" version of her.

I used her to turn around a set at my weekly the other day, after failing as Bayonetta and Marth; reverse 3-0. It brings me onto another topic, not neceserraly about Samus, but about the idea of having a lower tiered character anyway... but I'll save it for another time.

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

What makes every melee tech is a glitch sounds dumb?

For example League of Legends made glitches/unintended features a result: in one of the pro matches, a team dragged an neutal ai enemy that when killed in a specific way, would patrol a portion of the screen (their base) for enemies and let theor team know. The pro team managed to drag the ai near the enemy base, killed it there, and now it patrols the enemy base instead.

This was an unintended feature but in later patches, they added it as an official feature and made it easier to pull off.

A smash example would be in the E3 builds of Smash 4 where a disclaimer message appeared before every session, informing players that all grabs were given a 1 second cooldown period/intangibility. So in our case, a feature was removed which also got rid of melee and brawl's Chain Grabs and Wobbling, with a mixed reception from veteran smashers. Oh, I could also tack on removing tripping that was included in brawl since it was received negatively by both casual and competitive smashers (I bet it was a good idea to developers and probably in small playtesting, but flopped when it got in the hands of the masses).

EDIT:

It brings me onto another topic, not neceserraly about Samus, but about the idea of having a lower tiered character anyway... but I'll save it for another time.

So using a character, players in your area or maybe in your head you believe the scene or your opponents are umfamilar with to snag a victory.
Clever.

 

[David Viran]

Winning in Smash 4 doesn't really require "understanding the game" better, especially in a best-of-3 2-stock match setting.

Can you imagine Armada getting 49th at Genesis? Well, that's what Zero got at 2GGC: Civil War. Or can you imagine if Hungrybox got 33rd at Super Smash Con? That's what Dabuz got at SSC 2017. The list goes on and on...

Not really a fair comparison considering melee has been our for more than 15 years and players only really have to worry about 10 mus. Comparatively smash 4 has been out for almost 3 years with over 40 potentially relevant characters (even if a lot of them rely on mu mu inexperience).

 

[Nathan Richardson]

What makes every melee tech is a glitch sounds dumb?

For example League of Legends made glitches/unintended features a result: in one of the pro matches, a team dragged an neutal ai enemy that when killed in a specific way, would patrol a portion of the screen (their base) for enemies and let theor team know. The pro team managed to drag the ai near the enemy base, killed it there, and now it patrols the enemy base instead.

This was an unintended feature but in later patches, they added it as an official feature and made it easier to pull off.

A smash example would be in the E3 builds of Smash 4 where a disclaimer message appeared before every session, informing players that all grabs were given a 1 second cooldown period/intangibility. So in our case, a feature was removed which also got rid of melee and brawl's Chain Grabs and Wobbling, with a mixed reception from veteran smashers. Oh, I could also tack on removing tripping that was included in brawl since it was received negatively by both casual and competitive smashers (I bet it was a good idea to developers and probably in small playtesting, but flopped when it got in the hands of the masses).

No clue, but obviously everyone hated tripping because it was LUCK BASED. As long as you can control something, that's skill based, anything luck-based? Well that isn't controlled is it (though some people still like using G & W 'judge' so eh.)

 

[R3D3MON]

I never said 'every technique is a glitch' just wavedashing which isn't so much a glitch as a quirk in the engine that was overlooked (and was patched, which every competitive smasher didn't like) thing is the consistency issues aren't so much on the game as the player themselves as Nintendo Galaxy already explained (multiple times). Yes I can see how the abuse of the rage mechanic can make a game quote en quote 'inconsistent' we had a massive argument one time about whether or not rage was wrecking the game and that whole thing turned into a debate. Because execution isn't as important in sm4sh as in other titles people who focused solely on that were getting beat, then there was the balance patches which aren't being released anymore.

I agree it can be player thing in many instances. However so many factors of Smash 4 favors the underdog in unreasonable ways. Like I mentioned before, the 2-stock format is terrifyingly beneficial to characters with reliable kill confirms or 50/50s, which "balance" patches have mostly gotten rid of. This forces players to interact in very limited ways, especially at higher percents. Also as Routa stated, the overall lack of options and technical difficulties makes the game very stale and boring. There is a reason why so many people describe melee as "expressive" and "creative". The lack of options in S4 doesn't force players to be more creative, it just reinforces the safest options and leads to terribly obvious auto-piloting, even at high levels of gameplay (just take note of the amount of short-hop aerial approaches that players do into someone's shield).

Winning games in melee just by execution or "OP spacie comboez" is a terrible myth and only really works at the lowest level of gameplay. I would suggest you to stop having that mindset cause it prevents you from seeing and analyzing the amazing interactions that happen between players in melee at any given moment, which is possible because of the amount of OPTIONS both players have and must be mindful of at all times.

