Official Competitive Character Impressions 2.0

[Arthur97]

Or if you really screw up against Soaring Slash, then you could even get KO'd while he lives.

 

[KirbySquad101]

ESAM is an extremely talented player, so I don't want to suggest I know better, but I'm not sure if I'm gelling with his analysis on Cloud. He doesn't have 6-7 hit strings like Mario, Pika, or G&W, but a simple 2 hit FAir/BAir to Cross Slash or even a 3-UAir string from him nets about as much damage as most practical combos in the game (which I honestly think is saying a lot considering he's mainly a sword character). I don't even think his recovery is quite as awful as people suggest because of how frequently he's getting Limit along with being able to mix-up his recoveries with Cross Slash hover shenanigans.

If we're talking issues with Cloud, it's that the character is essentially a 3-button-neutral (which is the one thing I agree with ESAM on) and tha for as good as his shield pressure is, he doesn't have any good ways of profiting off of it which is why shielding/parrying is considered such an effective strategy against him (something that's practically a pipe dream to do online which is a major part of Dabuz and Maister's grievances with Wi-Fi Cloud).

 

[Das Koopa]

The weirdest take on his tier list for me is Ike over Greninja

 

[SwagGuy99]

The weirdest take on his tier list for me is Ike over Greninja

I think he has Greninja too low as well. It's not that I can't justify Ike being that high, it's more that it's hard to justify Greninja being that low. I think his Falcon placement is the thing I personally disagree with the most there as I still think even with IDJ combos and even with his 8.0 buffs, I don't think it changed the fact that his biggest weaknesses (disadvantage and recovery) are still much more extreme and overall exploitable than the other characters ESAM has near him on the tier list (with the potential exceptions of Fox and Bowser who make up for it with their more absurd strengths overall and in the case of Bowser, better survivability).

 

[Ziodyne 21]

I say that the main reason of the mass exodus of Cloud players(i.e just nearly everyone and their great uncle in competitve scene) in the first place, any why he has not become too much popular even after his buffs. Is that when you play Cloud need to you actullay think and plan in neutral . Unlike his SSB4 self where you could autopilot with nairs in netural and up-air strings in advantage in SSB4 and that was perfectly viable even in top-level play.

As far as ESAM's Luigi placement. I think its due to that he never had a good opinion on Luigi in ultiamte in the first place. I think he even palced him like near low or bottom in some of his past lists

 

[SwagGuy99]

I say that the main reason of the mass exodus of Cloud players(i.e just nearly everyone and their great uncle in competitve scene) in the first place, any why he has not become too much popular even after his buffs. Is that when you play Cloud need to you actullay think and plan in neutral . Unlike his SSB4 self where you could autopilot with nairs in netural and up-air strings in advantage in SSB4 and that was perfectly viable even in top-level play.

As far as ESAM's Luigi placement. I think its due to that he never had a good opinion on Luigi in ultiamte in the first place. I think he even palced him like near low or bottom in some of his past lists

Yeah, his last two tier lists he actually placed him pretty close to high tier which was surprising. This time he dropped him back down again, and you're right, he has had him as low as bottom 5 in the past I'm pretty sure. Overall, his opinion of the character during Ultimate's lifespan has been somewhat negative, both in terms of where he has Luigi on the tier list and how he views Luigi's matchup with Pikachu, and I personally think he underrates the character in both areas.

 

[Lacrimosa]

By that point in time it should be better to simply freeze tier-lists and wait until offline tournaments come back (some are occasionally held in Japan and Europe, although the latter has huge problems in the smash-relevant countries (France and The Netherlands but also Spain, Germany , the UK and Austria).

So, I feel like we are still in a pre 7.0 era of offline tier-lists since the only big tournament after 7.0 was Frostbite but we had no way of telling how big a difference the 4-frames (or more) discrepancy between wi-fi and offline makes for Min-Min or Steve but also other relevant buffs.

So, I duly note these tier-lists but I don't take them really serious as we're purely in theorycrafting currently and that should never be the most important category when making a tier-list as you also need actual results to back your theories up.

 

[KirbySquad101]

The weird part for me concerning Greninja is that him not being ranked Top 20/25 or Top Tier isn't even an uncommon opinion. Maister doesn't think he's top 20, Dabuz doesn't think he's top 20, Tweek doesn't, Riddles doesn't even think he's viable at a high level. I have to wonder if it's really just because he lacks a top 15 player rep, because otherwise, he's got everything going for him in terms of results and theorycraft (and even then, characters like Snake or Wolf don't even need a PGR-ranked rep to party with the big boys).

