- Mar 21, 2009
Kirby Jiggs shiek yes I totally agree. And I agree with your approach regarding tiers.So what characters we can agree on that are basically less viable? And potential low / bottom tier?
I’ll give some input in this:
: Mostly unchanged. Still great aerial game, but weak in everything else
: Ultimate addressed none of his weaknesses, even got nerfed I read
: Outclassed by anything that Incineroar can do, and Incineroar can do it better. He can still hold his own though much like in Smash 4, but again, weaknesses that are too easily to pass by.
: Was literally only good in Smash 64. Seems like a doomed character. It’s a shame.
: Got some new stuff but still too slow, easily punishable, can’t survive anything.
: Probably better than in 4, yet heavily underwhelming. Can get wins if the opponent doesn’t know the matchup. Which can make her appear better than she is.
: They took everything away from her what was good. Basically Brawl Sheik. Lowest of the lowest mid tier at this point I suspect.
A bottom up design method is helping us. If we can understand what makes a character bad, it will allow us to take two steps instead of one. Historically the bad characters tend to pool at the bottom and stay there for the duration
Of the lifecycle.
Also in general it’s a safe bet to assume that brawl/sm4sh characters that experienced the least changes are going to be the least prepared for the new mechanics. That’s just my opinion. It seems logical (but it is based on the assumption that the characters who were altered experienced changes that were a net positive)