JesiahTEG
Smash Master
"MARTH!" The announcers voice rings in my head. I've heard him call that name many times before. We all have. We've heard this at the start of the competitive Smash scene in 2003, when Ken first won TG4, all the way until the end of 2006. It didn't stop there though. We've heard this all throughout 2007 as M2K switched to Marth and began to dominate every tournament he entered. We've also heard this from the "master of diversity," Azen Zagenite, who mains Marth despite being able to play every character at a high level. What do all of these people have in common? The beginning of all of their matches began with, "MARTH!" and they all ended with, "This game's winner is...Marth!"
Despite overwhelming evidence that supports Marth being the best character in Melee, people still argue that he's not. At first I didn't understand this. After elaborate research and speaking with top professionals, I've gained perspective, and am proud to say I understand high level play better. I'd like to share my findings with you all, and receive feedback that will hopefully educate me even more on the topic of, "The best character in Melee." However, I do hope that in addition to receiving great feedback, you take your time and put effort into understanding my research. I spent a lot of work on it and hopefully I can present some new perspectives to the community.
FACTS
*Marth has more tournament wins than any other character by an overwhelming amount.*
This is the beginning of all of my conclusions. Marth has won more tournaments than any other character. This can be, and is debated all of the time, but there is one thing that cannot be argued with. The statement itself! Regardless of the reasoning behind it, or the "whys" and "hows" of this statement, it remains true. Marth is the most successful tournament character in Melee.
*Ken secondaried Fox, but mained Marth*
Some people say Fox is the best character in the game. A lot of people say that actually, and it may be true. But the fact is that Ken played both characters at a high level but decided to main Marth. This can also be debated but it's important to look at the face value as well.
*Azen could play any character at a high level, but mained Marth*
This is the same as the above statement, only Azen had more diversity than Ken. The facts are beginning to get a bit overwhelming now, no? Two of the highest level players, Ken and Azen, both main Marth despite being able to play multiple characters at the highest level, including characters that people say are the best in the game.
*M2K mained Fox and was a great player. He switched to Marth and became the best in the world.*
This is a big fact but is commonly countered by the whole "player skill is more important than character choice" argument. It is a good argument and holds true for the most part too, but again the fact cannot be ignored that M2K got significantly better after switching to Marth, despite what his reasonings were for switching in the first place.
Those are some pretty big facts. I know there are tons of reasonings why these facts may be considered irrelevant, but I implore you to at least realize that these facts have some sort of significance. Even if there are reasons behind them, they are facts and results. They mean something.
OPINIONS/ARGUMENTS
Many opinions/arguments are very well founded and have to be taken into consideration when deciding who the best character is. I'm more than happy to listen to these arguments and take them into consideration while deciding for myself who the best character is.
*Player skill matters more than character selection*
I personally believe this to be true. I played with this idea back and forth for a while before making my decision. If you don't think this is true, think about M2K when Brawl first came out. He mained DDD and was the best in the world. He switched to Metaknight and still is. I'm sure if he used Snake as well he'd be the best still. His skill is more important than the characters he chooses, since he has proven to play multiple characters at the highest level possible. This argument needs to be in the back of everyone's mind when exploring for themselves the topic of who the best character is. It's most likely the most important thing to keep in mind, as high level play revolves around player skill.
*Azen and Ken just "like" Marth more, and M2K switched to Marth because his controller broke*
M2K did indeed switch to Marth when his controller broke. That is true. Azen and Ken both just "like" Marth so they play him more...Getting kinda iffy there. It's hard to believe that arguably the two greatest players ever just mained him because they liked him. I can believe it though. What I can't believe however, is that it's just a mere coincidence that all 3 of these top players, who could be said to be the greatest players ever, are all the most skilled but just randomly main Marth. I'm sorry but that's just too much of a coincidence for me.