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

Ned's tier list

There was a problem fetching the tweet

And just like that, we have a tier list that says Greninja is top 15. I think this tier list is really solid, the only things I disagree on is that I think Lucina is a bit too high (Etsuji has dropped her and ProtoBanham is thinking about dropping her too) and I don't think she's better than Wario or ZSS and then Bowser Jr's placement is a bit low.

 

[Gleam]

So how much should we pay MKleo to use one time in a match before you all finally admit that the guy who has been buffed multiple times between 6.0 and now, has jumped up 20+ spots on Orion, was ranked #39 by the last update and still has players like HIKARU proving him even in this reduced meta...

Might have a bit more Texas Pete than some would care to admit.

Or do you think the only reason DK has done better than most Mid Tiers last time is because of HIKARU's "Dark Shinto Magic?"

Characters like also get this treatment from time to time. I don't think she's nearly as controversial but same thing. There are so many characters who just, do vastly better than what the perception of them are, but no character I think better represents the difference between perception and actual results than Donkey Kong.

 

[SwagGuy99]

So how much should we pay MKleo to use one time in a match before you all finally admit that the guy who has been buffed multiple times between 6.0 and now, has jumped up 20+ spots on Orion, was ranked #39 by the last update and still has players like HIKARU proving him even in this reduced meta...

Might have a bit more Texas Pete than some would care to admit.

Or do you think the only reason DK has done better than most Mid Tiers last time is because of HIKARU's "Dark Shinto Magic?"

You could say the same thing about other characters too. I feel like results don't matter as much when it comes to proving how good a character is in a (well balanced) game with 80 characters that is still getting balance updates somewhat regularly. For example, I could make this same argument with . Has multiple reps currently on the Japanese PGR, overall middling results during the OrionRank pre-quarantine (somewhere in the mid-50s I'm pretty sure), he had a PGR rep in Lui$ during the first PGR season of Ultimate, and the character has gotten decent results from Shissho and Tsumusuto over the past few months as Japan has been starting offline events again. And people will still argue this character is bottom 3 dispite this. ESAM just put Doc in "unviable" on his 9.0.2 tier list when Tsumusuto has shown Doc to be capable even against characters like Shulk.

Similarly to DK, the results don't really reflect the general opinion on the character.

I feel in these kinds of situations where results don't match the common opinion, you could argue one of a few things:

• Simple characters may have slightly inflated results due to more players using them due to their simplicity.
• The player(s) who are getting the results at top level are just that good.
• The character is underrated.

I think with DK, HIKARU is really just that good of a player to where he can make this character work despite his extreme flaws and I do think his results. at least at a regional level, are inflated due to how easy the character is to use. If you look at DK's flaws, it becomes apparent that most of the cast should be able to exploit them fairly easily. Which is why I think we don't see many DK players, because at top level, DK's flaws are easier to exploit at lower levels of play. But HIKARU is a good enough player to where he can outplay his opponent even with a character who's kit is sorely lacking in some areas. DK isn't an awful character but I really feel like it's hard to argue that he's good when almost all of his high placings at larger events are coming from one player who co-mains him with another character.

 

[Gleam]

Mind you, I think you can make the same argument with as well. Obviously not to the same degree but this could just as easily been discussed on how Dr. Mario still did significantly better than the perception of a non-viable character should. I think many of the characters from expected Mid-Tier and below are often underestimated in their capabilities.

DK is just such an extreme difference between that perception and actual results shown. I would make similar arguments in opposition to that also.

during the last update of Orion was #56 and he had dropped considerably from around #35 to where he was then. Yet back then, he was still considered by a great many to be a solid Mid Tier and ESAM even had him Borderline High Tier in 7.0. Depending on your perception, #56 might still be considered "Mid Tier" but it was more about the fact that...

were in very similar positions to Falco at that time and yet for some reason, Falco was given a pass on this notion. Now Falco has been buffed since around 8.0, so I won't get into a stance of Falco today. This is just perception and comparison of back then.

It was so easy for the concept on paper to overrule the actual data presented. People feel so convinced that numbers and theory can explain the characters. It is very easy to make weaknesses look greater than normal and/or to undersell strengths.

For , his results back then didn't surprise me. Not even getting into the works of HIKARU and others, as a character he was quite deceptive. He was deceptively fast, he had deceptive range and deceptive hitboxes as well as deceptive priority. And I don't think it can be ignored how much those aspects of DK help him.

DK is arguably a very volatile character, taking essence of extremes in both advantage and disadvantage. These flaws may very well be true, but I think it doesn't get into the point of just how much his positives are helping him. It's the same thing I've said about who many will detract for being too big, easily juggled, etc.

