Character Competitive Impressions

[Sinister Slush]

Sorry if this is a dumb question but I haven't been keeping updated....

Results? What was top 8 for each?

I'm not 100% sure outside of top 4 but it was something like
M2K diddy
Nick Riddle ZSS
Manny Sonic
Xaltis rosalina/Peach
Player 1 Diddy/Villager
Myran Olimar
LeoHeart Diddy
Chozox Samus

 

[spiderfreak1011]

I think Diddy is the best, not overpowered but definitely centralizing. Most forgiving risk/reward for sure. Pocket Diddys do not work unless you're already a good player though. He is definitely beatable... Zero winning with Diddy doesn't prove anything really, Zero wins tournaments regardless. There's a reason why late-tournament Diddy dittos are uncommon... most get eliminated! Eliminated by better players, who use whatever character they want.

I think Olimar and Luigi have a positive MU against Diddy, and characters with multiple mid-air jumps/high jumps (Shulk) should be explored more too.

He could get a reverse Shulk treatment (-1-3% on most moves) and still be fantastic

Just too much damage for a speedster and a few too many kill moves. And uair needs to decide whether it wants to be a damage racker or a stock closer.

I do like how most stream viewers last night were impressed by Zero's Diddy play, I think that's a good sign. He goes on the aggressive and is basically untouchable. God bless Nairo for taking 2(?) games off him.

As much as i'd love for Shulk to be a counter to whos considered top tier (given he's my main), even with high jumps, Shulk's laggy attacks aren't the best for dealing with Diddy. Not to mention, he's not good at dealing with pressure and can easily be shut down by the banana. : \ Unless the top Shulk mains start heavily incorporating techs like Monado Arte Reversal or Monado Arte Canceling, or dare i say, perfect pivots with Speed Shulk, i don't see high level players with him holding a candle to a high level Diddy like Zero.

Hey guys can we stop calling Diddy and the crew "top tiers"? There isn't a tier list yet and for all we know who you mean by top tier is different than what someone else means top tier. Can we call them something else?

Beserker01 (i think that's their name) told me that typically he/she goes by 3 tiers:

S (Can solo through a tourney)
A (are good among the roster, but might need you to have another main to deal with said characters bad MU's)
B (not viable)

 

[Smog Frog]

can we call them the stand outs? thats basically what they are

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Hey guys can we stop calling Diddy and the crew "top tiers"? There isn't a tier list yet and for all we know who you mean by top tier is different than what someone else means top tier. Can we call them something else?



I think Sonic is the devil but I will always encourage people to play Sanic if that is who they enjoy

I always used the term supposed top tiers since nothing is concreate.

 

[meleebrawler]

People who play "top tiers" for being "top tiers" play for money.

People who play the characters they actually like to use at real tournies play FOR GLORY (for realsies).

Face it, if you win a tourney with a "top tier" you may get prizes and some recognition for skill,
but the majority of the fanbase will treat you with indifference at best, or revile you for your selection at worst.

I mean look at us, do we sound at all happy for ZeRo and his awesome Diddy?
No, in fact some of us are just straight up worried about the turnout of this game's competitiveness.
Now compare that attitude to people's reactions about that Samus player. MUCH more positive,
and I'm willing to bet that people who hear of those exploits are more willing to track them
down and watch them to see how such a character can perform. Do you feel the same way
when watching a Diddy fight? Probably not, because he is played and thus seen a lot,
so you learn a lot less from watching him than others after a certain point.

So what if that Samus was an isolated case and she never places well again for a long
time. She'll still be talked about for longer than others and more people will be ultimately
interested as a result.

But still, like @NotLiquid says, don't be ashamed for using a character you like that gets a lot
of representation. It's your game and you can play it how you like.

 

[Conda]

can we call them the stand outs? thats basically what they are

We can call them top tiers and you can read that as "stand outs" if you like.

Check out the clashtournaments stream VOD btw guys, if you haven't seen it yet.

 

[Berserker.]

Beserker01 (i think that's their name) told me that typically he/she goes by 3 tiers:

S (Can solo through a tourney)
A (are good among the roster, but might need you to have another main to deal with said characters bad MU's)
B (not viable)

I might have been a bit too blunt with B but I couldn't think of anything else that sounds more positive than "Not viable"

 

[Zelder]

The Smash community has some serious problems with hyperbole. I understand perfectly why, Fox/Falco in Melee and Meta Knight in Brawl has set the precedent of only having a few competitive options, but I really don't think it's as warranted for Smash 4.

 

[Shaya]

Semantic nit-picking doesn't get us anywhere.
top tiers are characters who are winning well and reliably (or in some cases a bit of dat theory craft).

The meta right now can and will be interpreted.

