Balance patches are spoiling us

[Fatmanonice]

I think it's a good thing. Think about it... if the game had been completely unchanged from the original 3DS version, you'd have four characters (pretty much ) running away with the metagame with being completely unviable since their initial incarnations were garbage. All and all, they've done a great job with the patches so far and I think it's helped ease a lot of tensions in the community seeing how we don't really have any characters that are impossibly good or hilariously bad like we did in Melee and Brawl.

 

[AaronSMASH]

I think it's a good thing. Think about it... if the game had been completely unchanged from the original 3DS version, you'd have four characters (pretty much ) running away with the metagame with being completely unviable since their initial incarnations were garbage. All and all, they've done a great job with the patches so far and I think it's helped ease a lot of tensions in the community seeing how we don't really have any characters that are impossibly good or hilariously bad like we did in Melee and Brawl.

I agree that it is a good thing, if for no other reason than it gets people to go back and try some characters they wrote off before.

I just think it breeds the 'my character is weak pls help or he will never be good' attitude. Or 'this character is broken because I can't beat it' attitude.

Balance patches are great and all but there are so few people actually pushing the meta and innovating that in 8 months we still have a very undeveloped competitive scene.

It's impossible to know what are necessary changes for a character if nobody has taken the time to push it to its limit against the rest of the cast.

I mean just read some of these comments. Some guy is actually claiming it is 100% impossible to win with a 'low tier' character against a 'top level' sheik.

If people are just going to assume everything has already been thoroughly tried and tested then we won't ever see it actually develop. We will just see ZeRo clones with the same characters and the same playstyle.

I'm absolutely sure that there are more ways to win than what you see ZeRo doing.

 

[S_B]

I posted this in the competitive impressions thread and it's sadly also relevant here:

...that's how all fighting games work: two players attempt to make attacks that will create openings for them to deal damage, and they attempt to remain as unpunishable as possible while doing so.

When it comes to doing this, it's expected that a certain number of attempted attacks will succeed while others will fail during the normal ebb and flow of the match as each player attempts to read the other's intentions and counteract them.

The problem with the Shiek vs. ROB matchup (and largely with Shiek in general) is that the player using Shiek can afford to make many, MANY more attack attempts with very little risk involved, putting less effort into reads as well because Shiek's moveset allows her to attempt to attack and withdraw quickly if the approach turns sour.

Meanwhile, the ROB player is at the exact opposite side of this spectrum: every attack ROB attempts to make has a real danger of not only being punished but being punished for a sizable amount of damage. Shiek is also much more difficult to read than ROB, largely thanks to her superior mobility.

Of course, a ROB player who is just that much more skilled will beat a Shiek player who lacks the same skill. No one is arguing that.

The trouble is that the amount of skill advantage needed by the ROB player to defeat the Shiek player isn't typically found at the highest levels of play, and furthermore, if a player is THAT skilled with ROB, s/he'd be better off playing Shiek anyway because Shiek's superior frame data gives them that much more of an advantage.

So yeah, characters with safe options tend to rise in tiers because they can afford to make mistakes and the skill of the player using them can push the character much further.

------

Yes, tiers are real, and yes, balance patches can help to fix them.

As others have said in this thread, none of Melee's bottom/low tiers ever really rose to become top tiers. No amount of "meta development" is going to save a character that just has horrible frame data. Only balance patches can do that.

And as I said earlier, even the best SSB player in the world will have to work harder when using a bad character against the 2nd best SSB player in the world, which is why they just choose a good character to start with.

 

[haxfactory]

I don't care about anyone's 'credibility'. He could be the best game designer in the world. That doesn't make his claim that it's impossible for a low tier to win a major any less false.

When has a low tier ever won a major?

You can't expect every low tier to be the next Ice Climbers (which to be fair were already considered mid tier before the wobble was discovered).

I believe Ice Climbers were the biggest jump in competitive viability in a Smash game.

Mang0 brought Puff into the spotlight. It was a gimmick character much like Ice Climbers where the gimmick didn't really get developed fully until later in it's life. Puff was always mid-tier before it jumped though, it always at least had potential.

What is buffing low tiers going to do in a game well supported by patches?

Oh no, something was discovered! Boom nerf and then they are back to character parity.

You are thinking of patches as if they are irreversible. They aren't.

Luma's HP got nerfed, then buffed back to what it was in the following patch.

I think buffs should be the focus of the patches though. Nerfs are a little unnecessary early on in the metagame outside of glaring issues like pre-patch hoo ha.