And that's probably all true, but he's also got a great advantage state, edgeguarding, etc.

And it's helping him, just as whatever it is that makes DK good is helping him against his own flaws.

 

[Lacrimosa]

Speaking of results, I know there's a seperate thread for them but I think given how sparce results are, it'd be good to also post results here as well:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

And again, Japan proving that there is a lot of character variety in the top 32.

 

[Emblem Lord]

I'm going by pure memory, and I don't feel like browsing through the VOD so it'll be something to double check when he puts up the video detailing things. ESAM admitted on stream that he knew Sonic and Cloud would be the most controversial placings on his list. His logic with Cloud is that the character lacks strong combos, needs to guess correctly/win neutral too often with options that are either limited or regularly punishable - at least offline (Dabuz has been pretty vocal about his dislike for Cloud online) - and being regularly gimpable. Since this tier list was also made with offline in mind, Sonic was placed in high-mid on the grounds that people don't camp Sonic enough, that people don't know how to punish homing attack, and that he has trouble in making up deficits whenever he's at stock disadvantage - an assessment which I'm personally pretty 50/50 on.

With Captain Falcon, ESAM justifies his position entirely because of recent IDJ developments, and that Fatality is already at a point of doing a myriad of wild combos, zero-to-death strings and kill confirms within its first two months of existence. There's an argument to be made that he's the character who sees the biggest improvement in performance due to its existence. Conversely, he thinks that while Diddy is strong and that banana basically turns almost every top tier into an even MU, he currently benefits from an online environment where his whiff punishing is stronger. He also thought his off-stage presence is exploitable, but thinks the character could end up in one of the upper tiers despite all that.

Ryu was ranked over Ken because he argued Ryu was a superior camper, which he felt was more valuable over Ken's strengths since Ryu already has a strong advantage state. Terry was put below Ryu because he thought Terry needs to play neutral more frequently, doesn't have as strong of a disadvantage state, doesn't have as easy of a time scoring hits in neutral or out-of-shield, and that his strings are susceptible to SDI - though ESAM in his analysis doesn't account for tech like COIL or Terry being able to use different kill moves to cover SDI routes.

So basically he just straight up ignored game flow when talking about Terry and empirical evidence.

Terry by design has a WAY easier time getting hits in neutral and converting off errant hits.

Not to mention his results FAR surpass Ryu.

Ryu camping doesnt mean snyrhing because that's all he is. He does one thing so when faced with a character that doesn't care about it, he is SOL. And again his results are worse then Ken's.

As aside The_Bookworm Terry is not a shoto.

 

[Lacrimosa]

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Dunno if I'm reading too much into it (since it would confirm my statement above) but this list seems pretty dismissive of other tier-lists and the general idea of tiering characters currently.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I do find tier lists overrated for the vast majority of the player base. Just my opinion

 

[TennisBall]

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Dunno if I'm reading too much into it (since it would confirm my statement above) but this list seems pretty dismissive of other tier-lists and the general idea of tiering characters currently.

Tweek has always made tier lists differently compared to the others and only makes lists to how much potential a character has in theory as opposed to the cemented results based lists that at least some people occasionally consider. This is probably why there are some placements that people would consider a little "whack."

 

[MrGameguycolor]

Tweek has always made tier lists differently compared to the others and only makes lists to how much potential a character has in theory as opposed to the cemented results based lists that at least some people occasionally consider. This is probably why there are some placements that people would consider a little "whack."

To be honest, results aren't that important in this game. They speak mostly about the player and little to their character.
Barely useful for making tier lists in Ultimate IMO.

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

Something Tweek believes about is really interesting imo

He believes that Pikachu isn't getting results because he's hard and of how balanced the game is like most but more because ESAM isn't playing the character to his true potential: He's playing too aggressive with the character when he should be playing defensive instead and committing to a Tjolt plan. This has actually been shown really well recently with ShinyMark vs Maister, where ShinyMark ended up winning the matchup against because he was playing defensively rather than always throwing out aerials like ESAM does, which is why ESAM has so much trouble with Maister.

 

[KirbySquad101]

Since peeps have been craving for an offline experience:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

The results of November 28th's Mesuma all played out )playback doesn't work on Smashboards, but the link should work).

 

[Lacrimosa]

To be honest, results aren't that important in this game. They speak mostly about the player and little to their character.
Barely useful for making tier lists in Ultimate IMO.

