Brawl - More balanced than Melee? Lie or truth?

[Samochan]

And speaking of other qualities besides range, Ivysaur's recovery is laughable. Metaknight with his multiple jumps and reverse up B has a field day edgeguarding ivy. Gimp kills anyone?

Bit of range on some of ivy's attacks hardly redeems his other lousy qualities, especially when compared to meta's lack of bad qualities.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

How the hell would I prove that what you say is total BS? By posting vids where Ivysaurs get destroyed by Meta-Knights?

Actually, yes, as long as the participants are of similar skill level.

While everyone raises good points, some matchups need to be seen. I'm going to look into the Ivysaur/MK matchup some more prior to making any more comments on the issue, as on paper most people seem to believe MK has a clear advantage. However, Ivysaur has an interesting combination of power, quick attacks (Uair), weak, quick attacks (d-tilt), powerful, slow attacks (F-smash), and weak, slow attacks (side-B) that cause MetaKnight more problems than any of the other pokemon.

EDIT: theory is great, but everything I've physically seen indicates Ivysaur does well in this matchup right up until the gimp. Switch before the gimp, and Ivysaur is the best choice among the 3 pokemon for this matchup.

 

[Yuna]

While everyone raises good points, some matchups need to be seen. I'm going to look into the Ivysaur/MK matchup some more prior to making any more comments on the issue, as on paper most people seem to believe MK has a clear advantage.

How about you start doing that more before you say anything as you frequently make outlandish claims that are immediately shot down by myself or others and then corroborated by several people, followed by you saying "I'll look into it".

All this means is that you are very often wrong, have very superficial knowledge of the game and you seem fond of participating in discussions for which you're high unqualified due to your limited knowledge. I do not argue how to play golf properly because I've never ever even seen someone golf on TV (except for short excerpts in news reports or while channel surfing). To me, it's common sense.

However, Ivysaur has an interesting combination of power, quick attacks (Uair), weak, quick attacks (d-tilt), powerful, slow attacks (F-smash), and weak, slow attacks (side-B) that cause MetaKnight more problems than any of the other pokemon.

Meanwhile, Meta-Knight has an interesting combination of power, quick attacks (virtually all of them), good attacks for stringing together strings or combos (again, many of them), powerful, slow (but oodles faster than Ivysaur) attacks (Dsmash, Fsmash) and zero weak, slow (how the hell is this a pro?!) attacks.

I wonder who'd win...

EDIT: theory is great, but everything I've physically seen indicates Ivysaur does well in this matchup right up until the gimp. Switch before the gimp, and Ivysaur is the best choice among the 3 pokemon for this matchup.

Once again I say "Just because you've never seen it doesn't mean cookie-dough."

For one thing, you apparently base at least some of your arguments on what you've seen computers do and I hate to break it to you, but if someone at any time brings computers up in a discussion like this, they've just auto-disqualified themselves from participating in said discussion for the near future.

You have yet to provide any real arguments for why you think (keyword here being "think") Ivysaur "does well" (what does that even mean? Slightly disadvantaged? Slight advantaged? Distinct advantage?) in this matchup other than highly inaccurate and biased observations and opinions (partially based on what you've seen computers do).

Every time I argue against you in this thread, it's against arguments like "Well, according to what I have seen...", "In my opinion..." and "Here are the facts: ***highly inaccurate, faulty or flawed opinions/observations/lies perpetuated by others***".

 

[The Halloween Captain]

- Yuna

All I know is I gave up on personal experience after hearing all the complaints, and went to youtube. Youtube seems to agree with me. Where the heck is your physical evidence, once again, as seeing the matchup is better than having it explained.

 

[Zankoku]

Youtube agrees with everyone if they look at vids from March or earlier. Things like... Ike beating the **** out of everybody. : j

 

[Yuna]

- Yuna

All I know is I gave up on personal experience after hearing all the complaints, and went to youtube. Youtube seems to agree with me. Where the heck is your physical evidence, once again, as seeing the matchup is better than having it explained.

Youtube can prove anyone right if they look in the right/wrong places. It would only take me 15 seconds to dig up a video insinuating that Ike is Top Tier (when he clearly is not).

Why are so you stubborn? Let's take a look at our previous sessions of butting heads:
* You were wrong, I was right
* You were wrong, I was right, again
* You were wrong, I was right, yet again
* You were wrong, I was right, and no one was surprised
* You were wrong, I was right
* You were wrong, I was right

The track record looks pretty much like that. And every time, I have other credible (as in people with insight, knowledge and experience with the Smash games) on "my" side, corroborating my standpoint. Yet, every time, you seem surprised you're being challenged and you refuse to accept you're wrong, always persisting that you're right (and all of us are, thus, wrong) for at least one page before ultimately admitting defeat.

And every single time you provide video "evidence", it's clearly faulty. I don't trust your Youtube "evidence" on principle because you clearly don't know what constitutes good video evidence.

You want me to dig up matches that prove you wrong? Fine, give me a moment (as I have to actually watch through some of these matches).

Youtube agrees with everyone if they look at vids from March or earlier. Things like... Ike beating the **** out of everybody. : j

Guess who immediately said "No, Ike will not be Top or even High."?

EDIT: Someone else will have to dig up the Youtube evidence to counter THC's "evidence". I got bored after several pages of BS players.

 

[Edds]

most people know ike is a noobslayer. thats proberly why everyone reckon he was high tier

 

[Yuna]

most people know ike is a noobslayer. thats proberly why everyone reckon he was high tier

Some of us had enough foresight, insight, analytical skill and knowledge of the game to see right away that he wasn't.

 

[Zankoku]

EDIT: Someone else will have to dig up the Youtube evidence to counter THC's "evidence". I got bored after several pages of BS players.

There are no videos in recent history because of two reasons.
1. There are no good players who will exclusively use Ivysaur, or exclusively use any one Pokémon for that matter.
2. Trainer is unpopular.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

First off, Yuna - you never lose arguements, but it has nothing to do with your intelligence. Rather, your conviction in your own knowledge means that you never change your mind. Sometimes I change my mind, and that means I "lose" the arguement, but I learn something in the process, and sometimes I simply stop trying to argue because I am less focused and determined, but I do so without being convinced that you are correct. However, if you never change your mind once you form an opinion, you will always think you are right.