You try to sound like you are thinking of the game's future but you don't even consider the fact that patches are not final changes. Which is why it is easy to see that you have a very shortsighted viewpoint on patches in general.

People can keep discovering things even as patches release.

Also, early Melee meta and early Brawl meta are not equal to early Smash 4 meta.

Melee released in a time before streaming video was common. You couldn't watch streams to see match ups or what was viable. Your opinion of the competitive game was based on the best player in your area.

The community was not developed and it wasn't for years that the community had any kind of central online presence. It even took a while for people to explore wave-dashing and dash dancing even though they were discovered early on. If a wavedash was discovered in Smash 4 today, everyone would know how to do it tomorrow.

Even back then, the best characters found a way to separate themselves from the rest of the cast very early. Marth and Shiek were high tier from the very start of the game. Isaiah showed off Falcon pretty early on. Fox and Falco were top. As was Peach. There weren't many really high tiers that were discovered later. Ice Climbers and Puff.

People can get a good idea of what makes a character good or bad relatively quickly. Movesets are limited, you can learn framedata on a full moveset in a day to figure out what makes an option good or bad. Characters with more good options tend to do better as they are more efficient with mix-ups because then you don't have to keep doing the same good option as the good option should be covered by your opponent. So a character with only one good option either had to play into option coverage or use a poor option. That is what makes a character low-tier.

I will admit, I don't personally have the most experience in Smash at a competitive level. Though this is probably my 10th competitive game (I've played shooters, fighters, and card games at a competitive level). I know how to play games competitively at a high level. I've done my research, I can make proper reads and cover options but I'm still a scrub because I still have bad habits and my punish game sucks (due to lack of experience). So despite being inexperienced in Smash, I am very experienced in competitive gaming, it's something I love to do.

That being said, between 3DS and Wii U versions I have about 300 hours clocked in these games which isn't bad. Though I don't have the experience of having come from older Smash games.

 

[AaronSMASH]

I posted this in the competitive impressions thread and it's sadly also relevant here:

...that's how all fighting games work: two players attempt to make attacks that will create openings for them to deal damage, and they attempt to remain as unpunishable as possible while doing so.

When it comes to doing this, it's expected that a certain number of attempted attacks will succeed while others will fail during the normal ebb and flow of the match as each player attempts to read the other's intentions and counteract them.

The problem with the Shiek vs. ROB matchup (and largely with Shiek in general) is that the player using Shiek can afford to make many, MANY more attack attempts with very little risk involved, putting less effort into reads as well because Shiek's moveset allows her to attempt to attack and withdraw quickly if the approach turns sour.

Meanwhile, the ROB player is at the exact opposite side of this spectrum: every attack ROB attempts to make has a real danger of not only being punished but being punished for a sizable amount of damage. Shiek is also much more difficult to read than ROB, largely thanks to her superior mobility.

Of course, a ROB player who is just that much more skilled will beat a Shiek player who lacks the same skill. No one is arguing that.

The trouble is that the amount of skill advantage needed by the ROB player to defeat the Shiek player isn't typically found at the highest levels of play, and furthermore, if a player is THAT skilled with ROB, s/he'd be better off playing Shiek anyway because Shiek's superior frame data gives them that much more of an advantage.

So yeah, characters with safe options tend to rise in tiers because they can afford to make mistakes and the skill of the player using them can push the character much further.

------

Yes, tiers are real, and yes, balance patches can help to fix them.

As others have said in this thread, none of Melee's bottom/low tiers ever really rose to become top tiers. No amount of "meta development" is going to save a character that just has horrible frame data. Only balance patches can do that.

And as I said earlier, even the best SSB player in the world will have to work harder when using a bad character against the 2nd best SSB player in the world, which is why they just choose a good character to start with.

This just isn't necessarily correct. A Sheik player and a rob player could be on the same skill level. Each improving every game. Maybe sheik wins 99% of the first 10,000 matches. But it's absolutely possible that at some point during their ascent to the top levels of play, the matchup stops being about which character can make more mistakes and get punished less and becomes which character has the best tools to defeat the other. And maybe then rob starts to win.

Im not saying that is definitely the case. I'm just saying that we don't know for sure because of the self-fulfilling prophecy "my character can't win against a higher tier no matter how I play or what I do unless I'm way better."

When has a low tier ever won a major?

You can't expect every low tier to be the next Ice Climbers (which to be fair were already considered mid tier before the wobble was discovered).

I believe Ice Climbers were the biggest jump in competitive viability in a Smash game.