Not really a fair comparison considering melee has been our for more than 15 years and players only really have to worry about 10 mus. Comparatively smash 4 has been out for almost 3 years with over 40 potentially relevant characters (even if a lot of them rely on mu mu inexperience).

Fair enough regarding unfamiliar matchups. However Zero lost to Xzax and Luftie in 2GGC, both of whom play rather developed characters in the current S4 meta (fox and ZSS). Dabuz lost to some Corrin player and tweek (playing cloud), which the latter is another character that has a lot more development than other characters in the current S4 meta.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

I agree it can be player thing in many instances. However so many factors of Smash 4 favors the underdog in unreasonable ways. Like I mentioned before, the 2-stock format is terrifyingly beneficial to characters with reliable kill confirms or 50/50s, which "balance" patches have mostly gotten rid of. This forces players to interact in very limited ways, especially at higher percents. Also as Routa stated, the overall lack of options and technical difficulties makes the game very stale and boring. There is a reason why so many people describe melee as "expressive" and "creative". The lack of options in S4 doesn't force players to be more creative, it just reinforces the safest options and leads to terribly obvious auto-piloting, even at high levels of gameplay (just take note of the amount of short-hop aerial approaches that players do into someone's shield).

Winning games in melee just by execution or "OP spacie comboez" is a terrible myth and only really works at the lowest level of gameplay. I would suggest you to stop having that mindset cause it prevents you from seeing and analyzing the amazing interactions that happen between players in melee at any given moment, which is possible because of the amount of OPTIONS both players have and must be mindful of at all times.

*holds up hands* Let's agree to disagree, I explain in my profile how I'm not a pro player and am only a step above casual. I actually do a little research but that research is put up by other people. I started playing against others in brawl....boy was I bad at it...mainly because I suck at multi-man fights (my specialty is one-on-one). I get how in some ways the game forces limited options and I also know how ridiculously boring that is, but it also isn't fun to be constantly trashed by another player regardless of how much practice you put into the game. So it's kind of a toss-up.

 

[MERPIS]

for top 4 2017

 

[R3D3MON]

*holds up hands* Let's agree to disagree, I explain in my profile how I'm not a pro player and am only a step above casual. I actually do a little research but that research is put up by other people. I started playing against others in brawl....boy was I bad at it...mainly because I suck at multi-man fights (my specialty is one-on-one). I get how in some ways the game forces limited options and I also know how ridiculously boring that is, but it also isn't fun to be constantly trashed by another player regardless of how much practice you put into the game. So it's kind of a toss-up.

That should be a sign for motivation and more practice/learning, this is what all good/progressive players do in any serious fighting games. They practice and practice and discuss their failures with better players to get better at the game; they don't complain on some online platform like twitter (*hint hint*) about their losses like a crybaby. Just look at VoiD or ESAM's attitudes about the game. If you are complaining about getting trashed by a better player, then you should probably re-evaluate why you are even trying to play the game competitively. If you are just playing casually then you really shouldn't be complaining about getting trashed because it shouldn't really matter anyway.

 

[David Viran]

Fair enough regarding unfamiliar matchups. However Zero lost to Xzax and Luftie in 2GGC, both of whom play rather developed characters in the current S4 meta (fox and ZSS). Dabuz lost to some Corrin player and tweek (playing cloud), which the latter is another character that has a lot more development than other characters in the current S4 meta.

It was weird that zero lost to xzaz and Luhtie, 2 mus he's very experienced in, but before and after that he still wins those mus the majority of the time against the best players of those characters. Xzaz even stated on Twitter after, that he thought zero was just playing poorly. As for dabuz, I'm not sure how much experience he has against corrin but cloud is a very tough mu for Rosa. Combine that with the fact that dabuz had been losing almost consistently to every top cloud and tweek is top 10 player or close to it makes me not think of it as an upset really. Just bad bracket luck for dabuz at least with tweek.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

That should be a sign for motivation and more practice/learning, this is what all good/progressive players do in any serious fighting games. They practice and practice and discuss their failures with better players to get better at the game; they don't complain on some online platform like twitter (*hint hint*) about their losses like a crybaby. Just look at VoiD or ESAM's attitudes about the game. If you are complaining about getting trashed by a better player, then you should probably re-evaluate why you are even trying to play the game competitively. If you are just playing casually then you really shouldn't be complaining about getting trashed because it shouldn't really matter anyway.

Er I wasn't playing competitively, it was a bunch of players at the video game club so I'm guessing we were still playing casually, though if I had to practice I'd need someone else who's good to do it with....I've heard several suggestions on where to practice from Anther's ladder to the smash discord channels.