Ankoku - Yes there are no good players who use Ivysaur exclusively, only people who use Ivysaur to his maximum potential in a match. In other words, you would be looking for a match in which a good PT at some point switches Ivysaur in, not a match that features Ivysaur exclusively. Also, Pokemon Trainer is unpopular, so it will naturally be difficult to find a video. That is why I struggled to find good videos too (not that I'm all that great at surfing youtube).

Everyone - the most important thing to remember about character matchups is that they are entirely relative, and assume that both players are at the same level of skill. It is ALWAYS better to rely on personal experience than a chart with over 1000 matchups or the here-say of people who do not main your character.

Also, character theory means NOTHING compared to experience and actual matchups. Thinking through how a character can counter another character is never as effective as being a part of the matchup or a witness to two great players, because it is almost impossible to be as comprehensive in explanation as the level of understanding witnessing and experiencing gives players.

 

[Lavos]

Also, character theory means NOTHING compared to experience and actual matchups. Thinking through how a character can counter another character is never as effective as being a part of the matchup or a witness to two great players, because it is almost impossible to be as comprehensive in explanation as the level of understanding witnessing and experiencing gives players.

Did anyone else find this part of the post hilariously ironic? The guys with no real experience, who has spent the last few pages spouting off ridiculous amounts of theory about PT is now trying to lecture all the readers about it? Does he realize that the experience > theory thing works against his arguments?

 

[Yuna]

First off, Yuna - you never lose arguements, but it has nothing to do with your intelligence. Rather, your conviction in your own knowledge means that you never change your mind.

Once again, you're wrong. I frequently admit defeat on minor and major points.

Sometimes I change my mind, and that means I "lose" the arguement, but I learn something in the process, and sometimes I simply stop trying to argue because I am less focused and determined, but I do so without being convinced that you are correct.

I'm sorry, I said you "lose" when? I clearly said that you're almost always wrong when you say something this thread, yet you always insist you're right. And I almost always prove you wrong, yet you seem surprised every single time.

I call strawman/inability to read.

Tell me, how much experience do you have with Competitive gaming in general and Competitive Smash in particular? What makes you think your observation holds more water than mine or Ankoku's? I'm pretty sure Ankoku is on "my" side on this.

However, if you never change your mind once you form an opinion, you will always think you are right.

I don't form opinions based on nothing and BS.

Ankoku - Yes there are no good players who use Ivysaur exclusively, only people who use Ivysaur to his maximum potential in a match. In other words, you would be looking for a match in which a good PT at some point switches Ivysaur in, not a match that features Ivysaur exclusively. Also, Pokemon Trainer is unpopular, so it will naturally be difficult to find a video. That is why I struggled to find good videos too (not that I'm all that great at surfing youtube).

Pray tell, what videos do you base your newest outlandish claim on? You claim to be based it off of Youtube evidence, well, then, show us said evidence.

Everyone - the most important thing to remember about character matchups is that they are entirely relative, and assume that both players are at the same level of skill.

Rich, coming from the guy who has insofar only used videos where one player sucks and one player sucks less as evidence of his claims.

It is ALWAYS better to rely on personal experience than a chart with over 1000 matchups or the here-say of people who do not main your character.

Yes, but your personal experience is mostly made up of faulty logic, assumptions and "opinion".

Also, character theory means NOTHING compared to experience and actual matchups.

Pray tell, how much Competitive Brawl experience do you have?

Thinking through how a character can counter another character is never as effective as being a part of the matchup or a witness to two great players, because it is almost impossible to be as comprehensive in explanation as the level of understanding witnessing and experiencing gives players.

1) Show us your video proof.
2) Show us your credentials as a Competitive Brawler.
3) Tell us why your word is better than mine in this case. You main PT, but I have years of experience with Competitive gaming on you. Also, you seem to lack logic and judgment of character potential ("Captain Falcon is just as good as anyone else").

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Did anyone else find this part of the post hilariously ironic? The guys with no real experience, who has spent the last few pages spouting off ridiculous amounts of theory about PT is now trying to lecture all the readers about it? Does he realize that the experience > theory thing works against his arguments?

Yes, unfortunately. However, the lack of knowledge about PT amongst the older members of Smashboards coupled with the belief that they possess knowledge on the subject means that theory was nullified as an acceptable method to convey matchups.

Once again, you're wrong. I frequently admit defeat on minor and major points.


I'm sorry, I said you "lose" when? I clearly said that you're almost always wrong when you say something this thread, yet you always insist you're right. And I almost always prove you wrong, yet you seem surprised every single time.

I call strawman/inability to read.

Tell me, how much experience do you have with Competitive gaming in general and Competitive Smash in particular? What makes you think your observation holds more water than mine or Ankoku's? I'm pretty sure Ankoku is on "my" side on this.


I don't form opinions based on nothing and BS.


Pray tell, what videos do you base your newest outlandish claim on? You claim to be based it off of Youtube evidence, well, then, show us said evidence.


Rich, coming from the guy who has insofar only used videos where one player sucks and one player sucks less as evidence of his claims.


Yes, but your personal experience is mostly made up of faulty logic, assumptions and "opinion".


Pray tell, how much Competitive Brawl experience do you have?


1) Show us your video proof.
2) Show us your credentials as a Competitive Brawler.
3) Tell us why your word is better than mine in this case. You main PT, but I have years of experience with Competitive gaming on you. Also, you seem to lack logic and judgment of character potential ("Captain Falcon is just as good as anyone else").

O.K. Yuna, when have you admitted to being wrong in an arguement? links please.

I was surprised earlier on, and still occationally get surprised, but in more recent posts/weeks, I am not surprised when you "prove" me right, rather, I simply choose not to pursue the issue. Most recently, with the custom stage discussion. Now while you remain convinced you proved youself right, sorry about the word win by the way, I am almost always convinced you are wrong.

