Official Character Competitive Impressions - Tourneys, Tiers, Theories, Tactics

[Deleted member]

What about Toon Link? Duck Hunt, Mega Man, Mii Gunner, and Villager? And Samus to a degree? Maybe Wii Fit Trainer?

I personally would put Duck Hunt in this "closest to pure zoning category" alongside Link.

Granted my understanding of his optimal function is at best superficial since I don't play him but I feel like he gets so much mileage off of his "wall-like" projectiles specials (including the fact that I feel like he more often than not sets up and zones while being primarily stationary as opposed to other projectile-based characters) to the point that he is a definitive "defensive zoner" IMO.

On the topic of Toon Link and Mega Man I feel like their projectile games are not as suited for this zoning idea. Certainly, Mega Man has his entire set based on projectiles but he can't put out enough at once IMO (or simply a small number of projectiles which control a lot of space simultaneously) to really zone effectively.

Metal Blade is restricted to one on the field at once and despite it's omnidirectionality, its pressure capabilities are rather limited IMO since it travels along strictly linear paths and doesn't travel at a very intimidating speed. Crash Bomb is also hindered since it gets beaten by most other projectiles that would be put out to challenge it and because it doesn't really hinder the opponent's movement, if anything it just forces them to shield to avoid the damage from the timed explosion.

Leaf Shield is also rather hindered since it restricts Megaman from the rest of his moveset aside from grabs until it dissipates.

In regards to Toon Link, if I may make a direct comparison to Link's projectile game, I don't think it can zone as effectively as Link's. Certainly, barring some changes in their physics, they are rather similar projectiles, but in particular I don't feel like Toon Link can as effectively use his bombs to cover space as well as Link, which to me is a major contributing factor (alongside other notable factors, such as Toon Link's higher ground speed making him better with approaching, using his bombs more for hit confirms into strong attacks as opposed to pure zoning).

I would agree that Villager also belongs in the zoning category.

I honestly don't know anything about Mii Gunner so I can't make any sort of comment on their status as a zoner.

In regards to Samus, while certainly she can pressure from a distance with missiles and CS, the amount of space she can control is rather limited considering that she can only control space in a horizontal line directly in front of her with these projectiles. On top of that, her missiles and Charge Shot IMO simply don't have enough of a consistent presence/don't apply enough consistent pressure to really be effective zoning tools, at least not in the optimal sense of "zoning."

The same goes for Wii Fit Trainer (IMO) who again simply can't provide enough consistent pressure with her projectiles and other options to zone effectively, the soccer ball from Header is restricted to one on the field, it's heavily telegraphed, and its trajectory can only marginally be adjusted. And Sun Salutation is restricted in a similar way to Charge Shot. That and Wii Fit Trainer's CQC options are sufficient to the point that she would more often reap higher rewards in her CQC than in her attempts at zoning, IMO.

 

[Wintropy]

I'd have thought footsies does exist in Smash in some capacity, and in much the same way that it exists in trad fighters: it's the state in which both players are on the ground and trying to maneuver themselves into a favourable position or dodge the others' hits. By virtue of the name, it implies ground-based movement, and may consist of walking, running, dodging, rolling, pivoting, dash-dancing, foxtrotting or any other grounded movement option that's intended to get into the optimal position in neutral. In pro sport terms, I'd equate it to the state in which boxers or wrestlers shuffle about the ring to get into a good position from which to strike their opponent. So when I say, for example, that Pit can play good footsies with Ryu, I mean he has a decent variety of favourable movement options that is not outdone by Ryu and ensures neither opponent has the innate advantage in terms of finding and maintaining a good on-stage position in neutral.

Which, in that case, I agree is too narrow to define what happens in Smash, since it doesn't take into consideration jumping, platform maneuvering or the myriad of other options available. Theoretically you can say that footsies, such as it exists in Smash, can refer to maneuvering of any kind irrespective of whether it's done on the ground or in the air, but it is indeed a very different thing to what would be considered footsies in trad fighters. A better term would be "maneuvering" or "positioning", since that's essentially what it is.

Yet the essential concept is the same: you want to get into a good position where you can do damage while avoiding taking damage yourself. That's a universal concept of fighting games, Smash just has more ways of doing it and a great emphasis on the topography of the stage and the mobility of characters both on the ground and in the air, and on both a horizontal and vertical plane, compared to most trad fighters.

But yeah it's semantics. I'd just call it "the neutral game" and be done with it.

 

[LightLV]

I hate to be that guy but what buffs to shield and evasive options are we talking about? You mean upon Smash 4's release, right? Because consequently both of the above have been toned down patch by patch. Rolls are NOTICEABLY less effective and shields very much got worse than they were at Smash 4's launch. Even the powershield window got bumped down from its old 4 frame one to a 3 frame one, not a big difference on paper but 4 to 3 frames in game is noticeable, kind of like how when you cut 2-3 frames off of a move's startup it can become WAYYY better (see Falco Uair). In the past two patches alone (1.1.1 and 1.1.0) both rolls have taken a hit, with back rolls losing 2 frames overall (Front roll was only changed in 1.1.0 I believe, probably for the better as front roll is inherently riskier), air dodges losing a frame or two, shields being rehauled like twice now with how hitlag works, the latest of which adds a lot of interesting ways to hit a shield with spaced aerials and not have to worry about a shield drop punish (obviously if you mis-space you're eating an OoS punish), I mean, it's been pretty evident they're toning it down.