Top Tier, High Tier, Upper Half, Bottom Half and -maybe- bottom is generally how I'm thinking, but I don't think anyone really stands out in that area enough, especially if they haven't seen any tournament play plus are a new character. Beyond top and maybe high tier, character capabilities/power levels seem to be roughly similar a lot of the time.

 

[meleebrawler]

I might have been a bit too blunt with B but I couldn't think of anything else that sounds more positive than "Not viable"

"Not viable" implies that those characters can't win against other higher placed characters no matter
how hard they try. It would probably be nicer to say "these characters are hard to consistently play and do well with,
but not impossible if you put in the time".

 

[Chuva]

i am sad to confess i have committed the sin of maining =(

is it too late to switch? i started maining him 4 weeks ago.

As much as I hate playing against one you should play whoever you're comfortable and have fun with. It's just like how I feel bad for the dedicated Lucario mains who enjoy the character (be it gameplay or character design) only to put up with a lot of vitriol from people because of one lame mechanic.

After all, I play Rosalina, who isn't exactly a fun character to play against either.

 

[Zelder]

Like, I just think that if you really loved Smash 4, and was interested in seeing it develop competitively, you'd never tell someone to drop their character for a high tier hero. In a developed meta game, years down the line? Yeah, that's good advice. Doing it now, in the salad days of Smash 4? That's pretty bad. We'll never see anything new if new/curious players check out this thread, and get a resounding chorus of "lol only play Diddy/Shiek/Sonic".

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Like, I just think that if you really loved Smash 4, and was interested in seeing it develop competitively, you'd never tell someone to drop their character for a high tier hero. In a developed meta game, years down the line? Yeah, that's good advice. Doing it now, in the salad days of Smash 4? That's pretty bad. We'll never see anything new if new/curious players check out this thread, and get a resounding chorus of "lol only play Diddy/Shiek/Sonic".

Thank you so much. T>T i love you.

 

[Conda]

Like, I just think that if you really loved Smash 4, and was interested in seeing it develop competitively, you'd never tell someone to drop their character for a high tier hero. In a developed meta game, years down the line? Yeah, that's good advice. Doing it now, in the salad days of Smash 4? That's pretty bad. We'll never see anything new if new/curious players check out this thread, and get a resounding chorus of "lol only play Diddy/Shiek/Sonic".

Not sure where you're getting that vibe. This is not an advocacy group, we are discussing the metagame and characters as they are currently, and interpreting clues into the future. Nobody is saying "lol just play sheik/diddy/sonic", we're saying they're likely much better than the other characters as they are dominating and, if your character has a bad matchup against them, you'll have a hard time if your goal is to win tournaments.

I understand you may prefer the above paragraph be lighter and more hopeful and encouraging, but it's not. I do write helpful guides and record helpful commentary for the Smash community on my youtube channel, but this thread is not the place for that. There's always a need for hard discussion on what's going on in the metagame, and for people to discuss possible counters to what's currently dominant.

We are not going to sugar coat things, as that would actually be destructive to player knowledge (at least to players reading this thread) and would distort the reality of what's happening in the NA smash competitive community. Talking about it honestly is important, so that's what we're doing. I think it's going well.

Apologies if you don't find it as comfortable a discussion to parttake in, and I understand that. But you can't condition a community to believe things just for the sake of the good feelings associated with it. Many of us enjoy trying to figure out answers to what is going on currently. Cheerleading others isn't the way most of us here seem to do that, which is a good thing. We're trying to increase the knowledge readers of this thread have of the game, not comfort them with flimsy and unhelpful statements of "go get-em!"

I mean, "Go Get-Em!" for sure, but Go Get-Em with proper knowledge about the strong characters, strategies, and players out there now.

I would never say "Keep working on Zelda, I'm sure you'll win tournaments" because that's not helpful. I have a responsibility to not mislead people no matter how good it would make them feel.

I WOULD, however, say "Keep working on Zelda, if you enjoy playing as her and don't mind not being able to win tournaments. Your fun matters most " because that's 100% TRUE. But this thread is not about personal enjoyment, it's about character impressions and the metagame. We mix fun with knowledge and study. Fun times.

 

[meleebrawler]

To say nothing of the potential (but unlikely) threat of patches.

 

[HeroMystic]

Not sure where you're getting that vibe.

You must've skipped the past two pages.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Not sure where you're getting that vibe. This is not an advocacy group, we are discussing the metagame and characters as they are currently, and interpreting clues into the future. Nobody is saying "lol just play sheik/diddy/sonic", we're saying they're likely much better than the other characters as they are dominating and, if your character has a bad matchup against them, you'll have a hard time if your goal is to win tournaments.

I understand you may prefer the above paragraph be lighter and more hopeful and encouraging, but it's not. I do write helpful guides and record helpful commentary for the Smash community on my youtube channel, but this thread is not the place for that. There's always a need for hard discussion on what's going on in the metagame, and for people to discuss possible counters to what's currently dominant.