Again, I am terrible at using youtube so I don't know what you expect from me, but here's the videos. Watch Ivysaur in them, forget abbout the other pokemon.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qzwnIbUT4c4 0:45 - 1:45 (he was gimped, but Ivy got the kill and racked up 65 damage)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3UEU40K8zl8 Ivysaur takes MK's first and last stock in spite of PT's attempt to somewhat avoid him.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=At27-K7o8g8 Note how Ivysaur is the only pokemon to take a stock from MK, and the other two fail.

Unfortunately, personal experience is each individual's single best method for making decisions. While my experiences vary from yours, I have only my own experiences to rely on when actually playing and making my choices, and the same applies for you.

Now, I showed you unfortunately the best videos I could easily find, now about my credentials - I scored maybe 16th or lower in a local tournament hosted by Catfight containing about 45 participants. In short, I have no credentials. Nor will I ask what you and Ankoku have done. I don't feel credentials are relevent - sure they are an indicator of skill, but they make neither of our arguements any more correct than if we had zero experience. The message and the truth behind it is no more nor less truth because of our histories.

Now, my word is not better than yours, and anyone who is ignorant can choose to listen to your word, with more reason to believe you than me. However, until you start showing some knowledge about the characters from personal experience playing them, you should not comment. I am not suited to talk in any detail about Yoshi from a total of three matches playing as the character, no matter how much time I should choose to spend on the Yoshi boards, so I choose not to discuss his strategy. However, I played at least several hundred matches with PT, against both people and computers, so I am a little more confident.

On a final note, if I ever personally said Captain Falcon is just as good as anybody else, I take it back. If I said he can make strings surprisingly well, and uses his speed and comparison to gannondorf to take people by surprise/off guard, I stand by that statement.

 

[Yuna]

O.K. Yuna, when have you admitted to being wrong in an arguement? links please.

I'm not going to sort through my extensive post history to look up examples. You can do it yourself if you feel like it. I frequently write long posts and I write many of them, so it'd require me to actually go back and re-read a great deal of them.

I was surprised earlier on, and still occationally get surprised, but in more recent posts/weeks, I am not surprised when you "prove" me right, rather, I simply choose not to pursue the issue.

Because you're wrong. Almost every time you state something regarding individual matchups and character balance in this thread, you're wrong!

Most recently, with the custom stage discussion. Now while you remain convinced you proved youself right, sorry about the word win by the way, I am almost always convinced you are wrong.

The custom stage discussion is a matter of opinion, not facts. Note that I never once claimed to be right or that I had evidence to prove myself right beyond refutation, I merely presented my view.

Again, I am terrible at using youtube so I don't know what you expect from me, but here's the videos. Watch Ivysaur in them, forget abbout the other pokemon.

How can you be horrible at using Youtube?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qzwnIbUT4c4

0:45 - 1:45 (he was gimped, but Ivy got the kill and racked up 65 damage)

This was one of the first matches I had to sort through on my crusade through Videos of Suck. Guess what, I ignored it because both players are very, very bad. They're so bad at execution, they frequently walk instead of running and it's clearly not from fear of tripping because they do it even after launching their opponents and going for a follow up.

I just rewatched it just to humour you, up to the 1:25 mark. God that Meta-Knight sucks. He randomly dashattacks when his opponent's shield is already up. And why does he DI the Bullet Seed so badly?! No wonder he ate so much damage! He's terrible at DI:ing and shielding Ivysaur's jab, too. And he tried to punish an attack on block with Fsmash.

In summary, these players both suck.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3UEU40K8zl8 Ivysaur takes MK's first and last stock in spite of PT's attempt to somewhat avoid him.

Would it surprise you that this was yet another video I had to suffer through and disregarded?

Ivysaur took MK's first stock? Well, it's not like it was hard. MK already had 120% when Ivysaur spawned! Peach's attacks can easily KO MK at 120%! Peach must be an MK counter! PT then immediately changed to Charizard.

The last stock, MK just sucked hard. God what awful play.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=At27-K7o8g8 Note how Ivysaur is the only pokemon to take a stock from MK, and the other two fail.

Hey, yet another video I ignored for suckage.

That's a BS argument. So this one player was "better" as Ivysaur than as the other two PT Pokémon. Whoppity doo. God those MKs suck so much. That's just one match where one PT player did better as Ivysaur than as the other two.

Wow! Conclusive proof!

Unfortunately, personal experience is each individual's single best method for making decisions. While my experiences vary from yours, I have only my own experiences to rely on when actually playing and making my choices, and the same applies for you.

Only I use verifiable facts and extensive testing, relying also on the testing of the community instead of blindly following my own judgment. At least I have years of Competitive gaming on you. I know how to accurately gauge character potential, at least vastly better than you do, considering you just brought forth three videos of absolute **** players as proof of something.

Nobody cares about matches where sucky players suck against each other in giant suckfests. They're not playing their characters to their highest potential. Heck, they're barely in control of their characters.

Now, I showed you unfortunately the best videos I could easily find, now about my credentials - I scored maybe 16th or lower in a local tournament hosted by Catfight containing about 45 participants. In short, I have no credentials. Nor will I ask what you and Ankoku have done.

By credentials, I meant how long you've played Brawl Competitively, if you played Melee Competitively at all and if you've played any other game Competitively. A player who's played Smash Casually for 5 years might actually know less than one who's played it Competitively for 3 months because of the different mindsets and ways of looking at things.

I don't feel credentials are relevent - sure they are an indicator of skill, but they make neither of our arguements any more correct than if we had zero experience. The message and the truth behind it is no more nor less truth because of our histories.

They're an indicator of experience and knowledge. The most skilled players aren't always the most knowledgeable but why do you assume I'm wrong so much when I have almost four years of experience with Competitive gaming while you have, um... how long?

Why does this matter? Put a newbie in front of a "pro". Have a newbie see an Ike play against someone. Then have them see a Marth play against that same someone. Both the Ike and Marth are of equal skill and that someone is equally good against both FE characters. All three are among the best players in the world.