Mang0 brought Puff into the spotlight. It was a gimmick character much like Ice Climbers where the gimmick didn't really get developed fully until later in it's life. Puff was always mid-tier before it jumped though, it always at least had potential.

What is buffing low tiers going to do in a game well supported by patches?

Oh no, something was discovered! Boom nerf and then they are back to character parity.

You are thinking of patches as if they are irreversible. They aren't.

Luma's HP got nerfed, then buffed back to what it was in the following patch.

I think buffs should be the focus of the patches though. Nerfs are a little unnecessary early on in the metagame outside of glaring issues like pre-patch hoo ha.

You try to sound like you are thinking of the game's future but you don't even consider the fact that patches are not final changes. Which is why it is easy to see that you have a very shortsighted viewpoint on patches in general.

People can keep discovering things even as patches release.

Also, early Melee meta and early Brawl meta are not equal to early Smash 4 meta.

Melee released in a time before streaming video was common. You couldn't watch streams to see match ups or what was viable. Your opinion of the competitive game was based on the best player in your area.

The community was not developed and it wasn't for years that the community had any kind of central online presence. It even took a while for people to explore wave-dashing and dash dancing even though they were discovered early on. If a wavedash was discovered in Smash 4 today, everyone would know how to do it tomorrow.

Even back then, the best characters found a way to separate themselves from the rest of the cast very early. Marth and Shiek were high tier from the very start of the game. Isaiah showed off Falcon pretty early on. Fox and Falco were top. As was Peach. There weren't many really high tiers that were discovered later. Ice Climbers and Puff.

People can get a good idea of what makes a character good or bad relatively quickly. Movesets are limited, you can learn framedata on a full moveset in a day to figure out what makes an option good or bad. Characters with more good options tend to do better as they are more efficient with mix-ups because then you don't have to keep doing the same good option as the good option should be covered by your opponent. So a character with only one good option either had to play into option coverage or use a poor option. That is what makes a character low-tier.

I will admit, I don't personally have the most experience in Smash at a competitive level. Though this is probably my 10th competitive game (I've played shooters, fighters, and card games at a competitive level). I know how to play games competitively at a high level. I've done my research, I can make proper reads and cover options but I'm still a scrub because I still have bad habits and my punish game sucks (due to lack of experience). So despite being inexperienced in Smash, I am very experienced in competitive gaming, it's something I love to do.

That being said, between 3DS and Wii U versions I have about 300 hours clocked in these games which isn't bad. Though I don't have the experience of having come from older Smash games.

If a wavedash was discovered and the input was easy to plug in to your play style then sure, it would be picked up quickly. PP is not an easy input especially trying to use it in the heat of battle but I'm betting we start to see a lot more of it as people begin to develop a feel for it in matches. I think the reason you don't see it to often now is because the best players aren't comfortable using it yet and aren't willing to risk an input errors in a tournament. But as we start to see people get better and better, I think it will start to separate the 'best from the rest' so to speak. Then down the road it will become a necessity for competitive play.

I also think they are used more often than most people realize. A lot of attacks will cancel the slide and the dust animation. And with it being all in one fluid movement and such a short distance moved it's hard to recognize. Especially on a crappy youtube video.

 

[haxfactory]

Perfect Pivoting isn't hard. When I play Peach and Marth I perfect pivot up smash all the time on falling opponents. Keep in mind I'm considered bad...

If a bad player can Perfect Pivot I'm pretty sure any decent player can.

 

[AaronSMASH]

Perfect Pivoting isn't hard. When I play Peach and Marth I perfect pivot up smash all the time on falling opponents. Keep in mind I'm considered bad...

If a bad player can Perfect Pivot I'm pretty sure any decent player can.

Why do you PP up smash when you can just do a running up smash and cover as much ground as necessary...

Sounds like BS to me.

Either way, I didn't say it was hard to PP. I said in the middle of a fast paced match it isn't a simple thing to impliment as a spacing tool. Not to mention possible input errors.

Unless, of course, you are perfect every time and never ever accidentally dash attack or something. If you are, then that's impressive for a 'bad' player.

Edit: This whole time I thought I had to input a jump to do a running up smash. LOL its even easier than that! So what reason is there to PP into up smash? As far as I know, neither peach nor Marth have different horizontal hit boxes depending on which direction they are facing so there isn't even a reason to turn a certain way like there would be with Samus.

 

[haxfactory]

I don't know how to do the other thing yet and didn't realize that was a thing.

On the other hand I knew what PP up smash was.