We are not going to sugar coat things, as that would actually be destructive to player knowledge (at least to players reading this thread) and would distort the reality of what's happening in the NA smash competitive community. Talking about it honestly is important, so that's what we're doing. I think it's going well.

Apologies if you don't find it as comfortable a discussion to parttake in, and I understand that. But you can't condition a community to believe things just for the sake of the good feelings associated with it. Many of us enjoy trying to figure out answers to what is going on currently. Cheerleading others isn't the way most of us here seem to do that, which is a good thing. We're trying to increase the knowledge readers of this thread have of the game, not comfort them with flimsy and unhelpful statements of "go get-em!"

I mean, "Go Get-Em!" for sure, but Go Get-Em with proper knowledge about the strong characters, strategies, and players out there now.

but that was not persey the message that was being given across the last 2 pages.

all it was is "diddy so goddly zero was goddly what characters can handel zeros diddy?" and legit no answers spawn from it because it was zero the player that was brilliant. "pick a top tier kidz cuz we have some indefinite proof that a top tier is only what can handle zeros diddy" even though he was plowing through top tiers left and right. it was a meaningless post from the get go. no dissrespect conda

 

[Nobie]

I just hope people are not trying to use "THIS IS THE COLD HARD TRUTH" as a platform for letting their fears of a stagnant metagame run rampant.

 

[Conda]

You must've skipped the past two pages.

The past two pages consist of lengthy and detailed posts about people's impressions on Diddy, Sonic, Samus, and the role speed plays in the current metagame. It is not a reducible to "play sheik/diddy/sonic lol", that insults the thread and the actual discussions we've all been having together.

This is not a complaint thread - those who feel that our discussions on the metagame aren't to their liking have to take that up with themselves. We're talking about what's happening at tournaments. We shouldn't have to stop ourselves from talking about things pertaining to those tournaments. This thread would be useless if we did, and I certainly wouldn't parttake.

but that was not persey the message that was being given across the last 2 pages.

all it was is "diddy so goddly zero was goddly what characters can handel zeros diddy?" and legit no answers spawn from it because it was zero the player that was brilliant. "pick a top tier kidz cuz we have some indefinite proof that a top tier is only what can handle zeros diddy" even though he was plowing through top tiers left and right. it was a meaningless post from the get go. no dissrespect conda

Why should anyone have to word things in a way to convey a certain 'message'? So what if people think Diddy is good and voice that thought here. You can say your own impressions, but you can't blame anyone from talking about things to the point that you feel "the discussion doesn't have the energy or message I'd prefer it to have."

We've spoken about so much in the past two pages - your reduction of it to 'things you disliked about our 'message'' isn't our responsibility. We all have different voices. @ Shaya is abrupt and harsh, I'm rambly, @ Emblem Lord is concise and harsh, etc. We've all been saying a bunch of different thigns on a few different topics pertaining to the tournaments, and also to character selection.

We are players, commentators, and spectators talking about Smash. We are not controlling anyone's perspective of the game and shouldn't be held responsible for talking about two awesome tournaments that just happened. Diddy did well, we'll talk about that. If we didn't, this thread would be irrelevant and off-mark.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

The past two pages consist of lengthy and detailed posts about people's impressions on Diddy, Sonic, Samus, and the role speed plays in the current metagame. It is not a reducible to "play sheik/diddy/sonic lol", that insults the thread and the actual discussions we've all been having together.

This is not a complaint thread - those who feel that our discussions on the metagame aren't to their liking have to take that up with themselves. We're talking about what's happening at tournaments. We shouldn't have to stop ourselves from talking about things pertaining to those tournaments. This thread would be useless if we did, and I certainly wouldn't parttake.

but From the likes ness it more seem like it should belong to the "Competitve Player impressions thread" since its zero and m2k are extreamly dominant player regardless of what characters they use.
Once again zero used to pull the same prefformances with bowser back til he quit him.

 

[Conda]

but From the likes ness it more seem like it should belong to the "Competitve Player impressions thread" since its zero and m2k are extreamly dominant player regardless of what characters they use.
Once again zero used to pull the same prefformances with bowser back til he quit him.

This is a discussion thread. Just because you have an idea of what is correct doesn't mean it is, and doesn't mean others can't disagree. Some people don't believe their performance is 100% independent of what characters they use, and they'll talk about that. Some people do believe its 100% independent of what characters they use, and they'll talk about that.

Understand that ZeRo and M2K themselves would admit that Diddy helps them win. That's why they use him, and that's why they admit to using him. He HELPS them win - he is not THE cause, but he helps them perform very consistently and deal with counter strategies by other great players. Those who say "naw, Diddy's not that powerful, they're just awesome. They'd win with anyone." is actually incorrect and harmfully misleading to readers here.