Shields and evasion have been getting worse since since release, but even as of 1.1.1 they are all significantly and noticeably stronger than any smash game before them. Go back and play Melee or Brawl and you will immediately notice the difference between rolls and shields in smash 4.

All of the stuff about defensive and evasive options being too strong (potentially, not a grounded fact, we never got to see how far people would take pre-patch rolls as they got changed going forward) applied to the first versions of this game moreso than the one we're playing now, personally.

No. It is a grounded, undeniable fact, and isn't up for debate. Shields and evasive maneuvers are stronger than they've ever been, with the exception of airdodge landing lag.

You don't even need math to prove this, anyone with a controller can feel the difference. Again, go back and play a match or two of Melee/Brawl as if you're playing Smash 4. If you went back in time to when Brawl was the newest smash game, you'd very quickly unlearn what Smash 4 has taught you, because you'd be getting blown up for it.

And while 64 is very balanced I won't say it's balanced in a proper way. Shielding in 64 is very, very risky because everyone can legitimately break your shield in VERY SIMPLE combos rather than complex setups (in most cases). All Mario has to do is SH Dair, Smooth land, rinse and repeat. It's incredibly silly. 64 isn't really balanced because they gave everyone identical toolkits, it's because everyone kills each other in like one combo anyways so your unfavorable matchups are very usually 6:4 (not very often 7:3) because you get hit once and you die. I argue the tier list in 64 is a matter of who does it easiest rather than who can actually do it. It's balanced in the sense that Fist of the North Star is with its competitively viable characters, which is why 64 has a very dedicated, kinda small scene. Also having a small roster is inherently a factor as to why it's also balanced because you can design better and more intuitive matchups in a reasonable span of time when you have a character roster of like, 12 compared to say, 50+, and have it ready upon initial release, even. This is the entire reason why SF5 is launching with like, 16 characters and 5 DLC ones, DLC of which is coming out slowly and in a trickled sort of fashion over the course of one year, both to extend lifespan and properly integrate them into the roster. You can very easily balance and control roster interactions in a more controlled environment like this.

I explained that 64 owes alot of its balance to the fact that powerful options are not exclusive to one or two characters (Smash4, Melee, Brawl) but instead generally the entire cast. It doesn't matter how simple the inputs are or how fast you die. And this is why i said it has to do with character design and not roster size, because again, TTT2.

You can argue that 64's balance was a mistake because they were just starting out. But that's like saying Melee's depth was a mistake, or SF's combos were a mistake. It doesn't change anything. It's still a learning experience.

 

[bc1910]

Melee's depth WAS a mistake.

At least, the true extent of it. There are many factors to consider in that assertion, but it can be summarised nicely by the fact that the devs thought wavedashing had no useful application hence left it in. It's widely accepted that Melee is a beautiful accident. But I agree that while all this is terribly interesting it doesn't actually change anything for those playing the game.

Also can someone explain to me how shields are worse in Brawl than Sm4sh when Sm4sh shields now take more shieldstun than Brawl, have about 9% less health, have a smaller powershield window and force you to shield for a minimum 11 frames before shield dropping, as opposed to 4 frames?

Genuine question. Either some of my data is wrong or there's some other reason why people still tout shields as being the most OP they've ever been.

 

[Big-Cat]

Sorry for bringing back the Tekken comparison, but I feel like I should mention this

Tekken Tag 2 is VERY balanced in spite of its large roster (which, honestly, has so many clones) because the game has so few stuff that could be considered broken or unfair (there's like, the Mishima's EWGF and some other launchers?) and the game actually isn't that complex at all, not even high execution outside backdash cancelling and other moves, it just has a lot of depth. The tag team mechanics and the way the game is designed in general gives pretty much every character necessary options to compete. I'm no dedicated Tekken player though, so I'd appreciate if someone else can expand on this, or even correct me if I'm wrong.

Smash is actually really complex and there's a lot of nuances here and there. Stages play a laaarger role than they do in Tekken, you have more movement options, DI, fall speeds, overall aerial mobility, etc etc etc. Every traditional fighting game player I know that tried Smash actually think the mechanics are way too convoluted. Taking this into account, there's bound to be characters that could abuse the system.

In my opinion, it's not that the Smash mechanics are perceived as too convoluted. Rather, it's that most of the time no one can explain them without making them sound oh so deep.

I personally would put Duck Hunt in this "closest to pure zoning category" alongside Link.

Granted my understanding of his optimal function is at best superficial since I don't play him but I feel like he gets so much mileage off of his "wall-like" projectiles specials (including the fact that I feel like he more often than not sets up and zones while being primarily stationary as opposed to other projectile-based characters) to the point that he is a definitive "defensive zoner" IMO.

I think it depends on how you play Duck Hunt. I like to use the projectiles as pressure and making them scared of them in order to get into better spots unopposed. It's more like you're using the projectiles to minimize their movement options.

 

[ghWyPakDzVvPncx76h2J]

Melee's depth WAS a mistake.