 

[R3D3MON]

Er I wasn't playing competitively, it was a bunch of players at the video game club so I'm guessing we were still playing casually, though if I had to practice I'd need someone else who's good to do it with....I've heard several suggestions on where to practice from Anther's ladder to the smash discord channels.

It's fine if you aren't playing competitively. Just don't force your expectations from casual play into competitive play.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

It's fine if you aren't playing competitively. Just don't force your expectations from casual play into competitive play.

Wasn't exactly trying to, just trying to explain it from the other's point of view. Honestly though I didn't realize asking about games in the series was going to open this whole can of worms....can we get back to talking about the updated tier lists please?

 

[R3D3MON]

Wasn't exactly trying to, just trying to explain it from the other's point of view. Honestly though I didn't realize asking about games in the series was going to open this whole can of worms....can we get back to talking about the updated tier lists please?

Honestly this was way more productive and thought-inducing than talking about the unending tier list discussions that pop up in this thread every few weeks.

 

[Krysco]

Like I mentioned before, the 2-stock format is terrifyingly beneficial to characters with reliable kill confirms or 50/50s, which "balance" patches have mostly gotten rid of. This forces players to interact in very limited ways, especially at higher percents.

I'd just to like chime in on this particular comment. Sm4sh being 2 stock isn't entirely due to the game itself, it defaults to a 2 minute time match just like every other Smash game (except maybe 64? I don't recall). It's TO's and 'the community' as ambiguous as a term as that is that determines how many stocks there are. I honestly don't know why Sm4sh still goes with 2 stock in North America largely when Brawl went with 3 and as far as I've heard, areas that use 3 stock in Sm4sh are fine with it. My only guess would be perhaps that with more players picking up and playing Sm4sh, that means more matches at tournaments and with more matches, a TO would want them to end faster so the event ends on time. If that's the case, I could see there being an argument for the game being casual-friendly indirectly being the cause for the ever so prevalent 2 stock format.

More stocks would allow for less 'limited' playstyles despite Sm4sh having fewer options than Melee because making a risky read or choice and dying wouldn't mean losing half of your total stocks. Outside of this little tidbit, I've actually been enjoying reading this discussion.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

Honestly this was way more productive and thought-inducing than talking about the unending tier list discussions that pop up in this thread every few weeks.

Wait so you're saying all this arguing was actually productive? I was worried I was starting a flame war, though this does explain why people prefer melee. Wonder why the installments afterwards were changed so much? I hear it's because the creator hated the fact that it focused so much on competitive play but is that really the case? Is there any real way to balance a game so that it satisfies both sides between competitive and casual (some developers prefer to sell to casuals since the audience is bigger and hence more money can be made others cater to the competitive scene due to them being more loyal thus willing to pay more...I think)

 

[R3D3MON]

Wait so you're saying all this arguing was actually productive? I was worried I was starting a flame war, though this does explain why people prefer melee. Wonder why the installments afterwards were changed so much? I hear it's because the creator hated the fact that it focused so much on competitive play but is that really the case? Is there any real way to balance a game so that it satisfies both sides between competitive and casual (some developers prefer to sell to casuals since the audience is bigger and hence more money can be made others cater to the competitive scene due to them being more loyal thus willing to pay more...I think)

Honestly I can't tell you exactly why S4 is the way it is. It is true Nintendo has a negative view on competitive smash in general because they always envisioned it as a casual party game. Although Smash 4 initially had more techs (especially character specific ones), Sakurai nerfed them or removed them completely due to the noisy complaints of people who could not beat them. IMO Sakurai was too forgiving towards the scrubs who complained endlessly, and he as a developer got too swayed by the opinions of an outspoken minority (even though the minority often didn;t even know what they wanted exactly from the balance patches). This is why Smash 4 probably would not be alive if characters like Bayonetta, Cloud, and Ryu didn't exist. They still offer some of the types of options previous smash titles exhibited (although they are still limited in comparison).

 

[Game7a1]

I'd just to like chime in on this particular comment. Sm4sh being 2 stock isn't entirely due to the game itself, it defaults to a 2 minute time match just like every other Smash game (except maybe 64? I don't recall). It's TO's and 'the community' as ambiguous as a term as that is that determines how many stocks there are. I honestly don't know why Sm4sh still goes with 2 stock in North America largely when Brawl went with 3 and as far as I've heard, areas that use 3 stock in Sm4sh are fine with it. My only guess would be perhaps that with more players picking up and playing Sm4sh, that means more matches at tournaments and with more matches, a TO would want them to end faster so the event ends on time. If that's the case, I could see there being an argument for the game being casual-friendly indirectly being the cause for the ever so prevalent 2 stock format.