The argument that he'd do as good with Bowser is one that people could also talk about, and one that you'd likely be wrong about. But that's good, because getting to the correct and informed 'impression' of what's going on in the metagame is the goal of this thread. You can't criticise people for not conveying the specific 'message' you want them to convey - we're busy talking about tournament results and where the metagame is moving.

@ Shaya knows how important it is to dispel misinformation. This thread is very keen on dispelling misinformation and reductive discussion. It's probably best to discuss things intelligently if you have a point you think is correct. But do not try to goad others into abiding by your requirements for what sort of 'message' their posts should have.

Diddy, Sheik, Sonic, Zss, etc - they're all very relevant and we have a lot of facts to go on in our discussions about them, and how to deal with them. Insisting that we make you and others feel better somehow regarding how you play competitively is strange and not anyone's job here.
I'm a super nice guy and my goal w/ my commentary and guides is to help players out and make them feel welcome. But interrupting a discussion to criticize a legitimately interesting discussion about two huge tournaments that just happened isn't too cool a thing to do.

 

[mimgrim]

That's why I say you need to continue the search. Watch lots of videos of top level players
If any one of the 15 to 20 solid characters in this game have no synergy with you, then go ahead with your favourite character, work your *** off.

All the characters I connect best with are when customs are turned on or when Miis gets out of being forced to 1111 set-up and average size/weight because short fat 3232 Gunner Mii is absolutely awesome and is a mobile little ******. Which is why I play random currently.

 

[Shaya]

COMPLETELY UNORDERED hooray.
As time goes on and basic metas are set out for the 'lower half' characters, the harder it seems to differentiate them. Is sword fighter losing to everyone? Ganondorf and Zelda in Brawl legitimately lost to everyone, badly. While I'm pretty sure most of these characters aren't having fun against "top tiers" (no one is though, in truth) they aren't losing terribly in and around the middle point and lower. Even without a solid standing in singles, most characters have amazing abilities in doubles.
I think I'm officially not enthused by Yoshi at the moment. I'm starting to have a [brawl] g&w inkling, although he's winning a lot of this game's match ups easily he just doesn't seem to be performing anywhere by anyone. When a niche character (by some standards) like Olimar is showing up numerously right now with success, for me Yoshi should be kept near the not over or under rated position until further notice.
I currently don't think Sonic is anything but stream-killing and frustrating. A lot of the top tier characters are breaking the standards of 'fair neutral' and 'fair advantageous and disadvantageous' state, Sonic is just a lot easier at taking things slow.
ESAM doing poorly these last two weekends bodes poorly on the outer opinions of the character. I think things are little two sided right now; everyone knows and feels they have to fear Pikachu because of ESAM and are putting lab and practice time into learning that match up. The character hasn't counter-developed with meta advancements when there's still only 1 tournament threat playing him. The way his animations go really hurt for close to shield hits but I think most characters do have an OoS option at the right spacings (ZSS jab won't hit pikachu in front of her but a little bit ahead she will).
ZSS looks great in the meta right now, she has guaranteed kill set ups and great tools. Any above ****** height character seems to lose to her tbh; her Sheik MU may be one of the best in the game but it's probably 50:50.

"Not viable" implies that those characters can't win against other higher placed characters no matter
how hard they try. It would probably be nicer to say "these characters are hard to consistently play and do well with,
but not impossible if you put in the time".

How you decide to take the term "not viable" isn't our fault. No matter how hard you try and have wishful thinking, 90% of people playing a bad character aren't going to win a tournament. Do we really need to tip toe around this ever-building "statistical fact"? Should people give up and not work on any character? If you're going to tournaments these issues answer themselves. You'll either be an extremely good smash player, overcoming tier gaps against likely a good portion of people, QUIT or expand your horizons (secondaries, new main, etc).
For as long as you aren't going to live tournaments or accounting for top level play, character viability does not matter to you enough to change your perspectives or aspirations for playing the game.

 

[deepseadiva]

I'm not 100% sure outside of top 4 but it was something like
M2K diddy
Nick Riddle ZSS
Manny Sonic
Xaltis rosalina/Peach
Player 1 Diddy/Villager
Myran Olimar
LeoHeart Diddy
Chozox Samus

I know this is basically like 2 days into the game's lifespan but that's promising!!

 

[Emblem Lord]

Let me just say something. As a leader of the Marth community I have a responsibility to be honest with my fellow Marth players and well, anyone and everyone that asks me for advice. The most common question I hear is, "Hey, EL can I win with Marth?" And I tell them straight hey listen if you can't beat MY Marth, then no. You have a long way to go and the road is long and arduous and even if you become the BEST Marth, you will probably still get bodied by Sonic or Diddy. You might do well, but you will most likely never win consistently.