At least, the true extent of it. There are many factors to consider in that assertion, but it can be summarised nicely by the fact that the devs thought wavedashing had no useful application hence left it in. It's widely accepted that Melee is a beautiful accident. But I agree that while all this is terribly interesting it doesn't actually change anything for those playing the game.

Also can someone explain to me how shields are worse in Brawl than Sm4sh when Sm4sh shields now take more shieldstun than Brawl, have about 9% less health, have a smaller powershield window and force you to shield for a minimum 11 frames before shield dropping, as opposed to 4 frames?

Genuine question. Either some of my data is wrong or there's some other reason why people still tout shields as being the most OP they've ever been.

Biggest reason is shield health. In Brawl you couldn't just run up shield and take constant powerful hits to the level of smash 4. The fact that shields recharge make shield breaking moves have less utility because now they are just situational and require heavy reads to even get shield breaks. Brawl Shields do have less hitstun, but in Smash 4, a game that is dictated by characters with strong neutrals and grabgame, you have a rock paper scissors dynamic that has became less and less balanced with grab combo characters becoming dominating. Look at early tier lists of Smash 4. Diddy Kong, Captain Falcon, Ness, Luigi, R.O.B., and Sheik were some notable characters that consistently placed top 10 or 15 in early tier lists and why? Because of strong grab games. The health may be less, but the rate of recharge diminishes the prospect of health. When you did get hit by a shieldbreak move and you were on your last bits of health you had a shield that was almost dead ready to break, thus forcing the neutral to move faster, and the part you are missing is how much depletion per second comes as a result of holding shield. That's the big difference. The regeneration rates are almost about the same, but the depletion when holding it is something you are missing. The fact that Shields are a safer option is what has made it so over powered thus limiting the safe on shield options and making the game more dependent on characters that capitalize on Grabs.

 

[Big-Cat]

Please, space your paragraphs.

I disagree on the whole capitalize on grabs thing. That mostly came to be because everyone was approaching with aerials which got a huge recovery nerf in Smash 4 (and rightfully so). I don't think shields are a serious issue. You look at most of the top ten and none are particularly terrifying for their grabs anymore unless you count Ness' BThrow which is a design choice. Hell, Hoo Hah and Luigi's stupid DThrow stuff have been patched out.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

I'd have thought footsies does exist in Smash in some capacity, and in much the same way that it exists in trad fighters: it's the state in which both players are on the ground and trying to maneuver themselves into a favourable position or dodge the others' hits. By virtue of the name, it implies ground-based movement, and may consist of walking, running, dodging, rolling, pivoting, dash-dancing, foxtrotting or any other grounded movement option that's intended to get into the optimal position in neutral. In pro sport terms, I'd equate it to the state in which boxers or wrestlers shuffle about the ring to get into a good position from which to strike their opponent. So when I say, for example, that Pit can play good footsies with Ryu, I mean he has a decent variety of favourable movement options that is not outdone by Ryu and ensures neither opponent has the innate advantage in terms of finding and maintaining a good on-stage position in neutral.

Which, in that case, I agree is too narrow to define what happens in Smash, since it doesn't take into consideration jumping, platform maneuvering or the myriad of other options available. Theoretically you can say that footsies, such as it exists in Smash, can refer to maneuvering of any kind irrespective of whether it's done on the ground or in the air, but it is indeed a very different thing to what would be considered footsies in trad fighters. A better term would be "maneuvering" or "positioning", since that's essentially what it is.

Yet the essential concept is the same: you want to get into a good position where you can do damage while avoiding taking damage yourself. That's a universal concept of fighting games, Smash just has more ways of doing it and a great emphasis on the topography of the stage and the mobility of characters both on the ground and in the air, and on both a horizontal and vertical plane, compared to most trad fighters.

But yeah it's semantics. I'd just call it "the neutral game" and be done with it.

The thing is, footsies isn't just based on the ground-based movement anymore. Ever since marvel fighting games been releasing along with anime fighters and KOF, footsies is now a general thing to accommodate these newer fighters. Also footsies, while a mostly General term for not trying to get hit while hitting your opponent, the strategies used to do such is specific to fighting game, so our strategies for performing isai's famous principle are going to be vastly different than other fighting games (so I'm trying to say that footsies apply for our game as much as other fighters, just our strategies and stuff are just vastly different if I make sense at all lol).

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

And that is why traditional footsies don't actually exist in Smash 4. They don't exist in Marvel either, what is done in that game is almost just as different.

Footsies originate from Street Fighter, it's a Street Fighter term used for back and forth walking on the ground to avoid the opponent's pokes while using your own. Stop trying to apply the term into something it doesn't describe, it's pretentious and spacing is a much more descriptive term for Smash despite being broader. Like both of you said Smash encompasses more because of its different gameplay, thus it needs a broader term and not one specifically created for SF.

Footsies do exist you just have to expand the definition to take into account. The principles are the same. You claiming that there's no footsies in marvel is a straight up lie.

 

[wpwood]

So yeah, character competitive impressions.

 

[meleebrawler]

Please, space your paragraphs.

I disagree on the whole capitalize on grabs thing. That mostly came to be because everyone was approaching with aerials which got a huge recovery nerf in Smash 4 (and rightfully so). I don't think shields are a serious issue. You look at most of the top ten and none are particularly terrifying for their grabs anymore unless you count Ness' BThrow which is a design choice. Hell, Hoo Hah and Luigi's stupid DThrow stuff have been patched out.