Also, PP up smash is a bit of a frame trap in that it allows my opponent to think I'm going to let them recover from the air and then before they can airdodge I hit the up smash because PPs are very fast. If I was to dash, they'd likely see it coming.

 

[AaronSMASH]

I don't know how to do the other thing yet and didn't realize that was a thing.

On the other hand I knew what PP up smash was.

Also, PP up smash is a bit of a frame trap in that it allows my opponent to think I'm going to let them recover from the air and then before they can airdodge I hit the up smash because PPs are very fast. If I was to dash, they'd likely see it coming.

Considering PP is such a short distance it really wouldn't make a difference whether they would air dodge or not. You are essentially going to be directly under them before the PP anyway.

And I actually just realized you can just straight up do a running up smash... no other inputs lol. I've been pressing jump this entire time. So yea... still not making sense to me.

 

[haxfactory]

Yeah, running up Smash is a thing.

But, that kind of depends on a few more factors.

1) How far the initial dash goes (for spacing purposes)
2) How far you slide when you stop dashing.

If I play Luigi I use run up smash since you can slide into position.

Plus, it's worth mentioning I flub the inputs and end up dash attacking

EDIT: Actually no, the first one wouldn't matter since PP distance is based on the distance of the initial dash. I guess I don't need to consider that.

EDIT2: Also, we are digressing from the point of this thread. I find perfect pivots easy, it's just tapping back and forth, it's way easier than a wave-dash to me. In fact, I find wave-landing easier than wave-dashing too...so maybe I'm just weird. My point was made and I already said I'm pretty new to Smash at a competitive level perhaps I do overcomplicate things by using PPs when I don't have to. The point is, people know how to do them. Hell once Smash 4 community made a big deal over PPs the 64 community started using them with incredible results.

 

[AaronSMASH]

Yeah, running up Smash is a thing.

But, that kind of depends on a few more factors.

1) How far the initial dash goes (for spacing purposes)
2) How far you slide when you stop dashing.

If I play Luigi I use run up smash since you can slide into position.

No, you can run as far as you want with running up smash which is why PP doesn't make sense in that situation.

But that doesn't matter. My point remains that it is obviously useful and will be implimented more once it's necessary for the best players to use it to gain an edge on their competition.

Right now everyone is playing catchup with ZeRo. Once there are a few people on his level, one of them will use it to gain an edge.

 

[Big-Cat]

My philosophy is that lower tier characters should be buffed upwards. I do think that Shiek and Rosa need to be nerfed just a little bit. But yea, buffing the lower characters is the way to go. Make characters like Marth, Charizard, Samus, and Zelda more tournament viable. I'd love to have a Smash where every single character in the game is viable, and a different character wins every national.

This is something you have to be careful with. Like why are the top tiers top? Do they have moves that have way too much utility and power (Diddy pre 1.08) or can they get away with murder (Sheik)? I'm not saying some low tiers need to be buffed. It's plain as day Wii Fit Trainer would be a lot better if her startup was much better.

Perfect Pivoting isn't hard. When I play Peach and Marth I perfect pivot up smash all the time on falling opponents. Keep in mind I'm considered bad...

If a bad player can Perfect Pivot I'm pretty sure any decent player can.

Execution and actually being good at the game are two different things.

 

[haxfactory]

Execution and actually being good at the game are two different things.

Yeah, I get that. I came from DoA4 (which by now makes me feel bad that that was my entry into the genre...), into SFIV and MvC3, into Smash 4 so I'm actually used to slightly more difficult input than what is normal in Smash 4. I have played around in Melee but only a few hours here and there. I can almost wave shine already from the time I've put in like I drop it after the second shine usually.

Although I can say with some clarity that have I absolutely no idea how I should be applying it.

Also, the idea of fast falling and playing on a pad vs a fight stick is a little foreign to me. My input gets weird when I say try to do Shiek's FF fair combos.

I need a lot of work.

However, PP isn't that hard execution wise, I think it's pretty easy to execute. It's no where near as bad as plinking in Street Fighter XD

 

[Tenretsujin10]

Will we ever see a Diddy Kong revert? Hope so, but doubt

Yeah, running up Smash is a thing.

But, that kind of depends on a few more factors.

1) How far the initial dash goes (for spacing purposes)
2) How far you slide when you stop dashing.

If I play Luigi I use run up smash since you can slide into position.

Plus, it's worth mentioning I flub the inputs and end up dash attacking

EDIT: Actually no, the first one wouldn't matter since PP distance is based on the distance of the initial dash. I guess I don't need to consider that.