I'm not trying to strip away their love for the character. People come to me for guidance. I'm not going to lead them astray with misinformation or false hope.

For me personally in Brawl I just wanted to be a strong Marth in my state and for the time I played I was considered the strongest Marth in the area. But for someone that wants to win and wants a character with alot of fun and interesting options thats strong, yeah I'm going to tell them to pick Zero Suit Samus or Sheik because those chars fit the bill.

If winning is your goal YOU PICK A TOP TIER

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Some people don't believe it's as independant of what characters they use, and they'll talk about that. Some people do, and they'll talk about that.

The argument that he'd do as good with Bowser is one that people could also talk about, and one that you'd likely be wrong about. But that's good, because getting to the correct and informed 'impression' of what's going on in the metagame is the goal of this thread. You can't criticise people for not conveying the specific 'message' you want them to convey - we're busy talking about tournament results and where the metagame is moving.

now that not what i was doing Conda and u know that. Talking about where the meta is going is all fine and dandy but thats was not not what set me off if you read the first reply i made in this. Iv always been fine with the play a top tier. But Like i was saying is that some people simply are not compatible with the top tiers and play worse. This is a true thing Look at ryuga. now would u advise him from making possile strides and impacts in the meta several ikes are making of course you would not conda because i know your not like that. But some folks here were advising that and thats my problem. if i play Fatties who on the top tier spectrum would u recomend? I Play significantly worse with shiek And iv spent my first 2 months of the game with her before i droped her.
All i was trying to desplay was Player Prefference and Time and commintment make the difference in prefformance. the whole pick a top tier advise for me never worked. And im happy developing the meta for samus, pit, and dk.
Its not this whole butt hurt "truth to much for me" thing ur making it out to be. ( thats just how i feel ur trying to make it across as im very well aware this may not be your intent)
And I swear if you honestly think anybody in this thread EVER gave the "go git em" advise without at least trying to explain the weakness or what that character does positivly.
...Really?

*edit* i guess everybody has to be the bad guy at some point lol
its okay if you dont agree with me conda and if you feel im wanting to spread some mis information witch if u honeslty think im doing well i feel like i just wasted 200+ pages on here, pick a top tier is you wana win deal with it, i have what i cant stand is people devaluing peoples work with other characters witch set me off. if you think we should start doing soo (witch i dont think u do, unless i greatly missinterpreted u) ill just i dunno go?

 

[Conda]

Great posts @ Shaya and @ Emblem Lord

Again guys, none of these posts are meant to be disheartening. If you're a tournament atendee, then you will try to get SO DARN GOOD with Zelda and Kirby and figure out how to deal with people at tournaments. People. Other people who play the game.

It's a real world scenario, playing in tournaments. This isn't hypothetical discussion - we're all discussion what's going on in Smash 4's metagame. It's not our jobs, or your job, to make certain characters seem dangerous by writing about it here. It's your job to show us they're dangerous. THEN we'll talk about it.

Keep on Smashing!

now that not what i was doing Conda and u know that. Talking about where the meta is going is all fine and dandy but thats was not not what set me off if you read the first reply i made in this. Iv always been fine with the play a top tier. But Like i was saying is that some people simply are not compatible with the top tiers and play worse. This is a true thing Look at ryuga. now would u advise him from making possile strides and impacts in the meta several ikes are making of course you would not conda because i know your not like that. But some folks here were advising that and thats my problem. if i play Fatties who on the top tier spectrum would u recomend? I Play significantly worse with shiek And iv spent my first 2 months of the game with her before i droped her.
All i was trying to desplay was Player Prefference and Time and commintment make the difference in prefformance. the whole pick a top tier advise for me never worked. And im happy developing the meta for samus, pit, and dk.
Its not this whole butt hurt "truth to much for me" thing ur making it out to be. ( thats just how i feel ur trying to make it across as im very well aware this may not be your intent)
And I swear if you honestly think anybody in this thread EVER gave the "go git em" advise without at least trying to explain the weakness or what that character does positivly.
...Really?

I didn't design the game. I'd balance things out if I could man. I know it sucks to not 'jive' with the top tiers, but try your best to find someone who syncs with you. Again, you can't blame us for our 'message' seeming harsh to you. We can't provide answers for you, but we are also not to blame.

I fully understand your point dude. We're very sorry that there' may not be a decent chance a heavy tier character won't get you far in tournaments unless you're super good like Will. But this isn't our fault. That's how it is for now. I like heavies a lot too because I have balls for dexterity, but it's not my job to make others feel responsible if I feel bad about it.

Should we be saying "Charizard is your guy, he can beat Diddy." - we don't know this! It might be true, but we likely don't think it is and tournaments show us it's likely not true. Become as good as him as Will is with DK, and see how it works out! It's likely choosing a more secure and logically more competitively viable character would work out better if your 100% goal is to win consistently. But if your goal is to advance Charizard's metagame, then DO THAT INSTEAD! :D

It's not our responsibility to manage your expectations of characters.