Even so, combo throws are so ingrained, simple and ubiquitous in this game that those who do not have such a thing sometimes get touted as having a poor combo or throw game. Case in point: Mewtwo whose throws do serve to combo but gain space and positional advantage, like Marth (but with much higher damage). What does combo is almost all of his main spacing tools on the ground.

 

[LancerStaff]

Well, considering we're pretty far off track...

Whatever happened to the footage of Earth whooping 9B? (Or was it some other Ryu...)

 

[Big-Cat]

Even so, combo throws are so ingrained, simple and ubiquitous in this game that those who do not have such a thing sometimes get touted as having a poor combo or throw game. Case in point: Mewtwo whose throws do serve to combo but gain space and positional advantage, like Marth (but with much higher damage). What does combo is almost all of his main spacing tools on the ground.

Then that issue lies in how people have very narrow views of how characters are to be played. Bowser has only one combo off his UThrow and that's only at low percents and little rage, but that doesn't change the fact he hits like a truck with everything.

Not saying this to you, but I swear we have the dumbest players.

 

[ghWyPakDzVvPncx76h2J]

Please, space your paragraphs.

I disagree on the whole capitalize on grabs thing. That mostly came to be because everyone was approaching with aerials which got a huge recovery nerf in Smash 4 (and rightfully so). I don't think shields are a serious issue. You look at most of the top ten and none are particularly terrifying for their grabs anymore unless you count Ness' BThrow which is a design choice. Hell, Hoo Hah and Luigi's stupid DThrow stuff have been patched out.

You're right when it comes to not being a serious issue, but the whole reputation and as I've stated in the paragraph were based on an earlier interpretation of the game. It once devoured the whole meta at a point, shields still are much better in this game than Brawl even with the patches, but I also delivered some key points as to why they were better than in Brawl. And grabs do still have a strong importance, but not to the level of chaingrabs just that characters that counter shields did, and somewhat still have a larger increase in the meta. Even after the mariomaker update you need to position your aerials very precisely and certain characters still struggle at confrontation at close range. They can't pressure shields as well, but there's a lot more depth to why shields are better in smash 4 than in Brawl. I'd advise you watch some tournament matches of the 2 individual games it will give you a stronger understanding of how both metas differ.

 

[meleebrawler]

Then that issue lies in how people have very narrow views of how characters are to be played. Bowser has only one combo off his UThrow and that's only at low percents and little rage, but that doesn't change the fact he hits like a truck with everything.

Not saying this to you, but I swear we have the dumbest players.

The only way a throw game can really be considered poor is if it fulfills several conditions: the grab is poor, the throws don't combo or kill AND do poor damage. Yoshi is the only one who really fulfils this, though he does at least have a fairly damaging command grab.

 

[RonNewcomb]

So yeah, character competitive impressions.

... and theory. It's in the subject line too.

 

[LightLV]

Melee's depth WAS a mistake.

At least, the true extent of it. There are many factors to consider in that assertion, but it can be summarised nicely by the fact that the devs thought wavedashing had no useful application hence left it in. It's widely accepted that Melee is a beautiful accident. But I agree that while all this is terribly interesting it doesn't actually change anything for those playing the game.

Also can someone explain to me how shields are worse in Brawl than Sm4sh when Sm4sh shields now take more shieldstun than Brawl, have about 9% less health, have a smaller powershield window and force you to shield for a minimum 11 frames before shield dropping, as opposed to 4 frames?

Genuine question. Either some of my data is wrong or there's some other reason why people still tout shields as being the most OP they've ever been.

Well...

1) No shieldpush. Thus, moves that would actually be safe in Smash 4 with increased shieldlag (in respect to their damage) are still unsafe in Smash 4. (I.e. Zelda : The Movie) Shieldpush in Smash 4 is at damn near Perfect Shield values from the previous titles. Only Little Mac seems to still have any modifiers in. Smash 4 now has shieldlag greater than Melee, but in Brawl characters on average were much safer. (This also has to do with autocancel changes but as of 1.1.1, it's shield push.)

2) Shield depletion and regen. Brawl shields depleted when held down more than twice the speed they do now, which feels accurate. Wiki says shield regeneration in Smash 4 is lower than Brawl, which is clearly incorrect. They seem to regenerate about as fast as Brawl shields depleted.

3) Shield pokes are way more rare in Smash 4 for whatever reason, even when a shield is on its last legs and an attack very visibly strikes the opponent's hurtbox. It's probably a mechanical change but there's no information to confirm it. But you don't see many shield pokes anymore, even from the swordsmen.

4) No more ledge slipping, and also no more 100%+ ledge attack changes. In Melee/Brawl, hitting someone with an attack with their back to a ledge or platform made them fall off, setting them up for dangerous situations and sometimes even unavoidable combos. Either by design or result of shield push no longer being a thing, this doesn't happen anymore, which removes a pretty big level of stage control from the game.

Consider that before, knocking someone off the ledge with their back turned required them to get back up, and having +100% damage nerfed one of their wakeup options. So this is both a huge buff to the defender and a huge nerf to the attacker.

Also, all of these changes are simultaneously nerfs to heavy/power characters and buffs to speedy weaker characters....you know, the cool kids at the top of the tier list.