More stocks would allow for less 'limited' playstyles despite Sm4sh having fewer options than Melee because making a risky read or choice and dying wouldn't mean losing half of your total stocks. Outside of this little tidbit, I've actually been enjoying reading this discussion.

With Clutch City Clash 2 running the 3-stock format again for Smash 4, it'll be interesting to see once again how much of an impact 3-stock has on players in their matches and bracket, in comparison to every other 2-stock bracket. I know (most) of Europe ran (runs?) 3-stock, but I don't recall a very noticeable shift in power rankings when they run with 2-stock (an opinion from a prominent European observer would be helpful to confirm or deny this).

Then again, if it's the same as last year, then not much would change.

 

[Nathan Richardson]

Honestly I can't tell you exactly why S4 is the way it is. It is true Nintendo has a negative view on competitive smash in general because they always envisioned it as a casual party game. Although Smash 4 initially had more techs (especially character specific ones), Sakurai nerfed them or removed them completely due to the noisy complaints of people who could not beat them. IMO Sakurai was too forgiving towards the scrubs who complained endlessly, and he as a developer got too swayed by the opinions of an outspoken minority (even though the minority often didn;t even know what they wanted exactly from the balance patches). This is why Smash 4 probably would not be alive if characters like Bayonetta, Cloud, and Ryu didn't exist. They still offer some of the types of options previous smash titles exhibited (although they are still limited in comparison).

*chuckles* I was just happy that Cloud was introduced because in FG everyone used him without understanding how his techniques worked so I got over a 66% win rate with charizard. Granted that's online but it's the only place where I can actually play other people, even if the stages are limited and I get jerks every now and then. I've currently switched to pokken tournament though and found out that I love to win, as long as it's with my favorite characters.....THIS ISN'T IMPORTANT!!!!Sorry.

 

[ARISTOS]

With Clutch City Clash 2 running the 3-stock format again for Smash 4, it'll be interesting to see once again how much of an impact 3-stock has on players in their matches and bracket, in comparison to every other 2-stock bracket. I know (most) of Europe ran (runs?) 3-stock, but I don't recall a very noticeable shift in power rankings when they run with 2-stock (an opinion from a prominent European observer would be helpful to confirm or deny this).

Then again, if it's the same as last year, then not much would change.

All the evidence I've seen points to 3 stocks having a minimal impact.

I ran a statistical test early on in the game's history that came up empty in regards to this, and someone else also ran a test and reached the same conclusion.

If people like 3 stock more it should be done, but don't do it expecting more consistency.

Honestly I can't tell you exactly why S4 is the way it is. It is true Nintendo has a negative view on competitive smash in general because they always envisioned it as a casual party game. Although Smash 4 initially had more techs (especially character specific ones), Sakurai nerfed them or removed them completely due to the noisy complaints of people who could not beat them. IMO Sakurai was too forgiving towards the scrubs who complained endlessly, and he as a developer got too swayed by the opinions of an outspoken minority (even though the minority often didn;t even know what they wanted exactly from the balance patches). This is why Smash 4 probably would not be alive if characters like Bayonetta, Cloud, and Ryu didn't exist. They still offer some of the types of options previous smash titles exhibited (although they are still limited in comparison).

Do you have insider knowledge into how Smash 4 was developed?

Are you sure that Smash 4 would be dead if Bayonetta and Cloud didn't exist, given that a lot of negativity about the game stems from these two characters?

Like I get the sentiment behind telling everyone to up their game but this post is just too faux-tough guy for my taste.

reliable kill confirms or 50/50s, which "balance" patches have mostly gotten rid of.

Reliable kill confirms are always strong, no matter how many stocks are present

 

[Game7a1]

All the evidence I've seen points to 3 stocks having a minimal impact.

I ran a statistical test early on in the game's history that came up empty in regards to this, and someone else also ran a test and reached the same conclusion.

If people like 3 stock more it should be done, but don't do it expecting more consistency.

Do you have links to those data? I've been meaning to look for them for quite a while now.

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

With Clutch City Clash 2 running the 3-stock format again for Smash 4, it'll be interesting to see once again how much of an impact 3-stock has on players in their matches and bracket, in comparison to every other 2-stock bracket. I know (most) of Europe ran (runs?) 3-stock, but I don't recall a very noticeable shift in power rankings when they run with 2-stock (an opinion from a prominent European observer would be helpful to confirm or deny this).

Then again, if it's the same as last year, then not much would change.

I doubt anything will change. I think the rest of the US community looks down on our region so much that it forgets about us along as Trela is not brought up.
Not to mention that some cities run 2 stock and others 3, while a few of the latter eventually switched to 2 stock for their locals.
I think notable players and the community avoid Texas like the plague because they think the entire state runs 3 stock, excluding DFW (Dallas-Forth Worth area) and many players bandwagon the 2 stock opinion without giving it a fair shot instead of just saying to travel to Texas.
I have only seen Dabuz travel to two DFW tournies.