But you can't have theorycrafting alone since you need to proof your theories in some way and the only good way is when these characters are brought into a competitive-viable environment.
Theories are only good in a vacuum but the other question is how consistent can the theoretical strengths of a character be pulled off in said environment (hello, Pikachu debate).
Therefore I don't really think theorycrafting is the most important thing when talking about a character's viability. It's nice to have, it gives you certainty about your gameplan about what does and doesn't work in specific match-ups but I want to see the characters being played and then improved upon their performances by player A and then see the improvements (or lack of said improvements) executed in the next tournament.

 

[DougEfresh]

I think that the points made by both Lacrimosa and MrGameguycolor are well-taken, though problems arise when one relies too heavily on results or theorycrafting.

It's much more common for players to overcentralize a character's results when assessing their tournament viability, but there are two clear issues with this approach: (1) In a game with 80+ characters and a lifespan of only two years so far, there simply aren't enough high or top level representatives (yet) of each character to provide a clearer, more accurate evaluation of any given character's competitive viability; and (2) emphasizing competitive results too greatly tends to lead to binary "analysis" of a character's strengths and weaknesses in that environment, i.e., results = good/viable; no results or lack of consistent results = bad/unviable.

The first issue will likely see at least moderate resolution as time passes and offline events return, but what's problematic about the second issue is that it often leaves out any thoughtful analysis of what strengths, weaknesses and consistency any character (not widely considered to be high or top tier already) may in fact have. In reality, the presence of consistently high competitive results merely supports contentions of this or that character likely being high/top tier as that stream of consistent results grows larger, but it's fallacious to equate a lack of consistent results (especially this early in the game's meta) to a character being bad or unviable in a competitive environment (see issue 1 above). This all relates back to my last post about the toxic cultural mentality of the smash community generally toward a large chunk of the cast, especially undeveloped or underrepresented characters so far in Ultimate.

In addition, terms like "theorycrafting" and "potential" have been memed about with certain characters, if not demonized altogether and I think that's not the move either. Granted, a whole other section of the smash community may gravitate too heavily on abstract ideas about the game and certain characters without practical applications to compliment those ideas, but "potential" and "theorycrafting" form the basis that motivates players to push their mains to their limits which can very well lead to metagame improvements that can make a significant difference in tournament viability.

It's useful to just have common sense here: whoever we play and regardless of their current perception of competitive viability, would anyone be playing their character of choice if we didn't think they had potential to improve and grow? I highly doubt any competitive player, or even any competitively-minded player, would answer yes to this question. And, "theorycrafting," at least when done properly and sincerely, is actually quite a useful exercise of more actively seeking to push that "potential" through brainstorming and critical thinking about the game and your characters' options with respect to that.

To summarize my thoughts more succinctly here, both results and theorycrafting are important considerations for assessing a character's tournament viability and excluding or minimizing one or the other can lead to flawed or incomplete perspective(s) about them, but we should also encourage players who participate in genuine theorycrafting that can lead to meaningful changes to characters that enhance their competitive viability. Results are a good metric to use in your analysis if it's available, but it only gives rise to a conclusion (or greater support of a conclusion) about a character's viability and doesn't explain, by itself, why character x, y or z is able to achieve a certain caliber of results with consistency, which is really the lost art that again relates back to my previous post about how large sections of the competitive community view Ultimate and the characters within it thus far. I hardly expect high and top level players who make tier lists (or MU charts for their mains, for that matter) to analyze each character to the scrutiny of a dissertation for a PhD program, but I don't think it asks too much of these players, who supposedly have the greatest wealth of knowledge about the game of anyone, to give a more honest effort to have a holistic and impartial discussion about the game and its characters.*

*Until that happens though, perhaps it behooves us to more often think of our own discussion topics in this thread instead of constantly piggybacking off of so and so's tier list/character MU chart and going in circles about why we agree/disagree with those. They can be fun and even useful to spark a discussion in moderation, but its pervasiveness has made things stale with few fresh takes or topics discussed; just my two cents.

 

[MrGameguycolor]

But you can't have theorycrafting alone since you need to proof your theories in some way and the only good way is when these characters are brought into a competitive-viable environment.
Theories are only good in a vacuum but the other question is how consistent can the theoretical strengths of a character be pulled off in said environment (hello, Pikachu debate).
Therefore I don't really think theorycrafting is the most important thing when talking about a character's viability. It's nice to have, it gives you certainty about your gameplan about what does and doesn't work in specific match-ups but I want to see the characters being played and then improved upon their performances by player A and then see the improvements (or lack of said improvements) executed in the next tournament.

I think that the points made by both Lacrimosa and MrGameguycolor are well-taken, though problems arise when one relies too heavily on results or theorycrafting.

I said results weren't that important, as in they're on the lower end of stuff to factor in.
Not "results aren't important at all.", and I said nothing on theorycraft.