 

[meleebrawler]

If you wanna talk about game mechanics while keeping the topic about characters, try providing examples of the latter while you do so.

 

[Skeeter Mania]

Melee's depth WAS a mistake.

At least, the true extent of it. There are many factors to consider in that assertion, but it can be summarised nicely by the fact that the devs thought wavedashing had no useful application hence left it in. It's widely accepted that Melee is a beautiful accident. But I agree that while all this is terribly interesting it doesn't actually change anything for those playing the game.

Also can someone explain to me how shields are worse in Brawl than Sm4sh when Sm4sh shields now take more shieldstun than Brawl, have about 9% less health, have a smaller powershield window and force you to shield for a minimum 11 frames before shield dropping, as opposed to 4 frames?

Genuine question. Either some of my data is wrong or there's some other reason why people still tout shields as being the most OP they've ever been.

You know, I've seen people say that Melee was intentionally designed that way, and it kind of makes sense.

Here's a link I will provide you: http://www.1up.com/news/masahiro-sakurai-reflects-super-smash

 

[Sinister Slush]

Dont forget MJG beating Trela.

Didn't MJG beat trela with Villager not Tink at battlegrounds...
Hasn't he always been a villager main lol

 

[LightLV]

You know, I've seen people say that Melee was
intentionally designed that way, and it kind of makes sense.

Here's a link I will provide you: http://www.1up.com/news/masahiro-sakurai-reflects-super-smash

As much as i'll bash Sakurai for competitive balance, nothing about Melee seems to suggest its deeper workings weren't deeply tested and tweaked. Melee's bonus system was a surprisingly in-depth side feature to have in a game like smash bros, the kind that only would have been possible with deliberate knowledge of the game's engine. Melee's mechanic changes from Smash 64 were clearly privy to the competitive possibilities of that game as well.

Now...Whether or not he expected players to ever actually dig deep enough to abuse what was possible though, is anyone's guess (clearly he didn't). Even something like Waveshine is actually very likely to have been caught by the programmers, likely even pretty early in, but left untouched because...who's going to actually try to do that?

But that's a mistake developers make all the time, and it's a sensible one to make. Speedrunners have basically built their lives around abusing oversights from developers. The fact that Melee is able to be played at the level it is without abusing ACTUAL glitches is a pretty damn astonishing feat.

My only criticism for Sakurai in that regard is HOW he dealt with it after Melee. 64>Melee was clearly an evolution of what 64 was. Melee > Brawl was clearly actively trying to avoid Melee.

 

[Pazzo.]

Perhaps Sakurai wanted to try something new.

The man loathes sequels after all.

 

[Mazdamaxsti]

Please, space your paragraphs.

I disagree on the whole capitalize on grabs thing. That mostly came to be because everyone was approaching with aerials which got a huge recovery nerf in Smash 4 (and rightfully so). I don't think shields are a serious issue. You look at most of the top ten and none are particularly terrifying for their grabs anymore unless you count Ness' BThrow which is a design choice. Hell, Hoo Hah and Luigi's stupid DThrow stuff have been patched out.

Zero Suit Samus? She can kill you at 40% off of a grab. I'm really scared of ZSS's grab.

 

[LightLV]

Perhaps Sakurai wanted to try something new.

The man loathes sequels after all.

Well, both Brawl and Smash 4 are enormous successes. The only people complaining are those who try to make it competitive.

I feel like Sakurai's views on competitive play though are...well, wrong. But not unfounded. He's designing from the perspective of a designer, not a player.

Please, space your paragraphs.

I disagree on the whole capitalize on grabs thing. That mostly came to be because everyone was approaching with aerials which got a huge recovery nerf in Smash 4 (and rightfully so). I don't think shields are a serious issue. You look at most of the top ten and none are particularly terrifying for their grabs anymore unle-----------

Have you never fought a Sheik? A ZSS? A Diddy? A LUIGI? A MARIO??!!!??!

For gods sake, have you never even fought an Ike?

Bro by this point in the meta, getting grabbed by certain characters should be giving you trigger episodes

 

[Baby_Sneak]

Zero Suit Samus? She can kill you at 40% off of a grab. I'm really scared of ZSS's grab.

And Luigi still. He's outside top 10, but the only thing they really patched out was his kill confirms. His combos are all there still. Plus, sheik still has her 50/50s and stuff (good grab game, just not absolutely ridiculous tho).

 

[David Viran]

Zero Suit Samus? She can kill you at 40% off of a grab. I'm really scared of ZSS's grab.

TBH most people are still stupid about how they DI the staircase of death. They DI closer to the side blastzone to die when they should have just been stubborn, DIed in, ate the damage, and survived. Not counting cases with platforms, rage or low ceilings.

 

[LightLV]

The thing is, footsies isn't just based on the ground-based movement anymore. Ever since marvel fighting games been releasing along with anime fighters and KOF, footsies is now a general thing to accommodate these newer fighters. Also footsies, while a mostly General term for not trying to get hit while hitting your opponent, the strategies used to do such is specific to fighting game, so our strategies for performing isai's famous principle are going to be vastly different than other fighting games (so I'm trying to say that footsies apply for our game as much as other fighters, just our strategies and stuff are just vastly different if I make sense at all lol).