Then there was the Texas Gaming Show 6 disaster that Esam (made a video about it), Hyuga, Vinine, myself (my first Smash 4 tourney), and Zero (he canceled) attended.

Dreamhack Austin 2017 and CC2 helped a little since Ally, and a few other name brand players attened those events, but I still think the community at large still has a sour taste in their mouth about Texas and 3 stocks.

 

[ARISTOS]

Do you have links to those data? I've been meaning to look for them for quite a while now.

https://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/5yz6s4/2_stock3_stock_does_the_better_player_always_win/

https://www.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/3xmp4o/looking_into_the_2stock_versus_3stock_debate/

Here you go

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

Ok so I read the "casual/competitive conflict" tv trope page and was directed to the "scrub" and "stop having fun guys" (SHFG) trope pages.

I can say with confidence that the Smash 4 community has the scrub mentality in regards to #FreeMiiFighters, Cloud, and Bayonetta.

That is all.

 

[|RK|]

Honestly I can't tell you exactly why S4 is the way it is. It is true Nintendo has a negative view on competitive smash in general because they always envisioned it as a casual party game. Although Smash 4 initially had more techs (especially character specific ones), Sakurai nerfed them or removed them completely due to the noisy complaints of people who could not beat them. IMO Sakurai was too forgiving towards the scrubs who complained endlessly, and he as a developer got too swayed by the opinions of an outspoken minority (even though the minority often didn;t even know what they wanted exactly from the balance patches). This is why Smash 4 probably would not be alive if characters like Bayonetta, Cloud, and Ryu didn't exist. They still offer some of the types of options previous smash titles exhibited (although they are still limited in comparison).

I see many people make claims like this, but they're never backed up. How do you know Sakurai removed tech for this reason?

 

[R3D3MON]

I see many people make claims like this, but they're never backed up. How do you know Sakurai removed tech for this reason?

Ultimately it is circumstantial, but considering Nintendo's general anti competitive stance and the fact that Sakurai removed or nerfed a vast majority of what the community complained about nonstop for days in the past (diddy d-throw, diddy up-air, luigi d-throw, sheik d-throw and fair, bayonetta entirely lol, meta knight up-air and ladder combos, etc...), I think Sakurai was being receptive to the vocal minority of this game's early community.

 

[verbatim]

People like to anthropomorphize Sora Ltd. whenever they're talking about Smash 4, they usually call it "Sakurai". (see above)

Anyways, to take MY shot in the dark about the development practices of a company that I have very little knowledge about, Bandai Namco were the people who were hired to help finish the game in time after Sora failed to meet expectations.

Among other things, they were implied to have been behind most of the balance patches, with the biggest input that Sora Ltd. CEO Masahiro Sakurai had post launch was complaining to them about particular things that he saw at Tokaigi in 2015 and 2016. The leak that originally leaked Mario Kingdom Battle (w/ the Rabbids) also claimed that Namco was developing a Smash game for the Switch, which lines up well with claims that Sakurai isn't working on anything Smash related for the forseeable future.


TL;DR

• The people who (probably) made the shieldstun balance patch are rumored to be making Smash for Switch
• They've tended to take a more competitive look at the game than Sora has

 

[R3D3MON]

All the evidence I've seen points to 3 stocks having a minimal impact.

I ran a statistical test early on in the game's history that came up empty in regards to this, and someone else also ran a test and reached the same conclusion.

If people like 3 stock more it should be done, but don't do it expecting more consistency.



Do you have insider knowledge into how Smash 4 was developed?

Are you sure that Smash 4 would be dead if Bayonetta and Cloud didn't exist, given that a lot of negativity about the game stems from these two characters?

Like I get the sentiment behind telling everyone to up their game but this post is just too faux-tough guy for my taste.



Reliable kill confirms are always strong, no matter how many stocks are present

Uhm the negativity of the game really doesn't come from Bayonetta and Cloud, wtf are you talking about lol. Sure, maybe to people who can't stand combos (if you are one of these people just stop playing fighting games lul) or disjoints, but if you are saying that because of balance than other smash franchise players would like to have a word or two with you.

Of course reliable kill confirms are strong, but they are even more pivotal when you are playing with two stocks and your opponent may be playing a character that has to fish HARD for kills (i.e. sheik). Also rage seriously means you might die at melee Jigglypuff %s. In fact these kinds of S4 aspects, regardless of their actual impact in the game, drives more people away than any Bayo or Cloud complaints (which will never end).

