character archetypes and classification

[G13_Flux]

often times when researching into smash, u come across the talk of a "speedy combo" character, or a "powerful but slow" character, and those descriptions are generally thought of as archetypes. but how should u really classify a character? as knowledge of smash grows within the community, i think its just to say that we can look deep enough into the game to classify characters based on their overall demeanor, attack style, and behavior.

So whats the best way to do this? ive created this thread cuz i think community discussion will open up the best general ways in which we can classify character types, and eventually, create some sort of overall system that can describe the way characters act.

Obviously, many of this is MU and player dependent. also, some characters a odd blends of attributes, and these things can make creating a unifying system difficult, but im confident that with a good enough analysis of the game, we can do it.

So ill start with something i think can be onto the right thing. i think u can look at characters by their behavior in relation to their opponent, by how they attack and build damage, by how they kill, and by how they move. so thats four points.

1. behavior towards opponent:
This to me is bassically offense vs defense. does the character make the first move and try to pressure the opponent, or do they wait and play more in reaction to how their opponent behaves.

2. Method of attack and damage building:
descriptions in this category could be things like combo based characters, reset based characters (like keeping opponents in lock through tech chasing and reads; i used this term because it is a good description of how many function, and clowsui used this term in a ZSS thread, and it made a lot of sense), spacing, and zoning/camping. These differ from the first point in that they are the actual method through which characters build damage, and fight their opponent. This is not their demeanor, whether they are passive, aggressive, or neutral, but what they do to take on others most efficiently.

3. Killing:
this seems like it would be edgeguarding, combo killls, and counter kills (like using big hitboxes or armor frames to your advantage to overpower ur oponent). nothing to complicated here.

4. mobility:
is the character a super fast, quick moving character like fox? or are they a slow, laggy moving character like ganon? do they have great air mobility like jiggs? or are they very limited in their air mobility like luigi? ground and air, and transitions between the two make up this point.

so far, this is what seems like the best way to attempt to classify smash bros characters from what i can see. im very open to modifying these, as these are really just a base point that should be debated and tossed around.

 

[WhyNotTurtles?]

It's too bad there's no "Theory of Smash" category because this would fit well there, haha.

Arbitrarily categorizing the cast into archetypes is far too difficult. I mean consider Marth and Ike. At first glance, maybe they are the same archetype since they both have swords, but is that distinction all there is to it? Looking at their attack speed someone else might argue that Ike is more of a slow, hard-hitter while Marth is more of a fast, combo-oriented type. Then again, both of them don't have projectiles so they would need to play offensively to utilize their high-priority attacks. But even that is debatable as both Marth and Ike have the potential to play defensively because of their counter attacks. See even that one example is still subjective.

Sorry for ranting. It is an interesting idea but kind of out of scope with such a diverse cast of characters that Smash has

 

[G13_Flux]

no i understand. haha. i figured if i made the classifications a little more detailed, it would do a better job at breaking down characters. I still feel that you can fit in at least a general description of all characters. it certainly wont be with one or two words, but with multiple categories through which they place.

but if nobodys into what im sayin then nothing i can do about it. guess this threads a dud lol

 

[Jandlebars]

The furthest categorisation that Smash ever had was creating the furry-fighters who now go by the moniker of "Space Animals". While their play-styles aren't necessarily all that similar, they share specific traits that affect how people approach them in a meta-game sense.

But characters in fighting games are generally difficult to approach with the intent of splitting them into archetypes, unless they've been deliberately designed to be viewed as similar in their characteristics to other characters.
Street Fighter has its Shoto characters, just like how Smash has its Space Animals. The usual Shotos, Ryu, Ken and Akuma all have their famous Hadouken, Tatsumaki Senpukyaku and Shoryuken-type signature moves, all of which serve specifics purposes and have, more or less, similar properties. A number of their regular inputs are also fairly similar, though the most recent games show a greater disparity between them in that regard.

However, given that the aim of both Smash and several other fighters is to bring a diverse selection of fighters, with little congruency in the traits that they share, it really is difficult to truly classify them.


Just my thoughts on the matter.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Smash doesn't have archetypes, but it has trends in

**** I'll just copy paste the same thing I said last time this thread was made.

[collapse=post]

There's only really four aspects that go into Smash characters, and I guess you could describe characters as having archetypes if they have extremes in those aspects

Mobility- The ability to move in and out of range quickly, verticall, horrizontally, in the air, on the grund, or anything else. The ability to "Bait" moves basically.

Safety- How advantageous or disadvantageous a character is on hit, whiff, crouch cancel, and shield. Has a correlation with damage due to how shield stun is calculated, as well as a correlation with ending lag. It ties into mobility in characters like Jigglypuff that can safely use moves while staying out of range.

Coverage- Where hitboxes cover a character's hurtbox and beyond, as well as startup speed, start up invincibility, super armor, and other such attributes that can also generally be called "Priority." Melee Fox Shine can be described as a move with perfect coverage.

Stage/Space Control- Any combination of area denial, long-range pressure, the ability to cover a wide section of the stage at once (Think a dash dancing Fox instant SH nair) and ability to influence how your opponent must approach you. Coverage ties into this aspect as well when disjointed moves are considered.


There aren't archtypes so much as trends. Characters with high degrees of the above are universally top tier threats, while characters with low amounts of any of them are universally bad.

[/collapse]