Now ask the newbie who's better, Ike or Marth. Now do so with 10 newbies. No, the majority will not say "Marth". This is because they lack the necessary knowledge and judgment to accurate gauge character potential.

Also, I believe you've admitted to me being more knowledgeable.

Now, my word is not better than yours, and anyone who is ignorant can choose to listen to your word, with more reason to believe you than me. However, until you start showing some knowledge about the characters from personal experience playing them, you should not comment.

Look at my sig. Look at my sig. Meta-Knight is a tertiary character for me. I've also fought against many a Pokémon Trainers. In fact, I've even played Pokémon Trainer for a while, playing mainly Squirtle.

Guess what, I have personal experience on both ends of the spectrum on this one.

Also, one must not have played every single character against every single character to have the authority to speak about them. It helps, yeah. But it's not a requirement.

Also, quality > quality. So what if you've played hundreds of matches as Pokémon Trainer? How many of those were against Meta-Knight? And how many of those Meta-Knights did not suck?

I am not suited to talk in any detail about Yoshi from a total of three matches playing as the character, no matter how much time I should choose to spend on the Yoshi boards, so I choose not to discuss his strategy. However, I played at least several hundred matches with PT, against both people and computers, so I am a little more confident.

How many of these were good Meta-Knight players? Also, you, me, Online, now. I'll stoop to online to prove myself if that's what it takes to get you to believe me.

On a final note, if I ever personally said Captain Falcon is just as good as anybody else, I take it back. If I said he can make strings surprisingly well, and uses his speed and comparison to gannondorf to take people by surprise/off guard, I stand by that statement.

You did. And no, he can't make strings surprisingly well. Because he's slower and there's no hitstun. And, just like with this case, you based your standpoint off of faulty Youtube videos.

 

[Lavos]

However, I played at least several hundred matches with PT, against both people and computers, so I am a little more confident.

When I unlocked Ganon in the first few weeks of owning Melee, I stuck to him. He was my best character and I played thousands of matches with him vs. my brother's Sheik. I racked up 250 hours worth of play time between my brother, my friends, and computers. I watched videos of him online all the time and tried to mimic them. I would actually consistently beat my brother's Sheik, and though I knew that Shiek was a better character, I didn't think that the matchup vs Ganon was that bad. I found Ganon's chaingrab and all his hard hitting attacks were enough to fend off Sheik, and although I read people who were more experienced saying it was a horrible matchup that Ganon couldn't win, I didn't think it was true. I was confident in my opinion because I had played with Ganon vs a Sheik main for years, and I knew the people saying the matchup was bad weren't Ganon players. Last year, I got the chance to play some experienced competitive players on a regular basis, and something interesting happened...

I. WAS. HORRIBLY. WRONG.

Moral of the story: The number of matches/hours you play don't mean **** if they're wasted on other inexperienced players or computers! They seriously don't! I really hope that you move to a place where there are TONS of people to play against so that you can come to realize this and become a better player. Insisting that your "hundreds of matches" in a non-competitive setting are more relevant than other players years of experience in a competitive one is just silly.

 

[JigglyZelda003]

How many of these were good Meta-Knight players? Also, you, me, Online, now. I'll stoop to online to prove myself if that's what it takes to get you to believe me.
.

Yuna can i play against you sometime too?

 

[Dark Sonic]

When I unlocked Ganon in the first few weeks of owning Melee, I stuck to him. He was my best character and I played thousands of matches with him vs. my brother's Sheik. I racked up 250 hours worth of play time between my brother, my friends, and computers. I watched videos of him online all the time and tried to mimic them. I would actually consistently beat my brother's Sheik, and though I knew that Shiek was a better character, I didn't think that the matchup vs Ganon was that bad. I found Ganon's chaingrab and all his hard hitting attacks were enough to fend off Sheik, and although I read people who were more experienced saying it was a horrible matchup that Ganon couldn't win, I didn't think it was true. I was confident in my opinion because I had played with Ganon vs a Sheik main for years, and I knew the people saying the matchup was bad weren't Ganon players. Last year, I got the chance to play some experienced competitive players on a regular basis, and something interesting happened...

I. WAS. HORRIBLY. WRONG.

Man, I knew that matchup was bad and I haven't ever actually played as either character (well, Ganon every now and then for kicks and giggles).

@Holloween Captain. Playing competatively just makes you think differently in general. You stop comparing all of the characters' moves and start to only compare the good ones, because you finally realize...that no smart person will be using a move they know is bad. Metaknight's stop trying to punish with f-smash, because they realize D-smash is better. Marth's stop dairing near the ground, because they realize they'll get ***** in the lag.

I honestly don't think Ivysuar's tiny range advantage matters...at all in this matchup. Metaknight out speeds him, racks damage faster, edgeguards better, recovers better, and kills more reliably, (note: I didn't say sooner, I said more reliably) and many more brick walls and traps then Ivysuar can even deal with. Seriously, have you even played a decent Metaknight. It's a lot more than tornado and up B spamming. Believe it or not, those are only used as brick wall strategies (figure out how to deal with this, and then we'll start fighting. If not, I'm just going to keep doing this), it's just that a lot of bad Metaknights don't know what to do after their brick wall is torn down.

Although in all seriousness, you'd think any character has an advantage over any other if you saw a fight in which one of them didn't know the matchup. In my first friendly against M2K at fast one, I almost beat him...with Sonic. But after he figured out Sonic's game, he basically ***** me. So, if you're really going to form opinion's based off of videos, you should either take tournament videos (if available), or videos of players that you know are skilled. Like, find videos of the best player of that character...playing against other known players.


Oh...and as a side note. Everyone needs to watch the M2K vs DaShizWiz set from FAST 1! It's like, the coolest melee set EVER!!

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Lavos - did you compare ganon v. shiek to other matchups, such as ganon v. peach or ganon v. Marth, when making your analysis?

