And I say you can't right now cause you don't know how each char plays efficiently.
Funny, I don't remember that from your original post where you talked about a lot of
other things.
It's just as retarted as the other people stating DDD is broken or roy best. Also thats not the reason why I think it's ********. Any tier list made right now is ******** though cause most good players are still heavily used to a melee mind set. I guess I call it ******** cause I don't think 3 chars are better then all the others right now.
Funny, I don't. I try to discover new ways of playing it, which is especially easy when I play Toon Link and Pit (because they're smexy).
Airal is combat is different now since there are a lot of arial fights in melee you approach from the air but it's close to the ground. With chars like pit and meta knight and DDD and kirby you actually have air battles.
We had these in Melee as well, only in smaller numbers. I fail to see how aerial combat has changed that much for, say, Peach, Zelda or Falco other than that they've been rebalanced.
Yes but if you don't spam shieks fair it's still pretty strong. It doesn't turn sheik in a crap character. Also KO ability doesn't just ahve to come from high knockback. Certain chars actually are more efficient going off stage and working there opponents to the borders. Others use projectiles to prevent people from recovering. There's ton's of stuff like this and yet you still say it's almost impossible to KO in this game.
No, it's not. Have you tried it out? It's not that strong even on the highest knockback. Sheik isn't a crap character. She's just bland now. If you switch between her and Zelda, however, then she's Great. When did I say Sheik was crap?
Certain characters are more efficient, certain are not. Your point being? The same was tue for Melee.
Where have I said that it's almost impossible to KO in this game?!
Where?! It's
harder generally because of the floatiness, better DI and generally nerfed knockback output.
Which is crucial for a good balance. The more chars are similiar the more likely there is something like the best route for that playing style is found which makes that char better then the others chars. It's why pichu was worse then pikachu for example. There fairly similiar but the other didn't make up for the difference.
That's crap. Balance is in the game. Balance is not
created, it's just
discovered. The fact that players do this and that does not change what's already programmed into the game and
cannot be changed.
When we talk about balance, we talk about Theory Fighter: What if X characters was played at the highest level?
Also regarding the char list you posted I said not all. I know you don't play fox like falco but the way you approach is more similar then it is with fox and falco in brawl. They play very different from each other now.
Yes, and?! I know all of this. I actually research things.
The example I gave of sonic and diddy and ganondorf was to demonstrate the different approached you should take for chars and that slow chars haven't grown to be bottom tier at all. They make up for a lot by the rediculous knockback they have.
It's not
that they're slow alone. It's that they also have limited options. It doesn't matter if you're really strong if you can't hit people that often. Meanwhile, better characters will own you.
It's cause they have a counter style. They take hits to get there own or block to create openings and such. They still have offensive options but you should hit a shield straight on with it. This is what is so different from melee's metagame. You shouldn't be hitting shields as much as you did in melee anymore. Also you can't grab a ganondorf if he spaces well and you don't powershield cause he sends you too far back. And this is true for a lot of the stronger chars.
Did you know, powershielding is really, really easy now? Ganondorf is slow. Let's see how that goes hand in hand!
The fact that Ganondorf can't approach limits his game. How the hell is he going to get openings? Turtling and hoping for a mistake? Yeah, not a very good strategy.
Not important.
I'm not stating there are no counters in this game but I haven't found 1 char that overpowers each char or has no disadvantages ( while sheik was such a char).
Funny, Sheik has a bad matchup against Fox. Especially in NTSC. Falco was 50/50. Ever wondered why Sheik's 3rd on the Tierlist?
OK, you've stated your position and I've stated mine. For clarity's sake, I believe:
* A game's balance is determined ONLY by the characters near the top.
You believe (correct me if I'm wrong):
* A game's balanced is determined by the distance between EVERY character.
So now, my question is: can you come up with a rational argument for why your view of balance is better than mine? Because I can.
Imagine two fighting games: A and B. These games are identical in all respects, except for one thing: game B has single additional character that is pure, unplayable garbage. The character is so terrible that no one will ever consider playing him in a serious match where money is on the line.
My argument is, from a competitive standpoint, games A and B are the same game. The character does not affect the game in any perceivable way, because no one will ever play him. The best player in the world at game A will be the best player in the world at game B. In other words, the terrible character did not affect game balance at all.
Have you ever heard of a game series called Guilty Gear XX? In every single installation since the first XX-game, the characters have been so friggin' balanced, the tierlist
frequently shifts and
even Bottom Tiers have won major tournaments! That's right! It's the equivalent of
Pichu winning a tournament! Can you see it happening? Not really.
These games are so balanced, while there are bad individual matchups and always a Top Tier (with Eddie sometimes even taking God Tier),
the Bottoms still have a chance!
Let's see... it's a game where everyone's balanced against everyone. Would you call it more balanced than a game where everyone's balanced against everyone except the Bottom Tier? Yes you would.
"Competitive Balance" - Balance between the highest tiered character =/= General Balance.
This phenomenon can easily be seen in Magic: the Gathering. In the game, you are essentially taking what you consider to be the 60 best cards in the set and putting them in a deck (this is somewhat of an over-generalization, but bear with me). Because of this, people consider a balanced set to be one where all the most powerful cards are relatively equal to each other. No one looks at the power of the trash cards as an indicator of balance, because no one will ever play them in a competitive format.
Magic: The Gathering is not Smash. Magic the Gathering is also not balanced if there are a large number of cards that cannot compete with the rest.
A similar thing happens in fighting tournaments. Assuming the player is playing to win, he will pick the character that gives him the greatest possible chance of winning the tournament. As such, he will almost always be picking from the top echelon of characters.
Is Melee balanced? After all, the Top 4 had an equal chance to win against each other. It was really close! And people keep saying they only see the Top 4 at tournaments. Melee must be
super-balanced!
No.
