Character Matchups & Strategies

[gallax]

wtf stealth. we all agreed on the numbers. you may think one or two is a little high or low, but you were there and you were like yeah i agree. so dont back out of what you SAID last night.

me and esam and stealth talked about these matchups last night. and this is what was determined.

and ussi, i dont understand how oyu cant understand it. on a scale of 1 to 10, ten being the hardest ever and 1 being the easiest ever while 5 is nuetral, what do you give this matchup? its a difficulty rating you noob.

 

[Stealth Raptor]

galax. calm down. imo some of the numbers are a little off but as said it is very arbitrary in that peoples opinions can vary greatly. it is my opinion, not fact. for example i would bump ness and peach up .5 or so cause they give me trouble, and i would knock mk down by about 1. this is my exerience. and if you hadnt noticed i was trying to explain your chart to people who werent understanding. hypocritical and non support indeed.

 

[gallax]

im sorry for the outburst. sorry ussi.

 

[Ussi]

I'm sorry for saying some things too :\

Anyways, I believe difficulty ratings are the wrong approach to take. You should put up the true match up numbers that way we know the match up. Not who is harder to fight than who. Just IMO.

 

[gallax]

ok. i will see what i can do with matchup numbers.

 

[!Boom!]

Lol you guys are all wrong. End.

 

[gallax]

btw i have been working on lucario for a while now. he is a vey difficult person to write up. im close to being done. need to talk about killing and edgeguarding.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

I just got 3rd at a tournament playing pika and DK. Such a good combo. CP would always be brinstar and DK. Beat Linguini, some bowser with DK (He went luigi when i went pika first round) and a few other people. Green ace is surprisingly good, he just needs character exp.

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

Double post cuz this is important.

Stop bashing galax for what he did, it's more than ANY of you are trying to do for the MU. Why would he generalize 9 people to 5.5 when they go from 5.1-5.7? He did it basically in order and everybody on the chat 2 nights ago agreed on it. If you guys want to make that chart over with MU numbers, which we HAVEN'T DISCUSSED yet, then fine. But, we are going to remake that chart on the characters we havne't done yet when we get to then. If you guys aren't going to do anything about it, don't say what gallax did is stupid, just suggest "Hey, i think MU numbers would make a little more sense" NOT "You should put matchup numbers." SUGGEST IT, STOP BASHING GALLAX, AND IF THERE IS AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF WHO WILL DO IT, HE MIGHT BE NICE ENOUGH TO CHANGE IT. Stop being *******s about it, appreciate it, or go **** yourselves

/rant.

 

[GreenAce]

Thanks for the complement esam. I was really impressed with your pika it's nice to know that i'm not the only non scrubby pikachu main in south Florida.

 

[MK26]

So that matchup chart is subjective, not objective?

And wouldn't it be easier to make the scale go from 1 to 9 (or 0 to 10) rather than 1 to 10? Five is exactly between 1 and 9, and you cover every number with a single digit.

The chart seems so confusing because it's...different. What would a 4.4 on your scale be in the regular system with 70-30 being large adv etc

 

[K 2]

The numbers themselves don't mean anything. It only shows the RELATIVE difficulty of the matchup.

I like this matchup chart since its more specific. Most matchup charts have a few 70:30/65:35's and a butt load of 60:40's or 50:50's. I don't like seeing half the cast listed as 60:40, since I have no way of knowing which matchups are slightly more difficult or not, since there is no way 12 different matchups can have the same exact difficulty.

 

[gallax]

im going to make another chart too so that it will contain matchup ratios. that way mostly everyone can be satisfied.

 

[Stealth Raptor]

The numbers themselves don't mean anything. It only shows the RELATIVE difficulty of the matchup.

I like this matchup chart since its more specific. Most matchup charts have a few 70:30/65:35's and a butt load of 60:40's or 50:50's. I don't like seeing half the cast listed as 60:40, since I have no way of knowing which matchups are slightly more difficult or not, since there is no way 12 different matchups can have the same exact difficulty.

K 2 hit the nail dead on the head.

 

[Coffee™]

I like this matchup chart since its more specific. Most matchup charts have a few 70:30/65:35's and a butt load of 60:40's or 50:50's. I don't like seeing half the cast listed as 60:40, since I have no way of knowing which matchups are slightly more difficult or not, since there is no way 12 different matchups can have the same exact difficulty.

In the end a matchup number is just a "rough" number to generalize the difficulty of a match and the actually summary is whats really important.

I don't think this matchup chart really works because it's confusing, especially to members from other boards. I recently came and looked at it and I had to search through this thread to understand what the numbers meant and I'm sure people from other boards have had to do the same.

It's probably in the communities best interest to just go with the majority on this one and put normal matchup numbers or just add another chart with them to the first post.