Yuna - I would not mind playing you online, although it would not prove anything to either of us, as I am sure we both agree that Online matches are terrible lagfests. Add the fact that we don't live in the same country...

But still, I would very much enjoy facing you online. I would need your friend code, and we would have to arrange a time, as my Wii is not currently available (my brother plays Xbox on the same T.V.).

Anyway - yes I see your sig. Please tell me your joking with the tertiary characters. I doubt M2K could play proficiently with the number of characters you have in your sig. Once again, I take back the Captain Falcon can play as well as any other character comment, so no need to point out that I guess I said it (I don't remember when, though). I have 800 posts. Whoop-de-doo. That makes me no more nor less intelligent than someone with 50 posts, nor does it alter the meaning, truth, or falicies of my posts even slightly.

Listen, I dislike being flamed for what I put on youtube. So instead of me being flamed for putting up videos of lousy Ivysaurs beating worse MetaKnights, how about you find videos of MK destroying Ivysaur that I can complain about.

Finally, I have a fairly good memory of the posts you backed down from a point in, and I believe in the entire month-and-a-half I spent on this thread, the only time you've ever really backed down from an arguement was when you admitted that you weren't sure if a Yoshi AT that was being discussed was a practical AT or not. But then again, I have trouble with some of your longer "walls of text."

EDIT: Sonic Wave, I think you underestimate me slightly. I am fully aware that a good MK uses the tip of his sword as a spacing tool, that while the tornado and up-b are great attacks, they are avoidable (and in some cases, punishable). Let me be very clear on my (current) opinion of this matchup - Of the three pokemon, Ivysaur simply has the best matchup of the three pokemon against MK. MK is a soft counterpick for PT, neutral at best. I will not even try to defend any statement past that.

 

[Zankoku]

I doubt M2K could play proficiently with the number of characters you have in your sig.:

Then you would be wrong.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Anyway - yes I see your sig. Please tell me your joking with the tertiary characters. I doubt M2K could play proficiently with the number of characters you have in your sig.

He did in melee. Marth, Fox, Shiek, Falcon, Mewtwo, and a bunch of other characters

And at FAST1 he used Metaknight, Snake, and Dedede

And Yuna hasn't admitted to being wrong in this thread recently because...he hasn't been wrong in this thread recently.

 

[ArcNatural]

Yuna admitted defeat to my points in this thread no less. My point just didn't actually relate to the brawl melee balance. Just that despite all known factors in terms of tiers in games, there will always be some person that will be impossibly better with low tiers than they are with high. So as such even though the probability of you being better in competition with a high tier character is much greater you could possibly be better with low tiers for different reasons.

However, this doesn't factor into the major discussion of actual balance at all. So Yuna conceded because he thought I was arguing something else. We the argument die after that.

 

[Yuna]

Yuna can i play against you sometime too?

Of course. Gimme your MSN and I'll add you. Then when I have the time (I have many tournaments and anime conventions and other things to go to, for one thing, I'll be busy for the next three weeks with 2 festivals + 1 anime convention) but after that, we can play.

 

['Fro]

When I unlocked Ganon in the first few weeks of owning Melee, I stuck to him. He was my best character and I played thousands of matches with him vs. my brother's Sheik. I racked up 250 hours worth of play time between my brother, my friends, and computers. I watched videos of him online all the time and tried to mimic them. I would actually consistently beat my brother's Sheik, and though I knew that Shiek was a better character, I didn't think that the matchup vs Ganon was that bad. I found Ganon's chaingrab and all his hard hitting attacks were enough to fend off Sheik, and although I read people who were more experienced saying it was a horrible matchup that Ganon couldn't win, I didn't think it was true. I was confident in my opinion because I had played with Ganon vs a Sheik main for years, and I knew the people saying the matchup was bad weren't Ganon players. Last year, I got the chance to play some experienced competitive players on a regular basis, and something interesting happened...

I. WAS. HORRIBLY. WRONG.

Moral of the story: The number of matches/hours you play don't mean **** if they're wasted on other inexperienced players or computers! They seriously don't! I really hope that you move to a place where there are TONS of people to play against so that you can come to realize this and become a better player. Insisting that your "hundreds of matches" in a non-competitive setting are more relevant than other players years of experience in a competitive one is just silly.

This. I had the same experience with my Luigi against a Sheik. I don't even play Luigi anymore, and I'm maining Samus.


In any case, what some characters in Brawl have is quite obnoxious. It's hard to understand why they nerfed certain characters that didn't need to be nerfed (Mario, Samus, Falcon) while giving some characters ridiculous and spammable techniques and attacks (Snake, Dedede, Falco) as well as making some just plain amazing (Meta Knight, Snake again). It also gave defensive play a lower learning curve, as opposed to offensive play, which is much more difficult.

Melee may not have had the most balanced cast, but I feel the gameplay system is more balanced than Brawl.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Both are unbalanced. Fox is soo much better than snake or MK ever will be (unless more ******** crap comes out for MK). The bottom characters in brawl (link, C.Falcon, Ganon) are worse than pichu and mewtwo were in melee. IMO, they are basically the same in balance, just that everybody in melee was up a few notches. Fox and Falco are the same as MK and Snake, REALLY good, Few to no bad matchups, Easy comboes, and just better overall. Its just that fox and falco were better than snake and MK were. They are both unbalanced, but if you put melee fox in brawl, (with everyhting in melee included, just for him) you would find that Fox would be unbeatable due to waveshining and very easy combo ability.

@ Dark Sonic/Sonic Wave: The reason you did good against M2K as well as me the first match is because 1. you need to get used to Sonic's speed, and because we need to adapt to your specific playstyle. M2K lost matches to Afro Thundah, HR Nut, and Reflex because he needed to adapt fully, or just counterpick DDD because chaingrabs are stupid.

 

[maximuspita]

I don't think so.

Fox and Falco were one of the easiest to edgeguard once knocked of the stage. Snake is almost unkillable by most of the cast and MK is frustrating to edgeguard. Fox and Falco were also Fast Fallers, the most spectacular 0-death combos were used on them, a bunch of characters had Chain Grabs that could send off the stage and finished off with an EdgeGuard.