No one is saying "EVERYONE SHOULD PLAY TOP TIERS LOL!" We're saying that if you're an average competitive player, it's likely you aren't good enough to make specialized characters with less options and more counters (aka weaker characters) 'work' as well in tournaments. It sucks but I am not powerful enough to change Smash 4's metagame.

 

[ChronoPenguin]

This will always be an issue in Smash. Representation for inherently weaker characters will always be less and as a result you will either see the handful of excellent users of the characters placing or the rest of the player base failing to achieve anything meaningful. Heck, I'll bring up villager for a Smash 4 example. Several players have posted here saying that they feel Villager is really good, possibly top 15 (which I don't agree with BTW). There are a few Villager mains who are placing (zeezee is the main one) but few players are opting to choose Villager over others. How many of these wins are from player superiority or from matchup inexperience? Probably a little of both. What ends up happening is you have 90% of the best players using 10 or fewer characters that are the best, 8% using the other decent ones, and 2% using those that are just ineffective.

That's really fine for later in the game when people have played those characters for a good period of time, and grew out of them.
At this stage in the game? It's detrimental. Now not to force anyone to play **** because it's not being played simply that they shouldn't abandon ship because it isn't being played.
For example Kirby in melee? A lot of people played Kirby throughout the years. Kirby wasn't unexplored, he was insufficient and that was not based entirely on theory but practice.

A lot of "X isn't viable" is ****ing theorycraft.
Which I can't excuse myself from because I think DHD is bootycheeks, despite not playing him and playing maybe what 15 DhD's and only 1 of which was offline to formulate that opinion on a practical level. The rest of that is theory, and while I don't have a problem voicing this opinion, I am fully aware that I can't dismiss any performance DHD gives, especially because I dont think much of him.

If anything the under represented characters performing should immediately conjure "**** X stepped up somewhere, is their some validity here? What did this character that I perceive to be better, fail to exploit that even allowed X to get this far? We should explore because we lacked practical evidence prior to." Instead of "Eh they low-tier everyone else was just unskilled".

I mean hell when DK wiped out everyone but Mario/Shulk at TCU, no one really went back to give DK his fair assessment. It was just "Well that's Will for ya".

Aint that a trick. We have good players doing well with characters we deem "not good" or "not good enough" and when they step up, they get their praise, but no one actually cares for wtf the character can do?

This isn't to say everyones viable right now. Because we're already starting to see that certain characters aren't holding up weight but that's because people are *playing them*. If they weren't playing them we wouldn't know.

 

[spiderfreak1011]

Let me just say something. As a leader of the Marth community I have a responsibility to be honest with my fellow Marth players and well, anyone and everyone that asks me for advice. The most common question I hear is, "Hey, EL can I win with Marth?" And I tell them straight hey listen if you can't beat MY Marth, then no. You have a long way to go and the road is long and arduous and even if you become the BEST Marth, you will probably still get bodied by Sonic or Diddy. You might do well, but you will most likely never win consistently.

I'm not trying to strip away their love for the character. People come to me for guidance. I'm not going to lead them astray with misinformation or false hope.

For me personally in Brawl I just wanted to be a strong Marth in my state and for the time I played I was considered the strongest Marth in the area. But for someone that wants to win and wants a character with alot of fun and interesting options thats strong, yeah I'm going to tell them to pick Zero Suit Samus or Sheik because those chars fit the bill.

If winning is your goal YOU PICK A TOP TIER

Totally agree with this (would love to fight you btw). If you wanna win with a certain character, all you can do is put in alot of work with them, know their limits and how they stand in certain Match ups and how you should deal with them, and prove to others if they are really viable/dangerous or not. That's all you can do, and it's what i aim to do with Shulk, despite his rank in the roster.

 

[Hippieslayer]

Latest tournament impressions: everything was a lot less interesting than if there had been customs on... but hey I hear customs would ruin tournaments because reasons. Hell, we all know there are no valid arguments against customs being on at all except laziness, amazing ampharos showed us this quite a while ago. Conclusion: people are stupid. Commandment: thou shallt not whine about diddy or sonic if thy aren't also actively supporting the implementation of customs

also Samus and Wii Fit trainer are ****y lame ass characters that can win some matches by playing defensively with their respective energy balls and utilizing their comfortability around the edge. With the threat of those charged projectiles they can sit back and watch their opponents approach patterns without needing to do much themselves allowing them to focus solely on reading; whereby they may occasionally manage to surprise their opponents with their other attacks, oh and samus has dat up-b

still, similar characters, both rely on gimmicks and their opponents lack of matchup knowledge, both get destroyed if they face a solid top tier played by a top tier player anyway, with wii fit trainer it takes even less than that

 

[HeroMystic]

The past two pages consist of lengthy and detailed posts about people's impressions on Diddy, Sonic, Samus, and the role speed plays in the current metagame. It is not a reducible to "play sheik/diddy/sonic lol", that insults the thread and the actual discussions we've all been having together.