EDIT2: Also, we are digressing from the point of this thread. I find perfect pivots easy, it's just tapping back and forth, it's way easier than a wave-dash to me. In fact, I find wave-landing easier than wave-dashing too...so maybe I'm just weird. My point was made and I already said I'm pretty new to Smash at a competitive level perhaps I do overcomplicate things by using PPs when I don't have to. The point is, people know how to do them. Hell once Smash 4 community made a big deal over PPs the 64 community started using them with incredible results.

Perfect Pivot up-smash is really only beneficial if you're using a character that has a different kind of Up-smash hitbox where you want to hit a specific hitbox (ex. Mario, Luigi) within a short distance. If you're trying to cover a farther distance while still trying to hit that specific hitbox, then Dashing > Pivot > Jump Cancel Up-Smash is far more beneficial. Perfect pivoting isn't a gamebreaking tech that needs to be added to a playstyle like wavedashing in order to succeed. It just adds slightly more spacing options.

 

[S_B]

Im not saying that is definitely the case. I'm just saying that we don't know for sure because of the self-fulfilling prophecy "my character can't win against a higher tier no matter how I play or what I do unless I'm way better."

No one is saying that the Shiek will always win 100% of the time, just that the fact that Shiek's frame data is so much better means that Shiek will not only have a better chance to win but will ultimately be a better investment for a player's time than a character with bad frame data.

Frame data is extremely important in a game where you win by correctly determining what the other player is going to do. Good frame data basically means you have more time in which to react to your opponent once you've read them and that's insanely important when every 1/60th of a second counts.

How many games are won and lost because of the difference of a few frames in an attack? (answer to rhetorical question: a lot)

And no, I don't think it is a self-fulfilling prophecy because we HAVE players trying to bring these lower tiers up but it's just not happening. At a certain point, we have to admit to ourselves that, if it were truly possible, someone would've done it by now.

We're at the point where we can analyze frame data mere days after a patch releases, and we know from experience that better frame data is one of the key elements of a top tier character because fighting games are typically all about who can hit who first.

Also, as I said earlier, the fact that balance patches make people go back and take a 2nd look at low tier characters will be healthier for the meta in the long run for sure.

 

[RayNoire]

It's impossible to know what are necessary changes for a character if nobody has taken the time to push it to its limit against the rest of the cast.

I see the opposite happening; because of the patches and the good chance of future ones, I'd imagine less people are quitting on their character than there would be if the game was static. We're seeing a pretty good variety of characters in tournaments, with some low-tier mains finding moderate success (the Midwest is low-tier hero land). But there's still a disparity in results everywhere you look between the tiers, and unless things continue to change, most people are going to get discouraged by that.

Also, perfect pivots aren't hard but they're not entirely reliable either (and they're controller-dependent).

 

[AaronSMASH]

Will we ever see a Diddy Kong revert? Hope so, but doubt

Perfect Pivot up-smash is really only beneficial if you're using a character that has a different kind of Up-smash hitbox where you want to hit a specific hitbox (ex. Mario, Luigi) within a short distance. If you're trying to cover a farther distance while still trying to hit that specific hitbox, then Dashing > Pivot > Jump Cancel Up-Smash is far more beneficial. Perfect pivoting isn't a gamebreaking tech that needs to be added to a playstyle like wavedashing in order to succeed. It just adds slightly more spacing options.

That's what I was trying to say. You articulated it much better than I could have.

No one is saying that the Shiek will always win 100% of the time, just that the fact that Shiek's frame data is so much better means that Shiek will not only have a better chance to win but will ultimately be a better investment for a player's time than a character with bad frame data.

Frame data is extremely important in a game where you win by correctly determining what the other player is going to do. Good frame data basically means you have more time in which to react to your opponent once you've read them and that's insanely important when every 1/60th of a second counts.

How many games are won and lost because of the difference of a few frames in an attack? (answer to rhetorical question: a lot)

And no, I don't think it is a self-fulfilling prophecy because we HAVE players trying to bring these lower tiers up but it's just not happening. At a certain point, we have to admit to ourselves that, if it were truly possible, someone would've done it by now.

We're at the point where we can analyze frame data mere days after a patch releases, and we know from experience that better frame data is one of the key elements of a top tier character because fighting games are typically all about who can hit who first.

Also, as I said earlier, the fact that balance patches make people go back and take a 2nd look at low tier characters will be healthier for the meta in the long run for sure.

First of all, more than one person in this thread was saying exactly that. Go back and read some of the comments. Some people vehemently claim it is impossible to beat a high tier character with a low tier character when both players are at the same general skill level which is utter nonsense.