 

[Cyn]

I have gotten numerous reports from this thread today. Please keep the posts in this thread (and this particular forum for that matter) positive and productive. There is nothing wrong with healthy debate and I readily support it. But when it degenerates into borderline flaming or talking down to people because they have a different opinion, that is not ok. If it becomes apparent that you will not reach an amicable accord with a person you are debating with, then agree to disagree and move the discussion forward. Thanks, guys.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

*(some stuff I said here were thought of on the spot, so this might appear all over the place)*

I may be a little late, but I think what
R3D3MON is feeling is what I've experienced when I first felt the transition from brawl to S4. In my experience, everyone was either more rounded, cut off, or just uninteresting. Everything felt streamlined and simplified.

Glide toss was removed
DACUS was removed
Link and toon link had hundreds of tech in their arsenal in brawl, not sure about S4 though.


Two pivotal movement options from brawl were gone (jump canceled tosses are still here tho, but glide tosses moved you further and faster).

Diddy in brawl had SICKKK nana tech and really relied on that tool to get crazy, but S4 diddy has the nana as a accessory rather than something really integral to his gameplay. Adding onto his oppressive aerials that covers a multitude of options at a time (so you can use one move kinda repeatedly) and lack of excessive tech to distinguish one from another, and diddy is like another Mario, but with nanas. Brawl diddy had crazy normals like S4, but they paled to what he could do, or set up with nanas. They were a real open-ended tool (dribble them, do infinities with them, combos, "tech-chase," kill, gimp, fortress setup (ADHD style), stage control, etc... forgetting some stuff). And he was hugely interactive because you could use the nanas against him (and pull off your own crazy combo/string with your respective character).

Wario in brawl had waaaaaay better aerial control than his S4 version. Also had tires to improve his poor range, make kill confirms, movement options, a new neutral tool, and host of every things I forgot (it was a old wario guide about the magic of those tires that got removed to S4 SMH). Not to mention the depth the bike itself provided also, but to go back to his aerial mobility, wario could really WEAVE in brawl. Like, his movement was really a art form, whereas his S4 version struggles more to be evasive (though it's still possible, but not as extreme as his brawl version (more streamlined). Also had hidden bike tech with the platforms.

ROB had his Fair, Ftilt, glide toss, down-b wave bounce, and up-b aerial movement gutted in exchange for kill potential with his throws. More streamlined and Mario-esque because he struggled to kill in brawl

Can't speak for peach in-depth, but she is underwhelming in S4.

Falco got burnt in S4. In brawl, he was a crazy zoner. SHDLing from afar, then you got close and met his chain-grabs, crazy jabs, SH Dair, and combos from grab that led to his Gatling combo (a delayed dacus that combined his dash Attack and upsmash together). In S4, they just took everything away from him basically.

Snake was GREAT. A super heavy who was super fast (longest and easiest DACUS), had grenades, C4s, Mines, mortars, stupid normals (Ftilt and Utilt), and was just the epitome of interesting design. He was really open-ended and could set up traps like crazy. And they removed him.

Olimar had six pikmin to take care of and manage. Had stupid grab range with the blue and white, but had a garbage recovery. Had super armor on the whistle to protect him from getting juggled repeatedly. In S4, they cut him down to just three pikmin to manage, reduce his grab range, removed the SA on the whistle, and boosted his recovery. Streamlined him.


I'm sure there's more examples (can't think of any else), but that's what I'm seeing. Oh, and all the interesting characters in S4 are underwhelming (bowser jr., PAC-man, duck hunt, maybe even villager even, robin, shulk, etc...). Smash 4 is the game where the interesting characters lack the foundation (good normals), while the top characters lack the flash (good, interesting tools that breed creativity). This GENERALLY speaking though, as people are just about optimization and being as logical and robotic as possible. There is not many people who tries to push their character to their limits and create this highly nuanced character in their repertoire. We all talked about how fundamental ZeRo is. We also talked about gluttony and his amazing wario usage. The gluttonies are few and far between, whereas ZeRos' are pretty popular. Lastly, S4 is streamlined and polished, but that doesn't mean there isn't potential. Ryu is mr.well-rounded in ST, but his less-restrictive play style breeded multiple different styles. Same could come out of a lot of characters if people would just loosen up and let go of the "play-to-win" mentality. Armada and ZeRo are "play-to-win" personified, because they took the path of least-resistance and has been the most consistent based this mindset: top tiers, top fundamentals, no flash, and defensive oriented. Also readily able to switch mains. Very robotic. If you're trying to be creative and expressive, you're not consigning with the play to win mindset. You're actually going against it since,

1. You're with only one character (who is most likely not top tier)
2. You're willing to use options that are not optimal.
3. You're willing to play unfavorable MUs
4. You may go aggressive with the "wrong" character
5. It'll be hard for you to switch with all that muscle memory in a patchy game.
6. You'll be working harder than you'll need to for a win.