*Marth has too many weaknesses*
He is comboed easily, has trouble killing at higher percents, and he's bad on most counterpick stages. He loses to Sheik and Falcon, goes even with Fox and Falco. These weaknesses prohibit him from being the best character. Most of these weaknesses are true although they can be debated. Fox and Sheik have way less weaknesses and therefore make them the best characters. Hmm. This is where I begin to think hard about this.
Why does Marth have the most wins although two characters in the game are clearly better than him?
Something isn't adding up here. You could say because the best 3 players in history of U.S. Smash chose to use Marth. You could. But I can't, and I urge most of you to stop here with the opinions. There comes a point where you have to draw a line between opinions, and a ridiculous amount of coincidences. You have to line up the opinions with the evidence and come to a conclusion. Blaming Marth's tournament wins solely on the fact that "they liked him" can't be used. It doesn't line up with the evidence. Let's go deeper here.
Now ignoring the fact that we have to blame Marth's greatness on "player skill," we can begin to ask questions using that answer for everything. I believe this leads us to more accurate answers and I hope you at least begin to see where I'm coming from.
"If Marth has so many weaknesses, why does he easily have the most amount of tournament wins?"
There could be many different reasons for this, but there is a reason that is easily the most important: His strengths far, far outweigh his weaknesses. Ok, Marth has weaknesses. We get it. He also has advantages. Most people will weigh Marth's advantages and weaknesses equally. For example, his comboing is equal to the fact that he gets combod easily. I guess that one could work. But for us try and do that with every one of his strengths and weaknesses just isn't fair. Let's go over his strengths and weaknesses.
COMPARISONS BETWEEN STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
Weaknesses
-Gets combod easily
-Has a hard time killing at higher percents
-Does poorly on counterpick stages
-Lightshield edgeguarding ***** him
-He gets gimped fairly easily
-Dies off the top a bit easier than other characters
-Has a few bad matchups
Strengths
-Amazing grab range and grab game
-Amazing combo game
-Arguably the best edgeguarder in the game
-Best range in the game
-Tippers are amazing, especially Fsmash
-Tech chasing is really good
-Not a very technical character
-And one I think is forgotten about too often, the ability to be played more creatively than any other character. He has options, many many options.
Marth's strengths far outweigh his weaknesses. Ok, he gets gimped fairly easily. The amount of gimping he does is so incredible, and with such ease. It is infinitely times harder for a Falco to gimp Marth than it is for Marth to gimp Falco. He gets comboed easily, it's true. But look at his comboing ability. One grab on a Fox can spell potential death. As Umbreonmow puts it, "Marth messes up and Fox can **** him up ok. Fox messes up and he dies." Marth's edgeguarding alone more than makes up for the fact that he does poorly on counterpick stages. So he can't play well on a stage. You always have the fact that Marth's opponent messes up, which every player messes up...even the best of the best...If Marth's opponent messes up, one backthrow off the edge can spell death. This leads me to one of my biggest points that I want to explain.
MARTH AS AN INDIVIDUAL CHARACTER
Most of the time when people are explaining Marth and why or why not he should be top tier, they forget to keep in mind one very important aspect: Marth as an individual character. This applies to so much and people always forget about it. When people talk about Marth's bad matchups or bad stages, they only list specific matchup details. They forget to keep in mind how good of a character Marth is himself. I'll give a few examples.
Marth vs Falcon- Falcon outcamps Marth on the stage with grabs and combos him better. A lot of Marth's game is grabbing and when he gets out grabcamped, it spells trouble. Perhaps Falcon does have the advantage in terms of matchup characterstics. He probably does. I'd probably say he does at least. What most people don't take into consideration though is Marth's strengths and abilities as an individual character. At any point in the match near the ledge if Falcon gets thrown off, he can be edgeguarded to death. Maybe not always, but a good amount of time. Marth's Fsmash alone can turn a match with just one use. If Marth expects Falcon to DD away, Marth approaches by running past Falcon and Fsmashing. It's a tipper, next thing you know Falcon is off the stage and he's not coming back. There are simple advantages that Marth has against every character. These are his strengths, and people need to stop overlooking them when describing matchup details.