I never said frame data wasn't important. I'm saying that where the current metagame is, frame data is far more important now than it will be once people reach a certain point in skill level.

At a certain point, you're right. We do have to admit that if it hasn't been done yet than it may very well not be possible.

Is that certain point 8 months into the game? No. That 's absurd. Especially considering how few people are actually trying to develop the game. Most people seem content to copy the best players or blame low/high tiers for their lack of success and demand changes.

And as I said earlier, I agree with that sentiment. I just don't like the seemingly prevalent attitude of "there's only one way to win so I'm just going to copy the best players until they change the characters im not good enough to succeed with"

I see the opposite happening; because of the patches and the good chance of future ones, I'd imagine less people are quitting on their character than there would be if the game was static. We're seeing a pretty good variety of characters in tournaments, with some low-tier mains finding moderate success (the Midwest is low-tier hero land). But there's still a disparity in results everywhere you look between the tiers, and unless things continue to change, most people are going to get discouraged by that.

Also, perfect pivots aren't hard but they're not entirely reliable either (and they're controller-dependent).

You could be right, and I hope you are.

I hated the idea of customs at first but a commentator at a tournament explained it in a way that changed my feelings. He said that customs could be healthy for the game to help characters who might need it. As long as it isn't completely game breaking or adding unnecessarily to an already very strong character (I think he used Pikachu/heavy skull bash as his example).

I know that's off topic but it just made me think of that.

Controller dependent how? I didn't pick up PP instantly but now that I have it feels easy. What isn't easy is implimenting it in a match successfully. I frequently mess up the input and dash attack or something goofy.

But there have been moments of brilliance where I reaped tangible benefits from it. I can see it becoming very important.

 

[Diddy Kong]

's U Air, F Air and Side B need to be buffed up I hope. Especially U Air. Make it like in 1.07 please.

 

[RayNoire]

Controller dependent how?

Some GC controllers can't do it, or at least it's unreasonably hard. I've found that older controllers do it better, so maybe it's a matter of breaking them in.

Plus it's very difficult on a 3DS for all that's worth (easy on a gamepad though).

 

[AaronSMASH]

Some GC controllers can't do it, or at least it's unreasonably hard. I've found that older controllers do it better, so maybe it's a matter of breaking them in.

Plus it's very difficult on a 3DS for all that's worth (easy on a gamepad though).

Interesting. I have a pro controller and 5 different gamecube controllers (one smash edition two semi-old and a really broken in one) and of course the gamepad. I find virtually no difference between any aside from the gamepad just because the grip is awkward for me.

 

[PUK]

's U Air, F Air and Side B need to be buffed up I hope. Especially U Air. Make it like in 1.07 please.

I would give you the old AC window. Not the silly hitbox.
Fair could get a slight KBG buff, and so does Bair.
Side is perfect, why would one of the best move of the game buff be buffed?

 

[Diddy Kong]

I would give you the old AC window. Not the silly hitbox.
Fair could get a slight KBG buff, and so does Bair.
Side is perfect, why would one of the best move of the game buff be buffed?

Because that'd be fun :3

And I was pretty used to killing with Side B's kick, now that doesn't happen so much anymore.

 

[Divemissile]

That's what I was trying to say. You articulated it much better than I could have.



First of all, more than one person in this thread was saying exactly that. Go back and read some of the comments. Some people vehemently claim it is impossible to beat a high tier character with a low tier character when both players are at the same general skill level which is utter nonsense.

I never said frame data wasn't important. I'm saying that where the current metagame is, frame data is far more important now than it will be once people reach a certain point in skill level.

At a certain point, you're right. We do have to admit that if it hasn't been done yet than it may very well not be possible.

Is that certain point 8 months into the game? No. That 's absurd. Especially considering how few people are actually trying to develop the game. Most people seem content to copy the best players or blame low/high tiers for their lack of success and demand changes.

And as I said earlier, I agree with that sentiment. I just don't like the seemingly prevalent attitude of "there's only one way to win so I'm just going to copy the best players until they change the characters im not good enough to succeed with"



You could be right, and I hope you are.

I hated the idea of customs at first but a commentator at a tournament explained it in a way that changed my feelings. He said that customs could be healthy for the game to help characters who might need it. As long as it isn't completely game breaking or adding unnecessarily to an already very strong character (I think he used Pikachu/heavy skull bash as his example).

I know that's off topic but it just made me think of that.

Controller dependent how? I didn't pick up PP instantly but now that I have it feels easy. What isn't easy is implimenting it in a match successfully. I frequently mess up the input and dash attack or something goofy.