I think with how Japan sets up their tournies (no prize money, character loyalists, etc...) breeds better character development, which is why in brawl APEX 2010, Japan really shook America with their tech and made us level up (brood, a Japanese olimar player, was in a interview and said the American olimars were weak). But, yeah.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[dakotaisgreat]

What is it that suddenly attracted the ****posters in here?

"This isn't a youtube comment section/this isn't reddit"

That's exactly the point R3D3MON. This isn't those things. You chose to go into a smash 4 forum to discuss the current official tier list and metagame and started ****ting on the game, calling it trash and calling us casuals. All the smash games are very different, people like some better than others, that should be obvious to anyone. There's plenty of silly, stupid **** in all four of the games too, obviously including melee. You don't need to come in here and start flinging your **** on everyone for no reason, if you want to talk about melee go to the melee portion of the website.

People don't play Smash 4 because they have to, we play it because we choose to. Frankly, I find it ridiculous that you think competitive melee is that important to Nintendo or the smash franchise in general. It's a nearly 20 year long franchise that has been enjoyed by multiple millions of people. The competitive melee scene is what, a few hundred thousand people at most? This entire website and community could **** off and it would still be a successful, profitable franchise. Step out of your bubble.

Surprised none of the mods have really done anything about this.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

What is it that suddenly attracted the ****posters in here?

"This isn't a youtube comment section/this isn't reddit"

That's exactly the point R3D3MON. This isn't those things. You chose to go into a smash 4 forum to discuss the current official tier list and metagame and started ****ting on the game, calling it trash and calling us casuals. All the smash games are very different, people like some better than others, that should be obvious to anyone. There's plenty of silly, stupid **** in all four of the games too, obviously including melee. You don't need to come in here and start flinging your **** on everyone for no reason, if you want to talk about melee go to the melee portion of the website.

People don't play Smash 4 because they have to, we play it because we choose to. Frankly, I find it ridiculous that you think competitive melee is that important to Nintendo or the smash franchise in general. It's a nearly 20 year long franchise that has been enjoyed by multiple millions of people. The competitive melee scene is what, a few hundred thousand people at most? This entire website and community could **** off and it would still be a successful, profitable franchise. Step out of your bubble.

Surprised none of the mods have really done anything about this.

But R3D3MON did spark a interesting discussion though.

 

[Nu~]

*(some stuff I said here were thought of on the spot, so this might appear all over the place)*

I may be a little late, but I think what
R3D3MON is feeling is what I've experienced when I first felt the transition from brawl to S4. In my experience, everyone was either more rounded, cut off, or just uninteresting. Everything felt streamlined and simplified.

Glide toss was removed
DACUS was removed
Link and toon link had hundreds of tech in their arsenal in brawl, not sure about S4 though.


Two pivotal movement options from brawl were gone (jump canceled tosses are still here tho, but glide tosses moved you further and faster).

Diddy in brawl had SICKKK nana tech and really relied on that tool to get crazy, but S4 diddy has the nana as a accessory rather than something really integral to his gameplay. Adding onto his oppressive aerials that covers a multitude of options at a time (so you can use one move kinda repeatedly) and lack of excessive tech to distinguish one from another, and diddy is like another Mario, but with nanas. Brawl diddy had crazy normals like S4, but they paled to what he could do, or set up with nanas. They were a real open-ended tool (dribble them, do infinities with them, combos, "tech-chase," kill, gimp, fortress setup (ADHD style), stage control, etc... forgetting some stuff). And he was hugely interactive because you could use the nanas against him (and pull off your own crazy combo/string with your respective character).

Wario in brawl had waaaaaay better aerial control than his S4 version. Also had tires to improve his poor range, make kill confirms, movement options, a new neutral tool, and host of every things I forgot (it was a old wario guide about the magic of those tires that got removed to S4 SMH). Not to mention the depth the bike itself provided also, but to go back to his aerial mobility, wario could really WEAVE in brawl. Like, his movement was really a art form, whereas his S4 version struggles more to be evasive (though it's still possible, but not as extreme as his brawl version (more streamlined). Also had hidden bike tech with the platforms.

ROB had his Fair, Ftilt, glide toss, down-b wave bounce, and up-b aerial movement gutted in exchange for kill potential with his throws. More streamlined and Mario-esque because he struggled to kill in brawl

Can't speak for peach in-depth, but she is underwhelming in S4.

Falco got burnt in S4. In brawl, he was a crazy zoner. SHDLing from afar, then you got close and met his chain-grabs, crazy jabs, SH Dair, and combos from grab that led to his Gatling combo (a delayed dacus that combined his dash Attack and upsmash together). In S4, they just took everything away from him basically.