This is not a complaint thread - those who feel that our discussions on the metagame aren't to their liking have to take that up with themselves. We're talking about what's happening at tournaments. We shouldn't have to stop ourselves from talking about things pertaining to those tournaments. This thread would be useless if we did, and I certainly wouldn't parttake.

Sounds like you've seriously ignored the past few pages that has not directly involved you. I suggest you go back and look at the argument on whether or not people should just play top tiers or not.

That said, I feel the confrontation is missing the point, but also unnecessary. Because while I agree the point of this thread is to talk about what's happening in tournaments, no one has been debating against that. The point of the post you originally quoted is characters that are currently not top tiers should still be played on the chance that their highest optimal playstyle could be as strong as a current top tier characters.

I've already said ages ago that regardless of what beliefs we have, there are going to be characters that are going to be limiting your skill. I know that as a fact with Mario in Brawl and I'm not optimistic at all for Smash 4 that this game won't be dominated by a select number of characters. So yes, if your goal is to win, you pick a top tier, no question.

However, I've never seen anyone debating this fact. So I'm not sure what this parade is all about.

 

[Emblem Lord]

Totally agree with this (would love to fight you btw). If you wanna win with a certain character, all you can do is put in alot of work with them, know their limits and how they stand in certain Match ups and how you should deal with them, and prove to others if they are really viable/dangerous or not. That's all you can do, and it's what i aim to do with Shulk, despite his rank in the roster.

Shulk can win, but honestly he is the hardest in the game to master imo. Like...everyone else is playing SF2..Shulk is playing Guilty Gear. Be ready to invest months and months of work. If you can handle that then by all means play Shulk.

 

[ChronoPenguin]

Shulk can win, but honestly he is the hardest in the game to master imo. Like...everyone else is playing SF2..Shulk is playing Guilty Gear. Be ready to invest months and months of work. If you can handle that then by all means play Shulk.

Given those qualifications I presume you have a Shulk in practice waiting to spring on us all.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

Great posts @ Shaya and @ Emblem Lord

Again guys, none of these posts are meant to be disheartening. If you're a tournament atendee, then you will try to get SO DARN GOOD with Zelda and Kirby and figure out how to deal with people at tournaments. People. Other people who play the game.

It's a real world scenario, playing in tournaments. This isn't hypothetical discussion - we're all discussion what's going on in Smash 4's metagame. It's not our jobs, or your job, to make certain characters seem dangerous by writing about it here. It's your job to show us they're dangerous. THEN we'll talk about it.

Keep on Smashing!




I didn't design the game. I'd balance things out if I could man. I know it sucks to not 'jive' with the top tiers, but try your best to find someone who syncs with you. Again, you can't blame us for our 'message' seeming harsh to you. We can't provide answers for you, but we are also not to blame.

I fully understand your point dude. We're very sorry that there' may not be a decent chance a heavy tier character won't get you far in tournaments unless you're super good like Will. But this isn't our fault. That's how it is for now. I like heavies a lot too because I have balls for dexterity, but it's not my job to make others feel responsible if I feel bad about it.

Should we be saying "Charizard is your guy, he can beat Diddy." - we don't know this! It might be true, but we likely don't think it is and tournaments show us it's likely not true. Become as good as him as Will is with DK, and see how it works out! It's likely choosing a more secure and logically more competitively viable character would work out better if your 100% goal is to win consistently. But if your goal is to advance Charizard's metagame, then DO THAT INSTEAD! :D

It's not our responsibility to manage your expectations of characters.

No one is saying "EVERYONE SHOULD PLAY TOP TIERS LOL!" We're saying that if you're an average competitive player, it's likely you aren't good enough to make specialized characters with less options and more counters (aka weaker characters) 'work' as well in tournaments. It sucks but I am not powerful enough to change Smash 4's metagame.

im sorry conda its just.. like you did not read my post.. i dunno.
or more like u responded to the first half off my post where i was simply delveoping my point and where it would seem like im upset about the play top tiers only thing.

 

[spiderfreak1011]

Shulk can win, but honestly he is the hardest in the game to master imo. Like...everyone else is playing SF2..Shulk is playing Guilty Gear. Be ready to invest months and months of work. If you can handle that then by all means play Shulk.

Really? I thought MM had the highest learning curve, and that Shulk was one of the chars. with the highest learning curves of the roster. Anyway don't worry, i've been playing him since the release of the 3DS version, trust me, i've invested many months into learning the Monado's power, and i'm not stopping anytime soon. : 3

 

[the king of murder]

lol I read the last 3 pages and the users who began the discussion werent even talking about if a low tier can win a big tournament. I think we all know that if you play solely to win, you have to pick the top tiers and nobody should be blamed for that.