IMPORTANT DETAIL
*Please read this part carefully, as I believe it is a big contribution to Marth's high level success*
Another big advantage has as an individual character is his ability to be played creatively. Every character can be played creatively, but not like Marth can. This allows for a better mixup game overall and with more options, Marth has an easier time outhinking his opponent than his opponent does to outhink him. This is a HUGE factor and is really overlooked by most people. When people say, "Marth has to be played smarter than every other top tier," this is because of his creativity and all of his options. This plays a big role in all of his bad matchups. Sheik may be able to auto combo him, get inside of his range and edgeguard him well...but then why does Marth stand a good chance against Sheik at higher levels of play? Because of Marth's options and creativity. Majority of the time Sheik will win. But if the Marth player is even just slightly more skilled than the Sheik player...just slightly, the matchup instantly becomes much more even. Even if both players are equally skilled, Marth just has more options to work with.
Marth's individuality needs to be taken into account when determining his placing among the rest of the roster. Matchup specifics become increasingly less important when you realize the fact that Marth has more advantages and more options than most characters. The ability to play creatively could be perhaps his biggest strength, as it allows him to stand a chance in any situation.
The Best Character
I've thought Marth was the best character for a long time. Some people disagreed, saying Fox or Sheik were the best. I relied on tournament evidence to support my theory, while others relied on their own beliefs and observations. I decided to try out their level of thinking, and found myself seeing exactly where they were coming from. However, this only made me more confused. I thought to myself, "Why does Marth win the most tournaments, but he isn't the best character?"
After much thinking (and I mean a lot) I came to a conclusion. A very important conclusion. There is not one definition of the word "best." My best is different from some other people's best, which is different from some other peoples' best. I realized, even if Marth isn't the "best" character..he still is the "best." What am I getting at? What I'm trying to say is that when some people say the word "best" they are talking about the character's maximum potential. When I say "best" what I am talking about is the best tournament character, or the character most capable of winning tournaments. THIS is where the evidence comes in, THIS is why I've been so confused all this time. Maybe Marth doesn't have the maximum potential of Fox. When both players are played perfectly, maybe Fox really would win the most tournaments.
This isn't the way it works though, and there is more to look at besides potential. I like to relate it to competing in a tournament. When playing in tournaments, you are competing against more than the opposing player's skill. You have to deal with tournament philosophies, keeping up your stamina, the crowd etc. The same applies to using different characters. Fox may have the most potential, but other factors severely detract from how good he actually does in tournaments. He does well but doesn't win.
Ever heard M2K John about his controller? Yeah, maybe he really would have won every tournament with his Fox once he started improving. However, his controller prevented him from doing so. And even if his controller was working perfectly, there's no guarantees he could have played perfectly every tournament. In fact, he probably wouldn't. Take a look at P.C. Chris. PC was kind enough to show us what is probably the highest level Fox has ever been played in the history of Smash: His performance vs M2K at OC3. If PC played like this every tournament, he would probably win every tournament. However, that's nearly impossible due to the amount of technical prowess that is required to perform at such a level.
Marth isn't like that. Marth not only is not that far behind Fox in terms of maximum potential, but he is also much more consistent in terms of ability to place well at tournaments. It's probable that if M2K's controller didn't break AND he played perfectly all the time, he would have stuck with Fox. The fact is though, Marth is BETTER for what M2K was trying to do: Win tournaments. And win he did.
So, I'll reiterate what I think and what I've thought for a long time. Marth is the best character in Melee. If you think Fox or Sheik have more potential, that's fine. Just realize that tournament evidence doesn't show that. Even if the reasoning for the evidence is debatable, I've shown you (hopefully) evidence as to why that tournament evidence is viable and should hold truth.
A few notes though before closing.
I'm sure some people are going to disagree or at least have things to say to me about me being wrong. Please be respectful. I'm open to any changes if you can convince me and I'm not going to be an *** to you so please don't be an *** to me.