And just to weigh in on footsies, they exist in this game, just...not as footsies. The principle exists at least.

The reason it seems to be so relevant in Street Fighter and less so in anime fighters is because anime fighters (and smash) have wwwaaayyy more mobile characters than Street Fighter.

You can't defend yourself in the air at all in Street Fighter, it's a 100% commitment, so your ground spacing is tied into basically everything, including your approach. Not the case in Anime Fighters with air blocking, double jumps, air dashes. Or in Smash, with air dodging, rolls, double jumps, ect.


Footsies in Marvel consist of throwing **** at the space inbetween you and your opponent, and once you finally hit them, you wavedash over, confirm into a combo and kill literally their whole team. In that order.

 

[Skeeter Mania]

L LightLV As for shields in this game, they're honestly fine. I don't think they really need tweaking.

 

[Big-Cat]

Have you never fought a Sheik? A ZSS? A Diddy? A LUIGI? A MARIO??!!!??!

For gods sake, have you never even fought an Ike?

Bro by this point in the meta, getting grabbed by certain characters should be giving you trigger episodes

I play Bowser, their damage doesn't mean jack to me. Even then, learn to DI.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

And just to weigh in on footsies, they exist in this game, just...not as footsies. The principle exists at least.

The reason it seems to be so relevant in Street Fighter and less so in anime fighters is because anime fighters (and smash) have wwwaaayyy more mobile characters than Street Fighter.

You can't defend yourself in the air at all in Street Fighter, it's a 100% commitment, so your ground spacing is tied into basically everything, including your approach. Not the case in Anime Fighters with air blocking, double jumps, air dashes. Or in Smash, with air dodging, rolls, double jumps, ect.

You're using a strict definition of footsies being absolutely ground-based when it's not. The way we play footsies is entirely different than street fighter; that doesn't mean it's less important. Same thing with anime fighters and marvel games.

 

[ghWyPakDzVvPncx76h2J]

As much as i'll bash Sakurai for competitive balance, nothing about Melee seems to suggest its deeper workings weren't deeply tested and tweaked. Melee's bonus system was a surprisingly in-depth side feature to have in a game like smash bros, the kind that only would have been possible with deliberate knowledge of the game's engine. Melee's mechanic changes from Smash 64 were clearly privy to the competitive possibilities of that game as well.

Now...Whether or not he expected players to ever actually dig deep enough to abuse what was possible though, is anyone's guess (clearly he didn't). Even something like Waveshine is actually very likely to have been caught by the programmers, likely even pretty early in, but left untouched because...who's going to actually try to do that?

But that's a mistake developers make all the time, and it's a sensible one to make. Speedrunners have basically built their lives around abusing oversights from developers. The fact that Melee is able to be played at the level it is without abusing ACTUAL glitches is a pretty damn astonishing feat.

My only criticism for Sakurai in that regard is HOW he dealt with it after Melee. 64>Melee was clearly an evolution of what 64 was. Melee > Brawl was clearly actively trying to avoid Melee.

Melee still kind of was an accident and a lot of what you state is pretty true. The whole Melee was an accident was a phrase that has been around ever since its inception into the fighting game community. Remember back in the 2000s on sites like Shoryuken.com how people would just bash Melee saying they got really lucky that the game was competitive and was supposed to be a family kids game, well look where melee is at now. Super Wavedashing with Samus, Waveshine, Multishine, Wavedash, L-Cancel, Dashdancing, Double-Jump Cancel, Yoshi Parry, and just so much more stuff that allowed for the game to be ridiculously fast paced and ultra technical. But as fun as Brawl was it definitely did not deliver the expectations.

 

[predator_21476]

I play Bowser, their damage doesn't mean jack to me. Even then, learn to DI.

Those characters can combo even with DI. Especially with bowser because he's a huge target. Also getting grabbed and taking 40 % is never a good thing.

 

[G. Stache]

Well...

1) No shieldpush. Thus, moves that would actually be safe in Smash 4 with increased shieldlag (in respect to their damage) are still unsafe in Smash 4. (I.e. Zelda : The Movie) Shieldpush in Smash 4 is at damn near Perfect Shield values from the previous titles. Only Little Mac seems to still have any modifiers in. Smash 4 now has shieldpush greater than Melee, but in Brawl characters on average were much safer. (This also has to do with autocancel changes but as of 1.1.1, it's shield push.)

2) Shield depletion and regen. Brawl shields depleted when held down more than twice the speed they do now, which feels accurate. Wiki says shield regeneration in Smash 4 is lower than Brawl, which is clearly incorrect. They seem to regenerate about as fast as Brawl shields depleted.

3) Shield pokes are way more rare in Smash 4 for whatever reason, even when a shield is on its last legs and an attack very visibly strikes the opponent's hurtbox. It's probably a mechanical change but there's no information to confirm it. But you don't see many shield pokes anymore, even from the swordsmen.

4) No more ledge slipping, and also no more 100%+ ledge attack changes. In Melee/Brawl, hitting someone with an attack with their back to a ledge or platform made them fall off, setting them up for dangerous situations and sometimes even unavoidable combos. Either by design or result of shield push no longer being a thing, this doesn't happen anymore, which removes a pretty big level of stage control from the game.