 

[Zylar]

In the end a matchup number is just a "rough" number to generalize the difficulty of a match and the actually summary is whats really important.

I don't think this matchup chart really works because it's confusing, especially to members from other boards. I recently came and looked at it and I had to search through this thread to understand what the numbers meant and I'm sure people from other boards have had to do the same.

It's probably in the communities best interest to just go with the majority on this one and put normal matchup numbers or just add another chart with them to the first post.

These charts will be the most useful to those who've never played a good (*insert character here*) mainer.

Besides, every person, because of their own style, will deal with the opponent differently, along with every opponent dealing with the person differently. So this chart is truly a reference so that you know relative difficulty. (The ratio way of doing things is the same, but seemingly more restrictive, since everyone likes to round it out to the nearest 5.) So because each person will put a different number or ratio you're asking for a very difficult thing when you expect "the actual summary". It'll take years, to be close to the actual summary..
Besides wouldn't the less restrictive way get a more accurate picture of the "actual" summary? The ratio method with rounding gives us 20 possible outcomes, where as the decimal method gives us 100 possible outcomes.
Or maybe I've misunderstood...

But honestly the numbers aren't that hard to understand if you just look at the key that is inside the chart. With color and everything.
My old high school history teacher (lol, not my math teacher :D) always taught us to look at the title and keys of a chart/graph before trying to interpret the graph.
Fail to those who cannot to that. Besides if you want to "convert" it to a ratio, just think of it out of 100. So the marth ratio in number is 8.2, or 82:100, 85:100 if it is to look nice by rounding up. To me, its not even close to confusing, but that's just me...

Yes, I believe Galax is making another one with the ratios as a second chart. Feels kinda redundant though...

 

[Tagxy]

Yeah....that 35:65 , 55:45 system was pretty terrible. I cant believe that became so popular. MK26 brings up a good point though, haha.

 

[J4pu]

would anybody mind giving me a rough estimate for the Pikachu vs IC match-up?

 

[Coffee™]

These charts will be the most useful to those who've never played a good (*insert character here*) mainer.

Besides, every person, because of their own style, will deal with the opponent differently, along with every opponent dealing with the person differently. So this chart is truly a reference so that you know relative difficulty. (The ratio way of doing things is the same, but seemingly more restrictive, since everyone likes to round it out to the nearest 5.) So because each person will put a different number or ratio you're asking for a very difficult thing when you expect "the actual summary". It'll take years, to be close to the actual summary..
Besides wouldn't the less restrictive way get a more accurate picture of the "actual" summary? The ratio method with rounding gives us 20 possible outcomes, where as the decimal method gives us 100 possible outcomes.
Or maybe I've misunderstood...

But honestly the numbers aren't that hard to understand if you just look at the key that is inside the chart. With color and everything.
My old high school history teacher (lol, not my math teacher :D) always taught us to look at the title and keys of a chart/graph before trying to interpret the graph.
Fail to those who cannot to that. Besides if you want to "convert" it to a ratio, just think of it out of 100. So the marth ratio in number is 8.2, or 82:100, 85:100 if it is to look nice by rounding up. To me, its not even close to confusing, but that's just me...

Yes, I believe Galax is making another one with the ratios as a second chart. Feels kinda redundant though...

Don't get me wrong I understand the chart completely. Im just saying people who simply pass through the boards will see the chart and wonder how it actually compares to the MU ratios they know better. Look at the example of Marth you gave. 8.2 / 82:100 / 85:100 are all nice numbers to note when you are simply rating difficulty for Pikachu but what kind of MU ratio is that? 80 / 20 in marths favor? 85 / 15? You see where I'm coming from?

 

[J4pu]

i thought 8.2 would mean 18:82 match-up not in pikachu's favor.
seemed straightforward enough.

 

[Zylar]

i thought 8.2 would mean 18:82 match-up not in pikachu's favor.
seemed straightforward enough.

Don't get me wrong I understand the chart completely. Im just saying people who simply pass through the boards will see the chart and wonder how it actually compares to the MU ratios they know better. Look at the example of Marth you gave. 8.2 / 82:100 / 85:100 are all nice numbers to note when you are simply rating difficulty for Pikachu but what kind of MU ratio is that? 80 / 20 in marths favor? 85 / 15? You see where I'm coming from?

Fail on my part. I meant 82 / 18. I meant to say take it out of one hundred, not divide it by one hundred. Not only that I failed to round to the correct way. If you're going to round up 82 / 18, make it 80 / 20.

If people really wanted to know, they'd do the same thing you did.

But this way of doing things itself seems reasonable and simple enough to understand. Even if you're passing through.

 

[thespymachine]

Good **** ESAM.