It's important to read everything I wrote if you want to understand these perspectives fully. Don't skim through this and then try and tell me I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Keep in mind I'm not a random noob. I've been to tournaments and speak with good players on a daily basis. If you think I'm absolutely completely wrong about everything I said, you're probably wrong.
I'm tired and will update/read this later on. It may seem unorganized right now but I wanted to get it out there.
Lastly, M2K if you want to post about something please make sense.
Despite overwhelming evidence that supports Marth being the best character in Melee, people still argue that he's not. At first I didn't understand this. After elaborate research and speaking with top professionals, I've gained perspective, and am proud to say I understand high level play better. I'd like to share my findings with you all, and receive feedback that will hopefully educate me even more on the topic of, "The best character in Melee." However, I do hope that in addition to receiving great feedback, you take your time and put effort into understanding my research. I spent a lot of work on it and hopefully I can present some new perspectives to the community.
FACTS
*Marth has more tournament wins than any other character by an overwhelming amount.*
This is the beginning of all of my conclusions. Marth has won more tournaments than any other character. This can be, and is debated all of the time, but there is one thing that cannot be argued with. The statement itself! Regardless of the reasoning behind it, or the "whys" and "hows" of this statement, it remains true. Marth is the most successful tournament character in Melee.
*Ken secondaried Fox, but mained Marth*
Some people say Fox is the best character in the game. A lot of people say that actually, and it may be true. But the fact is that Ken played both characters at a high level but decided to main Marth. This can also be debated but it's important to look at the face value as well.
*Azen could play any character at a high level, but mained Marth*
This is the same as the above statement, only Azen had more diversity than Ken. The facts are beginning to get a bit overwhelming now, no? Two of the highest level players, Ken and Azen, both main Marth despite being able to play multiple characters at the highest level, including characters that people say are the best in the game.
*M2K mained Fox and was a great player. He switched to Marth and became the best in the world.*
This is a big fact but is commonly countered by the whole "player skill is more important than character choice" argument. It is a good argument and holds true for the most part too, but again the fact cannot be ignored that M2K got significantly better after switching to Marth, despite what his reasonings were for switching in the first place.
Those are some pretty big facts. I know there are tons of reasonings why these facts may be considered irrelevant, but I implore you to at least realize that these facts have some sort of significance. Even if there are reasons behind them, they are facts and results. They mean something.
OPINIONS/ARGUMENTS
Many opinions/arguments are very well founded and have to be taken into consideration when deciding who the best character is. I'm more than happy to listen to these arguments and take them into consideration while deciding for myself who the best character is.
*Player skill matters more than character selection*
I personally believe this to be true. I played with this idea back and forth for a while before making my decision. If you don't think this is true, think about M2K when Brawl first came out. He mained DDD and was the best in the world. He switched to Metaknight and still is. I'm sure if he used Snake as well he'd be the best still. His skill is more important than the characters he chooses, since he has proven to play multiple characters at the highest level possible. This argument needs to be in the back of everyone's mind when exploring for themselves the topic of who the best character is. It's most likely the most important thing to keep in mind, as high level play revolves around player skill.
*Azen and Ken just "like" Marth more, and M2K switched to Marth because his controller broke*
M2K did indeed switch to Marth when his controller broke. That is true. Azen and Ken both just "like" Marth so they play him more...Getting kinda iffy there. It's hard to believe that arguably the two greatest players ever just mained him because they liked him. I can believe it though. What I can't believe however, is that it's just a mere coincidence that all 3 of these top players, who could be said to be the greatest players ever, are all the most skilled but just randomly main Marth. I'm sorry but that's just too much of a coincidence for me.
*Marth has too many weaknesses*
He is comboed easily, has trouble killing at higher percents, and he's bad on most counterpick stages. He loses to Sheik and Falcon, goes even with Fox and Falco. These weaknesses prohibit him from being the best character. Most of these weaknesses are true although they can be debated. Fox and Sheik have way less weaknesses and therefore make them the best characters. Hmm. This is where I begin to think hard about this.
Why does Marth have the most wins although two characters in the game are clearly better than him?