However someone actually mocked a user for using a low tier, calling him a "machoist". That is kinda disrespectful for players who know their characters limitations and put effort into it regardeless, because of their passion or having fun in the competitive scene. It's like saying, "you are not right in the mind for using a low tier".

 

[Nu~]

Mega man's learning curve is high...until you completely change the way you normally play the game. Once you throw conventional smash play out the window, he works like a charm.
...no wonder...after playing him and pac-man (the only trap/setup archetype on the roster, much like joker in injustice), no one else on the roster feels right XD

 

[Conda]

The point of the post you originally quoted is characters that are currently not top tiers should still be played on the chance that their highest optimal playstyle could be as strong as a current top tier characters.

I've already said ages ago that regardless of what beliefs we have, there are going to be characters that are going to be limiting your skill. I know that as a fact with Mario in Brawl and I'm not optimistic at all for Smash 4 that this game won't be dominated by a select number of characters. So yes, if your goal is to win, you pick a top tier, no question.

However, I've never seen anyone debating this fact. So I'm not sure what this parade is all about.

Right, but it is not our responsibility to advocate others to use certain characters with the definite assertion that they'll have as much a chance at winning as a top tier. We aren't comfortable saying such things, which is a good thing.

Players can dedicate themselves to advancing a certain character's metagame. They can also dedicate themselves to winning. They may end up winning once they've developed a character's metagame far enough and gotten good enough at the game to make them work. That's great. But WILL that happen? We don't know, and we aren't going to turn the discussion into a comfort-fest just to make them feel like their main is a secure tournament-winning pick.


Nobody is saying people shouldn't bother playing anything other than top tiers. They're saying, if your prime goal is to win, then using top tier characters is how you do so consistently. We cannot apologize, that's how every competitive game works. We're not obnoxious enough to pretend Smash is different.

Yes, the 'top tier' place is still in contention, but that's not the issue anyone has. The issue is that people don't like the 'feeling' that top tiers provide a better chance of success for the majority of tournament competitors. You can't drag us into a discussion about that, though, because that's a topic for competitive multi-character/class games on a larger scale.

1) You can win as a less popular/effective character by being better than your opponent.

2) You can unlock the potential of a character and reveal that they're higher tier than we thought.

Those are two different things, though.

In the first instance (1), you are a player doing well with a suboptimal character. You'd likely do better with a character who has more options, more kill power, more safety, more evasiveness, more counter-strats, and more versatility. But you don't need to, since you do so well with your main.

In the second instance (2), you are a player who is taking a character people think isn't too good and going to the lab. You find ways to escape combos from high tier characters, you find attacks that out-prioritize with Sonic's spindash, you find mobility options that let you remain unpredictable, you find approaches that are safe on shield, you find ways to hit-confirm into a KO move, you find ways to trap landings, you find ways to get early KOs consistently, etc. Thus, you actually transform the character and evolve their metagame.


The second instance is VERY CRUCIAL right now, and what I advocate for. I see no point in encouraging people to play a character just because "you can do it! " I only see purpose in encouraging people to unlock the potential-potential of their character - to see if there's gold that will allow them to become a competitive threat. We aren't new to Smash, this is the third game with a serious competitive following - we can tell where potential lies. We just have to go to the lab and stop expecting others to tell us "yeah your main is good, you'll be able to win tournaments" just to make them feel alright.

ZeRo and M2K are so successful because they go to the lab, and they deemed Diddy to yield the most impressive results in the lab. That's their approach. Other players should follow and do the same thing with their main and see what they can find that will help them compete.

This is why people can tell Olimar/DK/Falcon/Fox/TLink/Wario/Luigi are likely very good and can MAYBE consistently do well in tournaments. But only IF their metagame continues developing and continues looking promising. If they keep coming up with answers against the currently dominating characters, then they may become more and more prominent and become top tiers themselves.

But if this doesn't happen, we are not to blame. Nobody is. We didn't design this thing.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

lol I read the last 3 pages and the users who began the discussion werent even talking about if a low tier can win a big tournament. I think we all know that if you play solely to win, you have to pick the top tiers and nobody should be blamed for that.

However someone actually mocked a user for using a low tier, calling him a "machoist". That is kinda disrespectful for players who know their characters limitations and put effort into it regardeless, because of their passion or having fun in the competitive scene. It's like saying, "you are not right in the mind for using a low tier".

Thats was the post that set me off thank you.

 

[Emblem Lord]

Given those qualifications I presume you have a Shulk in practice waiting to spring on us all.

I honestly thought about it since I like his options and how he feels, but I decided to take the path of least resistance and go Sheik.