 

[KuroKitt10]

I love the new image Galax =D It's super easy to quickly get an idea of Pikachu's match-ups at a glance now =)

Though, I do have to say, that yellow background is terrible. It makes it hard to see the more yellow shades for the rating numbers.

What do you think about putting some cute background image of Pikachu in instead of just a yellow pallet? Something that wont match the yellows of the number colors as much.

Meow.

 

[KuroKitt10]

Sorry for the double post, but I hadn't read the previous discussion about the 0-10 numbers.

Personally, I think this is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better way of rating match-ups. In all honestly, the xx:xx system was just ******** and unclear. I could never figure out if 40:60 was in the characters favor, or in their opponents favor. This method is much cleaner, and much easier to understand. Higher number means bigger disadvantage... super simple.

Also, I'd like to note that not all of the other boards are using that dumb xx:xx system, there are a few others (such as the Ice Climbers boards) which use a number range system like this.

Meow!

 

[KayLo!]

I was going to say that I wasn't a fan of the new system (just the numbering part -- the summaries done so far are crazy good), but then I took a look at the other character boards' matchup threads..... and ours is superior by far.

I prefer matchup numbers, but in the end the numbers don't mean much. It's the write-ups that really make the thread, and between community input and Gallax's additional editing, ours are ridiculously good.

Let's just get this **** done one way or another, yeah?

 

[Ussi]

I still have to say match up numbers make more sense to me (My previous dispute was just it wasn't making sense to me to have something different from every other board) :\ However, I never am concerned with numbers, I'm concerned with how to win.

 

[iSpiN]

Lol @ G+W

But how does Char/Ivy both 4.6 and Squirtle 5.5 = 4.7? I'm guessing the stamina?

Oh yes, Nice chart btw *saved*

 

[[FBC] ESAM]

its only 1 stock out of 3. Also, you still die fairly early so its a relatively short stock.

 

[iSpiN]

its only 1 stock out of 3. Also, you still die fairly early so its a relatively short stock.

Ah, that is true.

PT would do better w/o imo. A smarter PT though would start with Squirtle, try to switch to Ivy, let Ivy die, then go to Charizard. So by the last stock you will have Squirtle again.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Stealth Raptor]

that is what any good PT would do agaisnt a pika.

 

[babybaby 12 (banned 3x)]

All right! Red(one of my favorite characters) is being discussed! :D

I'm still using the old system, the new one is too confusing.

I think Red vs Pikachu is even.

 

[K 2]

Honestly guys, the matchup ratio/numbers doesn't really mean anything. Yeah, A matchup might be 60:40 in your opponent's favor...so what? how does that help you win? The thing that REALLY matters is the summary on HOW TO FIGHT the other character, not some random number. Fortuantly, we got one of the best MU summary writers on smashboards.

 

[iSpiN]

Just so I understand how I'm reading is this regular matchup numbers only replaced with decimals?

Ex. MK 7.8 Decimal Form; 78-22 MK: Pika

I hope I'm catching on, lol


Also, the PT (Red) matchup really doesn't matter as of now cause no one uses PT competitively.

 

[Stealth Raptor]

Just so I understand how I'm reading is this regular matchup numbers only replaced with decimals?

Ex. MK 7.8 Decimal Form; 78-22 MK: Pika

I hope I'm catching on, lol


Also, the PT (Red) matchup really doesn't matter as of now cause no one uses PT competitively.

lol this is the exact form that we are saying is not true. galax you may want to take it down as it is confusing WAY too many people. it is a relative difficulty scale independant of matchup numbers. this rates the hardness of a matchup whearas a matchup number gives the idea who would win more between 2 equal players.

 

[gallax]

trust me. im working on it. im almost done with lucario. he is by far the hardest one i have EVER written a guide for. im on my 3rd rewrite.

i will work on the matchup chart here in a bit that will explain it and then create a new one in the form XX:XX so that people will be able to look at a more popular form.

 

[babybaby 12 (banned 3x)]

That's not true, iSpin, people do use Red competitively. my brother's friend mains Red and he's really good at him. He whooped me when I was Marth

 

[Stealth Raptor]

babybaby is right people do. we have a pretty beast one in kansas. a lot of the top pt players though have another main.

 

[gallax]

i love watching charizard infinite ness/lucas. its so liberating. idk why though.

 

[babybaby 12 (banned 3x)]

Red is an awesome character with infinite potential

I love watching Squirtle beat the crap out of Snake, King Dedede, and every other character that I hate.

I also love watching Ivysaur use Razor Leaf on Edgehoggers and then recovering, thus leaving the opponent falling to his/her doom.

And I love watching Charizard Edgeguard other people after he just Chaingrabbed them off the stage.

 

[supermario27mx]

Typh and BoA have some beast PT's here in So Cal. MSKing is also decent.

EDIT: nice chart btw.