In Brawl, that option simply does not exist. There is no chance of equalizing from one grab or one clean hit unless you use a small group of character that can somehow combo.

And to me, it wasnt the WaveShine that made Fox top tier, it was his superior mobility with better than average moves all around. Waveshine was just topping on top of a great character.

 

[Dark Sonic]

@ Dark Sonic/Sonic Wave: The reason you did good against M2K as well as me the first match is because 1. you need to get used to Sonic's speed, and because we need to adapt to your specific playstyle.

I thought I just said that. It was because neither of you were used to the character matchup (although, you adapted much quicker than I expected, and I couldn't adapt fast enough to make up for it.)

And though I agree with most of your post, I'd have to say that melee's engine was more balanced in general. With L-canceling, most of the characters were generally fast, or at least had good approach options (though they could've just put lower lag times on everyone's aerials). The hitstun was high enough to combo into kill moves, but low enough that comboing zero to death was almost impossible. Most of the time it was just one combo ending and another one begining because they made a mistake, instead of them actually being in hit stun the whole time. Admittedly, Marth's fair, Falco's dair, Falcon's dair, ect, had much more hitstun than nessecary, but overall I liked the system. Airdodging was a nice addition, and it's much less abusable in melee (though it could've been a little better, like more distance and longer invincibility).

Autosweetspotting is gay in general, and the lag you suffer from grabbing the ledge makes it harder to punish the person who failed at edgeguarding you. Another win for melee here.

And even though edgeguarding in melee may seem completely broken, teching during hitlag certainly helped some characters deal with it (Falcon, Ganon, ect.) and essentially became part of recovering with them. Not like you really need to tech during hitlag in brawl, but it was pretty fun to do. Everyone would be like "ZOMG you teched counter!!??"

There's a lot of other little things that I like about melee's system, but melee doesn't have Sonic so... I'll continue playing brawl just for him (and maybe Marth too). After all, this isn't the first bad Sonic game that I've played lol.

 

[Lavos]

Lavos - did you compare ganon v. shiek to other matchups, such as ganon v. peach or ganon v. Marth, when making your analysis?

This isn't relevant to the point I was making...

I'm trying to tell you that your opinion isn't as well founded as you seem to believe it is. You've had extremely experienced players telling you that your experience isn't extensive enough. You've now got players who were formerly in your position telling you that the experience you have isn't enough. For some reason, you're just as adamant as ever that you have the experience to back up your opinion.

It's just very difficult to respect you when you insist your just as valid as anyone else, despite your obvious shortcomings.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Both are unbalanced. Fox is soo much better than snake or MK ever will be (unless more ******** crap comes out for MK)

In comparison I think Snake and Metaknight are more unbalanced. Marth could pretty much **** Fox off of a single grab/tipped fair/uair/uptilt. Metaknight and Snake don't really get ***** by anything in particular, you just have to keep hitting them and punishing mistakes over and over and over (though some mistakes are still hard to punish).

 

[The Halloween Captain]

This isn't relevant to the point I was making...

I'm trying to tell you that your opinion isn't as well founded as you seem to believe it is. You've had extremely experienced players telling you that your experience isn't extensive enough. You've now got players who were formerly in your position telling you that the experience you have isn't enough. For some reason, you're just as adamant as ever that you have the experience to back up your opinion.

It's just very difficult to respect you when you insist your just as valid as anyone else, despite your obvious shortcomings.

You misunderstood me. What I meant was did you compare the difficulty of the shiek-gannondorf matchup to that of the peach-gannondorf matchup or the Marth-gannondorf matchup? Since there are few people of equal skill to anybody, only relative difficulties of matchups can be compared. You should also go beyond that - not all AI's are equal, so to make up for that, did you observe the number of possibilities the characters had against you when you decided Ganondorf was a Shiek counter?

At this point, all I know is that the Brawl match-up chart is terrible in many aspects, certain characters have advantages these discussions do not credit them with, and Pokemon Trainer is rarely completely understood. He is simply a hard character to master that requires three times the patience of the other characters, and often the abilities of the individual pokemon are misunderstood. (Hint: people who say Squirtle is the best pokemon and Charizard is the worst probably have no idea what they are talking about, and more good PTs than not will say the exact opposite).

Also, if we are back to physics engines, melee's was more broken in a technical sence at the end of its metagame, in that after 7 years of melee there have been more exploitable components of physics outside of the typical options than the number found in Brawl. I have already proposed this, but I will do so again - Melee's physics engine was so broken, it redefined the game, making it more balanced than Brawl by giving all characters a greater number of common options.

Also, a melee character with melee hit-stun reaction v. a Brawl character that reacts with the Brawl hitstun - I think melee characters would have a hard time comboing Brawl characters, whereas Brawl characters would suddenly get a combo boost (which might help make up for their somewhat inferior speed).

 

[Yuna]

Yuna - I would not mind playing you online, although it would not prove anything to either of us, as I am sure we both agree that Online matches are terrible lagfests. Add the fact that we don't live in the same country...

It would be very easy for me to explain to you why Ivysaur has a bad matchup against Meta-Knight through simple demonstration either as a Training Mode-esque match or in a real (laggy) match where you'll at least be shown that his tiny range-advantage doesn't not the matchup break.

But still, I would very much enjoy facing you online. I would need your friend code, and we would have to arrange a time, as my Wii is not currently available (my brother plays Xbox on the same T.V.).

PM me your friend and Brawl code. Or just your MSN.

Anyway - yes I see your sig. Please tell me your joking with the tertiary characters. I doubt M2K could play proficiently with the number of characters you have in your sig.

Why must I be at M2K's level? You're not on M2K's level. You claim your personal experiences are enough evidence to base your entire opinion on the MK vs. PT matchup upon, thus, I only need to be of roughly the same level to be able to do the same.

Once again, I take back the Captain Falcon can play as well as any other character comment, so no need to point out that I guess I said it (I don't remember when, though).