Something isn't adding up here. You could say because the best 3 players in history of U.S. Smash chose to use Marth. You could. But I can't, and I urge most of you to stop here with the opinions. There comes a point where you have to draw a line between opinions, and a ridiculous amount of coincidences. You have to line up the opinions with the evidence and come to a conclusion. Blaming Marth's tournament wins solely on the fact that "they liked him" can't be used. It doesn't line up with the evidence. Let's go deeper here.
Now ignoring the fact that we have to blame Marth's greatness on "player skill," we can begin to ask questions using that answer for everything. I believe this leads us to more accurate answers and I hope you at least begin to see where I'm coming from.
"If Marth has so many weaknesses, why does he easily have the most amount of tournament wins?"
There could be many different reasons for this, but there is a reason that is easily the most important: His strengths far, far outweigh his weaknesses. Ok, Marth has weaknesses. We get it. He also has advantages. Most people will weigh Marth's advantages and weaknesses equally. For example, his comboing is equal to the fact that he gets combod easily. I guess that one could work. But for us try and do that with every one of his strengths and weaknesses just isn't fair. Let's go over his strengths and weaknesses.
COMPARISONS BETWEEN STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
Weaknesses
-Gets combod easily
-Has a hard time killing at higher percents
-Does poorly on counterpick stages
-Lightshield edgeguarding ***** him
-He gets gimped fairly easily
-Dies off the top a bit easier than other characters
-Has a few bad matchups
Strengths
-Amazing grab range and grab game
-Amazing combo game
-Arguably the best edgeguarder in the game
-Best range in the game
-Tippers are amazing, especially Fsmash
-Tech chasing is really good
-Not a very technical character
-And one I think is forgotten about too often, the ability to be played more creatively than any other character. He has options, many many options.
Marth's strengths far outweigh his weaknesses. Ok, he gets gimped fairly easily. The amount of gimping he does is so incredible, and with such ease. It is infinitely times harder for a Falco to gimp Marth than it is for Marth to gimp Falco. He gets comboed easily, it's true. But look at his comboing ability. One grab on a Fox can spell potential death. As Umbreonmow puts it, "Marth messes up and Fox can **** him up ok. Fox messes up and he dies." Marth's edgeguarding alone more than makes up for the fact that he does poorly on counterpick stages. So he can't play well on a stage. You always have the fact that Marth's opponent messes up, which every player messes up...even the best of the best...If Marth's opponent messes up, one backthrow off the edge can spell death. This leads me to one of my biggest points that I want to explain.
MARTH AS AN INDIVIDUAL CHARACTER
Most of the time when people are explaining Marth and why or why not he should be top tier, they forget to keep in mind one very important aspect: Marth as an individual character. This applies to so much and people always forget about it. When people talk about Marth's bad matchups or bad stages, they only list specific matchup details. They forget to keep in mind how good of a character Marth is himself. I'll give a few examples.
Marth vs Falcon- Falcon outcamps Marth on the stage with grabs and combos him better. A lot of Marth's game is grabbing and when he gets out grabcamped, it spells trouble. Perhaps Falcon does have the advantage in terms of matchup characterstics. He probably does. I'd probably say he does at least. What most people don't take into consideration though is Marth's strengths and abilities as an individual character. At any point in the match near the ledge if Falcon gets thrown off, he can be edgeguarded to death. Maybe not always, but a good amount of time. Marth's Fsmash alone can turn a match with just one use. If Marth expects Falcon to DD away, Marth approaches by running past Falcon and Fsmashing. It's a tipper, next thing you know Falcon is off the stage and he's not coming back. There are simple advantages that Marth has against every character. These are his strengths, and people need to stop overlooking them when describing matchup details.
