I mean, to be fair, it's hardly "feature to feature" when both characters are fundamentally the same. Whether or not it came across that way or not, it was not intended to. I'll attempt to explain my point better here...
In short, Marth's moveset is centred around his ability to hit tippers; by this, I mean he has moves, staple to his success and kit (Jab and Dancing Blade), that are designed for use in neutral and punishes, and that are intended to set up and allow for easy tippers and KO's. Lucina has the same moves as Marth, but lacks the raw reward from these setups (I think Emblem Lord's recent post about the pair is also as notable if not more notable than what I am attempting to convey here actually, so I'll support what he said there).
Of course her raw punishes with Smashes are much better than Marth's (on most occasions; KO'ing somebody at 35% with tipper Fsmash because they chose the wrong getup option or chose the wrong recovery option after being trumped is kind of dumb), though this is nothing new whatsoever; we've always known this. The point I am getting at is that yes, while Lucina might not need to use the same moves as Marth to get the KO as he does, because she's fundamentally the same as him, it's not in her design to actually
play different from him; she'll still be playing neutral almost identically, for example. When the opponent is at 80%, even though it can KO, Lucina isn't going to go around using her Fsmash in neutral, or to "space", because it's just not within their design to do that. She's still going to be going around spacing out the opponent like Marth will be, looking for that opening for an easy Jab or Dancing Blade for example. The difference here is that Marth can potentially KO from these confirms.
So yes, Lucina could hit the opponent at 80% and KO with an Fsmash, but Marth could use Dancing Blade and KO at the exact same percent (provided it tippers), and he can safely attempt to set up into his KO and not with a randy Fsmash or read attempt. It's more more a "I'll throw this out and hope it hits" situation. Damn good if it does hit mind; I certainly can't downplay that, but my point is that it's not practical, especially when you consider exactly how punishable the same move is. The point I was basically getting at is that Marth has easy and reliable confirms into his KO moves, Lucina does not (Yes, Nair 1 to Fsmash is a thing, but it's telegraphed, strict and heavily punishable by shield; Marth has the same but he can stutter step backwards into a tipper Fsmash, but we don't see Marth players going for this do we?).
Now this transitions back into one of my original points about Mr. E's playstyle. Mr. E is by far the most aggressive of the 4 notable Marth mains out there. I will admit that in recent times he has taken a few notes from Leo and is playing a little more patient/defensive, though it doesn't seem to be working as well, which might explain his recent thoughts about Lucina. Him playing his aggressive, up close playstyle might transition better into Lucina, because him pounding away at the opponent and using the Fsmash when the opponent goes into him for a punish might reap him more noticeable rewards (even if it is a playstyle that when put into context with the rest of their kit, is easily beaten by shield, though this is when we can start applying Shield Breaker mixups into the equation, but that's a whole other ball game).
Their kit essentially has many areas designed to set up for tipper rewards. That was my point. If Jab 1 to Fsmash was actually a true combo at said percents, then we might be talking about a whole different story, but it isn't; nowhere near true unfortunately, so she'll still be looking for the bread and butter stuff like Marth.
(and as a TL:DR to you personally
|RK|
, I appreciate the reply; good to get some non heated discussion going).
---
Though it's still barmy to me that players are actually taking Lucina seriously now! All it took was for a few top players to use her and low and behold, people suddenly like her.
:-1 (Could potentially be even in the future but it isn't looking like it right now)