It was a seriously blow to your credibility. And it will haunt you for a long time (if your credibility needs to be questioned in the near future, it will be used as an example).

I have 800 posts. Whoop-de-doo. That makes me no more nor less intelligent than someone with 50 posts, nor does it alter the meaning, truth, or falicies of my posts even slightly.

And this is relevant how?

Finally, I have a fairly good memory of the posts you backed down from a point in, and I believe in the entire month-and-a-half I spent on this thread, the only time you've ever really backed down from an arguement was when you admitted that you weren't sure if a Yoshi AT that was being discussed was a practical AT or not. But then again, I have trouble with some of your longer "walls of text."

Then again, since when did I (or you, for that matter) ever limit my examples of backing to only this thread? Also, if you dig deeper, you'll see a few more.

EDIT: Sonic Wave, I think you underestimate me slightly. I am fully aware that a good MK uses the tip of his sword as a spacing tool, that while the tornado and up-b are great attacks, they are avoidable (and in some cases, punishable). Let me be very clear on my (current) opinion of this matchup - Of the three pokemon, Ivysaur simply has the best matchup of the three pokemon against MK. MK is a soft counterpick for PT, neutral at best. I will not even try to defend any statement past that.

But why do you hold this opinion, besides "personal experience" and sucky Youtube players (no, really, they sucked)? We've told you why we think MK has a quite good matchup against PT and that it's in no way neutral.

Yuna admitted defeat to my points in this thread no less. My point just didn't actually relate to the brawl melee balance. Just that despite all known factors in terms of tiers in games, there will always be some person that will be impossibly better with low tiers than they are with high. So as such even though the probability of you being better in competition with a high tier character is much greater you could possibly be better with low tiers for different reasons.

However, this doesn't factor into the major discussion of actual balance at all. So Yuna conceded because he thought I was arguing something else. We the argument die after that.

I'd just like to point out that I hold the exact same opinion and have argued it on many occasions. I just misread his post and conceded that I misread it and apologized for it.

Still, a concession and an apology for being wrong. It counts.

 

[Yuna]

You misunderstood me. What I meant was did you compare the difficulty of the shiek-gannondorf matchup to that of the peach-gannondorf matchup or the Marth-gannondorf matchup?

In theory fighter, we always assume both players are of equal skill unless stated otherwise. Why even have a Tier list if someone can just go "But what if the PT is just much better than the Meta?", because it goes like this:
Individual skill > Individual matchup >>> Tier list

Since there are few people of equal skill to anybody, only relative difficulties of matchups can be compared. You should also go beyond that - not all AI's are equal, so to make up for that, did you observe the number of possibilities the characters had against you when you decided Ganondorf was a Shiek counter?

For the love of puppies, stop bringing computers up! Lavos only mentioned computers as an aside and then dedicated the rest of his post to talking about human opponents and videos.

Don't... bring... computers... up... ever.

At this point, all I know is that the Brawl match-up chart is terrible in many aspects, certain characters have advantages these discussions do not credit them with, and Pokemon Trainer is rarely completely understood.

Just because the matchup chart, which consists of mostly input from any Tom, **** and Pikachu, is highly flawed doesn't mean your own observations are right. Everyone credible agrees on that that chart is deeply flawed.

He is simply a hard character to master that requires three times the patience of the other characters, and often the abilities of the individual pokemon are misunderstood. (Hint: people who say Squirtle is the best pokemon and Charizard is the worst probably have no idea what they are talking about, and more good PTs than not will say the exact opposite).

And? Have you mastered him? Do you understand him completely? I'll say this, touting Razor Leaf as some kind of MK-killer and claiming his attacks outprioritize Meta-Knight, not helping your credibility.

Also, if we are back to physics engines, melee's was more broken in a technical sence at the end of its metagame, in that after 7 years of melee there have been more exploitable components of physics outside of the typical options than the number found in Brawl.

1) It's broken because we had some exploits? Umm... yeah...
2) And no, there are a greater number of glitches and exploits for Brawl already. You heard me. In fact, there were more of those (known) in Brawl over a month ago. Again, not helping your credibility.

I have already proposed this, but I will do so again - Melee's physics engine was so broken, it redefined the game, making it more balanced than Brawl by giving all characters a greater number of common options.

As opposed to Brawl's? Also, what about it was so broken? No sweeping blanket statements, please.

Also, a melee character with melee hit-stun reaction v. a Brawl character that reacts with the Brawl hitstun - I think melee characters would have a hard time comboing Brawl characters, whereas Brawl characters would suddenly get a combo boost (which might help make up for their somewhat inferior speed).

What the hell does this even mean?

 

[RDK]

You misunderstood me. What I meant was did you compare the difficulty of the shiek-gannondorf matchup to that of the peach-gannondorf matchup or the Marth-gannondorf matchup? Since there are few people of equal skill to anybody, only relative difficulties of matchups can be compared. You should also go beyond that - not all AI's are equal, so to make up for that, did you observe the number of possibilities the characters had against you when you decided Ganondorf was a Shiek counter?

You don't factor in the individual skills of players when creating a tier list. It's about which character has a better chance against all other characters, not whether Sliq's Ganon can beat Yuna's Peach (for example).

At this point, all I know is that the Brawl match-up chart is terrible in many aspects, certain characters have advantages these discussions do not credit them with, and Pokemon Trainer is rarely completely understood. He is simply a hard character to master that requires three times the patience of the other characters, and often the abilities of the individual pokemon are misunderstood. (Hint: people who say Squirtle is the best pokemon and Charizard is the worst probably have no idea what they are talking about, and more good PTs than not will say the exact opposite).

You're missing the big picture. Obscure counterpick ideas aside, PT is just a mediocre character. The fact that it's three mediocre characters put together doesn't make it any better in the long run--it's just a big ball of mediocre.

Besides, saying you've mastered him and can use him to overcome MK's amazing priority, speed, and lagless attacks is just plain silly. MK has every advantage over PT, as do many other characters.