Snake was GREAT. A super heavy who was super fast (longest and easiest DACUS), had grenades, C4s, Mines, mortars, stupid normals (Ftilt and Utilt), and was just the epitome of interesting design. He was really open-ended and could set up traps like crazy. And they removed him.

Olimar had six pikmin to take care of and manage. Had stupid grab range with the blue and white, but had a garbage recovery. Had super armor on the whistle to protect him from getting juggled repeatedly. In S4, they cut him down to just three pikmin to manage, reduce his grab range, removed the SA on the whistle, and boosted his recovery. Streamlined him.


I'm sure there's more examples (can't think of any else), but that's what I'm seeing. Oh, and all the interesting characters in S4 are underwhelming (bowser jr., PAC-man, duck hunt, maybe even villager even, robin, shulk, etc...). Smash 4 is the game where the interesting characters lack the foundation (good normals), while the top characters lack the flash (good, interesting tools that breed creativity). This GENERALLY speaking though, as people are just about optimization and being as logical and robotic as possible. There is not many people who tries to push their character to their limits and create this highly nuanced character in their repertoire. We all talked about how fundamental ZeRo is. We also talked about gluttony and his amazing wario usage. The gluttonies are few and far between, whereas ZeRos' are pretty popular. Lastly, S4 is streamlined and polished, but that doesn't mean there isn't potential. Ryu is mr.well-rounded in ST, but his less-restrictive play style breeded multiple different styles. Same could come out of a lot of characters if people would just loosen up and let go of the "play-to-win" mentality. Armada and ZeRo are "play-to-win" personified, because they took the path of least-resistance and has been the most consistent based this mindset: top tiers, top fundamentals, no flash, and defensive oriented. Also readily able to switch mains. Very robotic. If you're trying to be creative and expressive, you're not consigning with the play to win mindset. You're actually going against it since,

1. You're with only one character (who is most likely not top tier)
2. You're willing to use options that are not optimal.
3. You're willing to play unfavorable MUs
4. You may go aggressive with the "wrong" character
5. It'll be hard for you to switch with all that muscle memory in a patchy game.
6. You'll be working harder than you'll need to for a win.

I think with how Japan sets up their tournies (no prize money, character loyalists, etc...) breeds better character development, which is why in brawl APEX 2010, Japan really shook America with their tech and made us level up (brood, a Japanese olimar player, was in a interview and said the American olimars were weak). But, yeah.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Is it possible to make love to a smashboards post?

I love this so much T_T

Btw...controversial thoughts

Spoiler

We had a chance to add a lot more creativity and self expression to the game through customs...but then people whined about 2-4 moves that they didn't want to develop counterplay for, and here we are :,)

Tfw Bayonetta alone is better and more "unfair" or "jank" than any custom character but everyone runs to defend her existence immediately. And no, this doesn't mean I personally want to ban bayo lol

 

[dakotaisgreat]

Btw...controversial thoughts

Spoiler

We had a chance to add a lot more creativity and self expression to the game through customs...but then people whined about 2-4 moves that they didn't want to develop counter play for, and here we are :,)

**** man, I agree with you 100%. I love customs. Perhaps not as much as the vanilla game but still, customs are fun as ****. The reason people don't bother with them is because nobody wants to grind out unlocking all that ****, I haven't even done that on my own personal wii u and it's been three years. I blame the devs for locking customs behind all that garbage more than I blame the community for their general distaste of them.

I would much, MUCH rather watch a customs side event more than I would ever actually want to watch doubles.

 

[FullMoon]

In S4, they cut him down to just three pikmin to manage, reduce his grab range, removed the SA on the whistle, and boosted his recovery. Streamlined him.

Minor nitpick but the whistle still has super armor in S4

 

[|RK|]

Funny enough, regarding the debate on tech in Smash 4 - I'm actually just listening to a couple of Smash 4 players saying how easy it is to beat low & mid level Melee players. Typically because they often have great tech skill, but 0 fundamentals.

I just thought that was relevant. Because I feel like tech skill is more often than not raising the skill floor, but doesn't necessarily make a game "more skillful," if that makes sense.

 

[dakotaisgreat]

Funny enough, regarding the debate on tech in Smash 4 - I'm actually just listening to a couple of Smash 4 players saying how easy it is to beat low & mid level Melee players. Typically because they often have great tech skill, but 0 fundamentals.

I just thought that was relevant. Because I feel like tech skill is more often than not raising the skill floor, but doesn't necessarily make a game "more skillful," if that makes sense.

Agreed. I prefer playing against my opponent rather than playing against my controller.