IMPORTANT DETAIL
*Please read this part carefully, as I believe it is a big contribution to Marth's high level success*
Another big advantage has as an individual character is his ability to be played creatively. Every character can be played creatively, but not like Marth can. This allows for a better mixup game overall and with more options, Marth has an easier time outhinking his opponent than his opponent does to outhink him. This is a HUGE factor and is really overlooked by most people. When people say, "Marth has to be played smarter than every other top tier," this is because of his creativity and all of his options. This plays a big role in all of his bad matchups. Sheik may be able to auto combo him, get inside of his range and edgeguard him well...but then why does Marth stand a good chance against Sheik at higher levels of play? Because of Marth's options and creativity. Majority of the time Sheik will win. But if the Marth player is even just slightly more skilled than the Sheik player...just slightly, the matchup instantly becomes much more even. Even if both players are equally skilled, Marth just has more options to work with.
Marth's individuality needs to be taken into account when determining his placing among the rest of the roster. Matchup specifics become increasingly less important when you realize the fact that Marth has more advantages and more options than most characters. The ability to play creatively could be perhaps his biggest strength, as it allows him to stand a chance in any situation.
The Best Character
I've thought Marth was the best character for a long time. Some people disagreed, saying Fox or Sheik were the best. I relied on tournament evidence to support my theory, while others relied on their own beliefs and observations. I decided to try out their level of thinking, and found myself seeing exactly where they were coming from. However, this only made me more confused. I thought to myself, "Why does Marth win the most tournaments, but he isn't the best character?"
After much thinking (and I mean a lot) I came to a conclusion. A very important conclusion. There is not one definition of the word "best." My best is different from some other people's best, which is different from some other peoples' best. I realized, even if Marth isn't the "best" character..he still is the "best." What am I getting at? What I'm trying to say is that when some people say the word "best" they are talking about the character's maximum potential. When I say "best" what I am talking about is the best tournament character, or the character most capable of winning tournaments. THIS is where the evidence comes in, THIS is why I've been so confused all this time. Maybe Marth doesn't have the maximum potential of Fox. When both players are played perfectly, maybe Fox really would win the most tournaments.
This isn't the way it works though, and there is more to look at besides potential. I like to relate it to competing in a tournament. When playing in tournaments, you are competing against more than the opposing player's skill. You have to deal with tournament philosophies, keeping up your stamina, the crowd etc. The same applies to using different characters. Fox may have the most potential, but other factors severely detract from how good he actually does in tournaments. He does well but doesn't win.
Ever heard M2K John about his controller? Yeah, maybe he really would have won every tournament with his Fox once he started improving. However, his controller prevented him from doing so. And even if his controller was working perfectly, there's no guarantees he could have played perfectly every tournament. In fact, he probably wouldn't. Take a look at P.C. Chris. PC was kind enough to show us what is probably the highest level Fox has ever been played in the history of Smash: His performance vs M2K at OC3. If PC played like this every tournament, he would probably win every tournament. However, that's nearly impossible due to the amount of technical prowess that is required to perform at such a level.
Marth isn't like that. Marth not only is not that far behind Fox in terms of maximum potential, but he is also much more consistent in terms of ability to place well at tournaments. It's probable that if M2K's controller didn't break AND he played perfectly all the time, he would have stuck with Fox. The fact is though, Marth is BETTER for what M2K was trying to do: Win tournaments. And win he did.
So, I'll reiterate what I think and what I've thought for a long time. Marth is the best character in Melee. If you think Fox or Sheik have more potential, that's fine. Just realize that tournament evidence doesn't show that. Even if the reasoning for the evidence is debatable, I've shown you (hopefully) evidence as to why that tournament evidence is viable and should hold truth.
A few notes though before closing.
I'm sure some people are going to disagree or at least have things to say to me about me being wrong. Please be respectful. I'm open to any changes if you can convince me and I'm not going to be an *** to you so please don't be an *** to me.
It's important to read everything I wrote if you want to understand these perspectives fully. Don't skim through this and then try and tell me I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Keep in mind I'm not a random noob. I've been to tournaments and speak with good players on a daily basis. If you think I'm absolutely completely wrong about everything I said, you're probably wrong.
I'm tired and will update/read this later on. It may seem unorganized right now but I wanted to get it out there.
Lastly, M2K if you want to post about something please make sense.