Also, if we are back to physics engines, melee's was more broken in a technical sence at the end of its metagame, in that after 7 years of melee there have been more exploitable components of physics outside of the typical options than the number found in Brawl. I have already proposed this, but I will do so again - Melee's physics engine was so broken, it redefined the game, making it more balanced than Brawl by giving all characters a greater number of common options.

Don't be a fool. This isn't some MvC2 situation where it's so broken it's balanced. Melee was in NO WAY broken. The fact that there were so many "exploitable components of physics", as you call them, actually made the game more balanced. Most of the exploits were universal, unlike Brawl, where the overwhelming majority of them are character-specific--and usually only specific to the ones that are so good they don't need them in the first place.

Also, a melee character with melee hit-stun reaction v. a Brawl character that reacts with the Brawl hitstun - I think melee characters would have a hard time comboing Brawl characters, whereas Brawl characters would suddenly get a combo boost (which might help make up for their somewhat inferior speed).

Jigga-what? What does this have to do with anything?

 

[IrArby]

Yea we brought this up before how much some Brawl chars would own in a Melee engine. Then again, you'd have to take away alot of Brawl specific abilities like gliding and autosweetspotting, you know, that gay **** that stops you from dying or killing the other guy. I would so love for them to put Snake in Melee just to see an awesome Falcon stomp the **** out of him.

Jesus H. Christ I just read like 8 pages of Yuna and THC arguing about who was right wrong and some random spurts of PT/Ivysour bs.

 

[JigglyZelda003]

but while snake would go down a bit MK would still be up there wouldn't he?

 

[Dark Sonic]

Halloween Captain...you do not know what the qualities of a balanced engine are or you would never dare argue that brawl's engine is more balanced. We are not talking about characters' movesets being balanced, but rather what the game itself does to fix imbalances in those movesets.

For instance, if your character's kill moves were rather slow on startup or unsafe when wiffed or blocked (Marth, Falcon, ect), then you could take advantage of your faster moves to combo into your slower finishers, thanks to the hitstun in melee. If your character's dash was not good for spacing (Ice Climbers, Luigi, Marth a little bit), then wavedashing could fix it. If your recovery was easy to edgeguard...learn to tech.

It may not be the most balanced of engines, but it's certainly a lot better than brawl's. If your character doesn't have ways to deal with Metaknight's tornado, or Snake's f-tilt, ect, then the system really isn't going to bail you out this time.

IMO, what made melee unbalanced was not the engine, but the specific stats of characters' moves. Fox's up smash was too strong, Fox's shine had to much stun, his nair had too much distointedness, Marth's f-smash was too strong, he shouldn't have had a spike (meteor smash works), his fair had too much stun, Falco's laser animation shouldn't cancel when he hits the ground, ect. And in general, the low tiers needed more stun on their quick moves. Roy could've been beastly if his fair or uair actually combo'd into each other like Marth's (or if he at least did more damage). Just go through each one of the low tiers in melee and check out how much stun their moves have. Now if you pretty much double it then they become pretty amazing, because their moves actually do put the opponent in a nice position, it's just that they're not in stun (sounds a lot like brawl).

But I digress. I recently got Guilty Gear Accent Core and I must say, I love it's engine in general. With so many gauges, what could go wrong?


And melee Marth would still **** in brawl's engine. More range than Metaknight, with the same amount of speed. All he'd really need to do is spam fair, d-tilt, and up tilt and nobody in brawl would really have an answer for it. Oh, and his grab range would **** everything. It's only a few pixels shorter than Young Link's chain in melee. As in, it's bigger than DDDs grab range, and he'd litterally be grabbing you out of attacks.

Yeah, melee characters in general were just so much better at pretty much everything.

 

[Zankoku]

Melee characters were also smaller, if the Melee stages ported to Brawl are any indication.

 

[Dark Sonic]

but while snake would go down a bit MK would still be up there wouldn't he?

Nah, because Marth, Shiek, Falco, and Fox would just completely **** him.

Marth-F-throw->F-smash. Side B up tilt. Fair walls. Nair walls. D-tilt walls. And counter edgeguard for his up B (which he'll have to use since he has no pound and using his other B moves will get him ***** by f-smash)
Shiek-Needle cancel->Grab->d-throw->fair. D-tilt->Fair/uair. Crouch cancel->d-tilt, ect.
Falco-Well, you don't have up throw rest, nor any throw combos in general. Your basically a really floaty Marth that gets nothing from a grab, is really floaty, but a bit harder to edgeguard. Eat lasers, dairs, shines, and back airs. And in the case of Metaknight. Laser->d-tilt KO.
Fox-What you'd do against Jigglypuff, only without the up throw rest.

So yeah, Metaknight would take his fair share of butt **** too.

 

[Yuna]

Nah, because Marth, Shiek, Falco, and Fox would just completely **** him.

Marth-F-throw->F-smash. Side B up tilt. Fair walls. Nair walls. D-tilt walls. And counter edgeguard for his up B (which he'll have to use since he has no pound and using his other B moves will get him ***** by f-smash)
Shiek-Needle cancel->Grab->d-throw->fair. D-tilt->Fair/uair. Crouch cancel->d-tilt, ect.
Falco-Well, you don't have up throw rest, nor any throw combos in general. Your basically a really floaty Marth that gets nothing from a grab, is really floaty, but a bit harder to edgeguard. Eat lasers, dairs, shines, and back airs. And in the case of Metaknight. Laser->d-tilt KO.
Fox-What you'd do against Jigglypuff, only without the up throw rest.

So yeah, Metaknight would take his fair share of butt **** too.

Meta-Knight, fast moves with almost no cool down. Imagine that with L-canceling... and hitstun. Multi jumps too.

Can you say "comboing across the stage into Up B/Side B"?

 

[RDK]

Add stages with walls to that mix and you get your very own Smash pseudo-infinite.

 

[Vyse]

Melee characters were also smaller, if the Melee stages ported to Brawl are any indication.

Or the SSB64 stages ported to Melee.
Dreamland 64 seems so small on the 64.