Consider that before, knocking someone off the ledge with their back turned required them to get back up, and having +100% damage nerfed one of their wakeup options. So this is both a huge buff to the defender and a huge nerf to the attacker.

Also, all of these changes are simultaneously nerfs to heavy/power characters and buffs to speedy weaker characters....you know, the cool kids at the top of the tier list.

I disagree with the notion that buffed shields were bad for heavies. Let me tell you something about DK's shield in melee: it was a free shield poke waiting to happen. His shield was absolute trash and the buff to shields only helped him and the rest of the heavies. No shield push is annoying (unless your facing Luigi, in which case every attack will send him sliding like he's on ice), but manageable. And, another thing about buffed shields in general: they help with a heavy's approach. Faster characters don't not have to rely on shield as much for an approach, and a larger amount of fast characters seem to receive projectiles more frequently than heavies (we have Tink, ZSS, Sheik, Mario bros, pikachu, yoshi, etc.) and for heavies we have charizard/bowser with a projectile that's used for approaching the same way Ike's Aether is used as an off stage edge guarding tool (as in away from the ledge). And we have gordos from DDD which are a great approach option...when they're not getting reflected back towards you 95% of the time. Heavies need all the approach options they can get. Dash into shield is still more viable than it ever was. So that gives heavies a way to approach. A very predictable approach, but at least it's something. In the end, I'd argue that buffed shields help the super heavies more, as they can protect themselves better from pressure that aren't grabs and they can theoretically use their strong moves to pressure shielding better than most (or just grab if you're zard or DK). I like the new and improved shields for heavies. It's the grab happy meta that the heavies don't like. But hey: at least I'm not getting punished by Marth for the 50th time just because I mistakenly pressed the R button.

 

[Pazzo.]

Well, both Brawl and Smash 4 are enormous successes. The only people complaining are those who try to make it competitive.

I feel like Sakurai's views on competitive play though are...well, wrong. But not unfounded. He's designing from the perspective of a designer, not a player.




Have you never fought a Sheik? A ZSS? A Diddy? A LUIGI? A MARIO??!!!??!

For gods sake, have you never even fought an Ike?

Bro by this point in the meta, getting grabbed by certain characters should be giving you trigger episodes

I don't think we can be objective by saying Sakurai's views on competitive play are "wrong."

Perhaps we should just say that Sakurai prefers his games to not be limited to one form of enjoyment.

 

[Mazdamaxsti]

TBH most people are still stupid about how they DI the staircase of death. They DI closer to the side blastzone to die when they should have just been stubborn, DIed in, ate the damage, and survived. Not counting cases with platforms, rage or low ceilings.

Well I mean, I main Kirby, and the leading hits kill me off the top. Unless I smash DI my ****ing heart out I'm not escaping no matter my DI.

 

[Lavani]

You aren't escaping with SDI either because Boost Kick's multihits have a 0 SDI multiplier.

 

[Mario766]

You sdi the first hit.

It's why people fall out so much.

 

[thehard]

Something to keep in mind is that Nintendo developers generally try to make sequels totally new experiences from their predecessors.

There may be something vital lost in translation (the poor man falls victim to that a lot) but Sakurai has generally said in interviews that he focused more on advanced gamers with Melee and merely refocused Brawl's design more toward beginner gamers, spurred by the Wii itself having a focus on casual, or rather all-inclusive gaming (had to make sure people could play the game with Wiimotes, etc.) Of course, the breadth/depth mantra has been a consistency, and he's mentioned that he felt Brawl was more advanced in ways from Melee too (more of a focus on aerial combat, more character identity). I'm sure he would have loved to patch Brawl too (in an older Famitsu column he responds to a reader who was basically mad about being camped out online and says he'd like to fix interactions like that for the next game) but it wasn't an option with wi-fi.

 

[Kung Fu Treachery]

A few scattered thoughts on topics raised in the last few pages:

1) Would people prefer that [Character X] hadn't gotten into Melee/Brawl because they're bad? I often think that Ganon getting into Melee was the worst thing that ever happened to him. The issue with character loyalty is that not only do the devs have to get a loyal translation of a character into Smash (via attacks, animations, fighting styles, etc.), but they also have a sense of loyalty to previous Smash titles. This loyalty causes real problems when combined with my next point.

2) Smash is a very unique fighter, and because of this, it can be hard to judge which character designs will actually work out, and which will just kinda suck.

The loyalty to previous designs wouldn't be so bad if the devs could be sure that those designs would work in the first place, but some characters are just focused around strategies that are inherently less rewarding in Smash gameplay. Heavies are a primary example of this. Having lots of high damage, high knockback moves actually hinders your ability to combo; speed is worth more than power; and you need to have a good recovery. Just as troubling are the characters who were hurt by alterations between Smash games. Jigglypuff thrived on edgeguarding, which was made much weaker in Smash 4 (that's not her only problem, but it's a large one). Sheik and Zelda used to be one character; Sheik is quick and racks up damage, and Zelda has tons of finishers (it never played out that way, since speed is so much better than power, but that seemed to be the intention). Now they're separate characters, and Sheik, who has always had a solid moveset, gets another fast, safe option in Bouncing Fish. Zelda is left with a bunch of big hits that are super finicky to sweetspot and no real way to set up for them. Loyalty to previous iterations can really, really hurt characters, and I hope that in the future devs are willing to ditch certain designs that have seen multiple failures or no longer fit well with modern Smash.