But there have been moments of brilliance where I reaped tangible benefits from it. I can see it becoming very important.

I was exaggerating a bit when I said it was impossible. It is possible, but extremely unlikely. It also makes no sense to invest a ton of time into a mediocre character, when you do better as a better character

 

[AaronSMASH]

I was exaggerating a bit when I said it was impossible. It is possible, but extremely unlikely. It also makes no sense to invest a ton of time into a mediocre character, when you do better as a better character

You are operating under a false assumption. Just because a character is more successful at the moment doesn't mean it is necessarily better.

I hate to make the league comparison again but when I played, akali was consistently banned in low elo while nobody even used her in high because she's so easy to destroy in lane.

Different levels of skill can see wildly different character usage.

 

[Rikkhan]

You are operating under a false assumption. Just because a character is more successful at the moment doesn't mean it is necessarily better.

I hate to make the league comparison again but when I played, akali was consistently banned in low elo while nobody even used her in high because she's so easy to destroy in lane.

Different levels of skill can see wildly different character usage.

Don't use league of leguend please, that game is waaayy diferent and even following your example akali is strong in low elos because she is an assassin so she can easily get feed on lane and rolfstomp in mid/late game, in high elos people dont die too often so she is ok, she has been bouncing between unviable to overpower for a long time.

A more fitting example using league of legends to your claims is "teemo is a tournament viable adc is just that people haven't mastered it yet and pros just pick easier characters"

 

[Thinkaman]

I hate to make the league comparison again but when I played, akali was consistently banned in low elo while nobody even used her in high because she's so easy to destroy in lane.

Actually, Akali's win rates for the last month across all regions via loldb:

• Bronze - 48.78%
• Silver - 47.92%
• Gold - 48.45%
• Platinum - 49.47%
• Diamond - 50.21%
• Master - 49.70%
• Challenger - 52.00%

 

[Rikkhan]

Actually, Akali's win rates for the last month across all regions via loldb:

• Bronze - 48.78%
• Silver - 47.92%
• Gold - 48.45%
• Platinum - 49.47%
• Diamond - 50.21%
• Master - 49.70%
• Challenger - 52.00%

well I haven't played LoL in almost 2 years, in my time akali was a noobstomper, also data in lol is tricky for example Lee Sin has low winrates in solo queue but he's been permapick in tournaments for almost 3 years(again this is when I used to play lol), thats because even tough Lee Sin is very strong he is hard play so the data fools you that Lee Sin is weak.

 

[Tenretsujin10]

well I haven't played LoL in almost 2 years, in my time akali was a noobstomper, also data in lol is tricky for example Lee Sin has low winrates in solo queue but he's been permapick in tournaments for almost 3 years(again this is when I used to play lol), thats because even tough Lee Sin is very strong he is hard play so the data fools you that Lee Sin is weak.

My fellow League of Legends dropout<3

 

[AaronSMASH]

Don't use league of leguend please, that game is waaayy diferent and even following your example akali is strong in low elos because she is an assassin so she can easily get feed on lane and rolfstomp in mid/late game, in high elos people dont die too often so she is ok, she has been bouncing between unviable to overpower for a long time.

A more fitting example using league of legends to your claims is "teemo is a tournament viable adc is just that people haven't mastered it yet and pros just pick easier characters"

Not even close. How many more people do you think play league? And how long has it been out? And how often do you think the top players play? Like 8-12 hours a day on the reg. So yea that's a ridiculously stupid comparison. They actually have a developed metagame and there is pretty much mechanical parity at the top levels of play.

Actually, Akali's win rates for the last month across all regions via loldb:

• Bronze - 48.78%
• Silver - 47.92%
• Gold - 48.45%
• Platinum - 49.47%
• Diamond - 50.21%
• Master - 49.70%
• Challenger - 52.00%

That's why I said "when I played".

well I haven't played LoL in almost 2 years, in my time akali was a noobstomper, also data in lol is tricky for example Lee Sin has low winrates in solo queue but he's been permapick in tournaments for almost 3 years(again this is when I used to play lol), thats because even tough Lee Sin is very strong he is hard play so the data fools you that Lee Sin is weak.

Good point. He has intangibles that make him great. Data is meaningless without context. And yet people want to start fiddling with characters because they think they know the game and every character in 8 months lol.

 

[ARGHETH]

Good point. He has intangibles that make him great. Data is meaningless without context. And yet people want to start fiddling with characters because they think they know the game and every character in 8 months lol.