Lastly, one vital example of the difficulty of balancing in Smash (I haven't played traditional fighters much, so inform me if I'm off base). In Smash, you need a kill move, and this is distinct from a move that does lots of damage. In traditional fighters, if it does damage, you can kill with it, but you will never take a stock with a Fox jab. This is uncharted territory for game balancing. A kill move needs high knockback, reasonable speed, and most crucially, a reliable setup or setups. If Smash had health bars, Duck Hunt might be really good. He can zone and rack damage. But he can't kill, so no dice. Damage isn't worth anything without the ability to close the stock.

As Bobby Scar and Bill Russell have taught us, this game has always been, and will always be, about buckets.

Why is ZSS possibly the best in the game? Because she can take a stock like no other, and that's what matters.

Why has Ryu been a hit, while Roy has not? Have you seen Roy's FSmash? Answer: Ryu can set up into TSRK. Roy FSmash is all reads, all day. It's fast and strong, but you can't ever guarantee it.

The fact that a character needs at least one move with very particular qualities and needs other moves that lead into that one move in order to be viable is unique in Smash, compared to other fighters. The devs can't really look to other games for guidance. Damage can sometimes be a red herring. You need to KO, not get people to 200%. Coffee is for closers.

 

[TTTTTsd]

A few scattered thoughts on topics raised in the last few pages:

1) Would people prefer that [Character X] hadn't gotten into Melee/Brawl because they're bad? I often think that Ganon getting into Melee was the worst thing that ever happened to him. The issue with character loyalty is that not only do the devs have to get a loyal translation of a character into Smash (via attacks, animations, fighting styles, etc.), but they also have a sense of loyalty to previous Smash titles. This loyalty causes real problems when combined with my next point.

2) Smash is a very unique fighter, and because of this, it can be hard to judge which character designs will actually work out, and which will just kinda suck.

The loyalty to previous designs wouldn't be so bad if the devs could be sure that those designs would work in the first place, but some characters are just focused around strategies that are inherently less rewarding in Smash gameplay. Heavies are a primary example of this. Having lots of high damage, high knockback moves actually hinders your ability to combo; speed is worth more than power; and you need to have a good recovery. Just as troubling are the characters who were hurt by alterations between Smash games. Jigglypuff thrived on edgeguarding, which was made much weaker in Smash 4 (that's not her only problem, but it's a large one). Sheik and Zelda used to be one character; Sheik is quick and racks up damage, and Zelda has tons of finishers (it never played out that way, since speed is so much better than power, but that seemed to be the intention). Now they're separate characters, and Sheik, who has always had a solid moveset, gets another fast, safe option in Bouncing Fish. Zelda is left with a bunch of big hits that are super finicky to sweetspot and no real way to set up for them. Loyalty to previous iterations can really, really hurt characters, and I hope that in the future devs are willing to ditch certain designs that have seen multiple failures or no longer fit well with modern Smash.

Lastly, one vital example of the difficulty of balancing in Smash (I haven't played traditional fighters much, so inform me if I'm off base). In Smash, you need a kill move, and this is distinct from a move that does lots of damage. In traditional fighters, if it does damage, you can kill with it, but you will never take a stock with a Fox jab. This is uncharted territory for game balancing. A kill move needs high knockback, reasonable speed, and most crucially, a reliable setup or setups. If Smash had health bars, Duck Hunt might be really good. He can zone and rack damage. But he can't kill, so no dice. Damage isn't worth anything without the ability to close the stock.

As Bobby Scar and Bill Russell have taught us, this game has always been, and will always be, about buckets.

Why is ZSS possibly the best in the game? Because she can take a stock like no other, and that's what matters.

Why has Ryu been a hit, while Roy has not? Have you seen Roy's FSmash? Answer: Ryu can set up into TSRK. Roy FSmash is all reads, all day. It's fast and strong, but you can't ever guarantee it.

The fact that a character needs at least one move with very particular qualities and needs other moves that lead into that one move in order to be viable is unique in Smash, compared to other fighters. The devs can't really look to other games for guidance. Damage can sometimes be a red herring. You need to KO, not get people to 200%. Coffee is for closers.

I think they already have ditched some prior things, thankfully, and kept some too! To note:
- Mario is no longer average in everything
- Doc still has D-Throw Fair (only on Fastfallers but it still works! Pretty neat!)
- Dashgrabs in general have been beefed up
- There are likely more examples haha, I definitely see your point, I just wanted to bring up the exemptions as they're also frequent, this game feels very much transitional in character identity = )

I do agree, in some cases sticking to the old designs is in some ways problematic. But I don't think this game's guilty of it in as many fronts as some would like to believe. Stuff like Samus jab needs to change, but things like Falcon's moveset can probably be left alone without changing it because it's not really required.

On that note, I'm taking a solid break from this thread, but this was an interesting read and its basic ideas correlated with mine so I figured I'd post a response. Take care, sir, you have my blessing for this post.

And yes, if Smash was health based Duck Hunt would be really good, and so forth. Regular fighters don't need kill moves although some characters can have some radically good moves/mixups that put them ahead of other characters, it's very different but in some ways identical!