So, just checking...you'd prefer the game to be as it was when it came out, right?

 

[LightLV]

You people are still arguing with this Aaron guy and his ridiculous theorycrafting? Give it up, just let him believe whatever he wants to.

This "tiers dont exist" argument works if and ONLY if the game you're playing is Tekken, which typically has a crapload of characters and a tier list where players rarely ever rate anyone below "B-" or "C+". In smash though? Haha, yeah whatever. Bring a low-tier into a tournament with all your hard work and practice and see how far it gets you. When you struggle and lose to a derpy Captian Falcon, maybe you'll change your mind.

 

[NGUY (guitarstage)]

They dont get the meta to develop

 

[b2jammer]

You people are still arguing with this Aaron guy and his ridiculous theorycrafting? Give it up, just let him believe whatever he wants to.

This "tiers dont exist" argument works if and ONLY if the game you're playing is Tekken, which typically has a crapload of characters and a tier list where players rarely ever rate anyone below "B-" or "C+". In smash though? Haha, yeah whatever. Bring a low-tier into a tournament with all your hard work and practice and see how far it gets you. When you struggle and lose to a derpy Captian Falcon, maybe you'll change your mind.

Tires don exits? Sorry, had to make the joke.

On a more relevant note, I agree. Tiers are definitely less extreme than previous Smash games, but are still rather well-defined even this early in the meta's development. While low-tiers like Samus and Palutena do have useful tools in their movesets, their overall playstyle and current setup just doesn't work in a competitive environment.

In this Iron Age of the internet (I don't think we've hit the Golden or Space Ages just yet), the meta of any given game can advance light years ahead of where it would be before, and Smash 4 is no exception. While we're not sure exactly where any given character fits on the tier list, we can already state, in less than 8 months time, that Sheik is awesome, Samus is crap, or MK is mid-tier and have concrete, solid support in the form of tournament results. Time is not as much of a problem in terms of metagame development as it used to be.

In some ways, yes, we are being spoiled by balance patches, mostly due to the fact that they didn't exist in previous Smash games (with the exception of Melee's regional changes, but that's really stretching it). However, the thing about balance patches is that they aren't meant to drastically change a character, unless of course a character needs to be drastically changed in order to save the rest of the game (hoo-hah immediately comes to mind). Minor aspects of a character are fine-tuned to take advantage of their developing playstyle, and while the patches have been somewhat haphazard as of yet, they will become more focused as people start to find what exactly needs to be toned up or down. Characters who were already competitively viable, like Sheik, have been brought down slightly to be on a more even level with the other fighters, but they don't play drastically different from before, and less viable characters like Ike have either seen improvement in their already existing options, or have been given entirely new options to hopefully bolster their status as a tournament fighter (e.g. in Ike's case, his dash attack is much faster, making it useful now).

 

[Infinite901]

How many times do I have to say this? No matter how many hours you put into a low tier character, you won't be able to beat a good player with a high tier character. You can keep being obnoxious and repeating your stupid arguments about how we don't know everything, but it won't change that fact.

But a good Falco can beat any Fox

 

[Master Knight DH]

But a good Falco can beat any Fox

That's the brand of hope that should be encouraged, actually. It's technically not completely true, but rewarding affinity ultimately reduces the amount of defeatism.

 

[b2jammer]

That's the brand of hope that should be encouraged, actually. It's technically not completely true, but rewarding affinity ultimately reduces the amount of defeatism.

Eh, I don't know. Call me a cynical SOB if you want, but I think that false hope is worse in the long run than just not having any in the first place, as it hurts even more when you realize "oh crap, I actually can't beat any Fox as Falco," thus making the giving up all the more painful.

EDIT: That particular example probably isn't the greatest; how about Palutena vs Luigi? Also, I guess this isn't necessarily false hope here, but still, I like to point it out.

 

[Divemissile]

That's the brand of hope that should be encouraged, actually. It's technically not completely true, but rewarding affinity ultimately reduces the amount of defeatism.

I'm pretty sure he was saying a joke. The "a skilled x can beat any x" is a meme

 

[b2jammer]

I'm pretty sure he was saying a joke. The "a skilled x can beat any x" is a meme

Well, time to learn that I will never fully understand the internet XD

 

[Infinite901]

A good meme can beat any b2jammer.

I'll stop.

 

[HFlash]

If this game had no balance patches, it would be brawl 2.0, where everyone figured out the best character at release (Diddy), spam him, and would kill the biggest perk this game has going for it which is character diversity.
PLUS, patching in a youtube upload and tournament mode is gonna be HUGE.