No offensive, but you guys are putting words in my mouth...

 

[Lacrimosa]

I said results weren't that important, as in their on the lower end of stuff to factor in.
Not "results aren't important at all.", and I said nothing on theorycraft.

No offensive, but you guys are putting words in my mouth...

I see. I think I jumped the gun there.

In fact, that video from MockRock about tier lists is good (and probably what most of us have on their mind when talking about that stuff) but I don't really agree with the tiering of each point in that video.
When I think about it more, it's more or less a loop:

You start with theorycrafting (basically knowing what the character's attributes are from mobility to framedata), then you make a hypothetical matchup chart for a character and then you go into a tournament with character X. Then you have a tournament under your belt and you do some further theocrafting ("building the meta") and adjust the matchup spread. Now that tournaments have taken place you should have a basic understanding what matchups are more important and which are less important (a loss against Palutena weighs more than a win against Mewtwo in the long run).
Rinse and repeat (theocrafting -> matchup knowledge -> tournament -> theorcrafting -> ...) and in a perfect world you will eventually have a "solved" character (and not even Melee is solved, aside from the fact that it's a real-time game unlike chess (and even chess isn't solved)). Just saying, in a perfect world but we don't live in one.

 

[DougEfresh]

MrGameguycolor that's a fair criticism. My intent wasn't to attribute any claims about theorycrafting to you when you didn't actually make any statements about it; your comment about results not mattering as much in Ultimate is something I agree with and it was just that that sentiment was closest to the theorycrafting "extreme" of the spectrum in competitive smash discussion when comparing that to the "MuH rEsUlTs" extreme of the spectrum to communicate a more balanced viewpoint between the two. That said, thanks for keeping it real and I'll bear in mind how I phrase things in the future.

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

This is not something I'd ever expected to see.

Edit: Also, because this fits this thread more, here are Larry Lurr's thoughts on Wolf.

 

[MrGameguycolor]

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

This is not something I'd ever expected to see.

I'm sorry what...

 

[Guynamednelson]

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

This is not something I'd ever expected to see.

Are they going to do something about the website name or leave it alone because Nintendo doesn't have the rights to the word Smash?

 

[Envoy of Chaos]

The name and origins might had been for smash related events but smash.gg hasn’t been about only smash in a long time and allows for the hosting of all kinds of tournaments with some of the most robust and in-depth tournament organizing and tournament running tools publicly available. It’s likely just Microsoft getting more involved with e-sports I wouldn’t expect anything to change with the service as a result of this.

Also Nintendo would have nothing to do with it, it’s a tournament hosting website it’s only relation to smash at this point is it origins.

 

[SKX31]

The name and origins might had been for smash related events but smash.gg hasn’t been about only smash in a long time and allows for the hosting of all kinds of tournaments with some of the most robust and in-depth tournament organizing and tournament running tools publicly available. It’s likely just Microsoft getting more involved with e-sports I wouldn’t expect anything to change with the service as a result of this.

Also Nintendo would have nothing to do with it, it’s a tournament hosting website it’s only relation to smash at this point is it origins.

Still, it's a possible signal that if Nintendo doesn't do anything more substantial with Smash (and other e-sports under their belt) other companies will eventually fill that void. Regardless of how much Nintendo tries to avoid or intervene in that - honestly, it feels to me like the actions started a pressure-cooker situation.

And also, Nintendo might not like the insinuation that people like HBox are spreading via rather clickbait-y Youtube vids:

 

[Arthur97]

Ugh, that video title. The website has not legitimate ties to Smash, why are people acting like it does? It's a tournament organizing site named after it. Good old clickbait.

Still, you think Nintendo cares? I've said it before, this is a pretty niche group comparatively. Nevermind they're not being the most reasonable themselves with freaking out like this over one tournament (that Nintendo gave an alternative and their name was attached to). Then you have clickbait which seems to be bordering on flatout misinformation. How can anyone take them seriously after they throw this kind of fit over something they had a hand in? If the TO hadn't been so inflexible, it could have happened, just not quite how they wanted.

 

[Gearkeeper-8a]

Still, it's a possible signal that if Nintendo doesn't do anything more substantial with Smash (and other e-sports under their belt) other companies will eventually fill that void. Regardless of how much Nintendo tries to avoid or intervene in that - honestly, it feels to me like the actions started a pressure-cooker situation.

And also, Nintendo might not like the insinuation that people like HBox are spreading via rather clickbait-y Youtube vids:

What?? Nintendo is the one who makes smash, no company will be doing anything with competitive smash unless nintendo allows it.

Microsoft is interested on platform services, this isnt the first time they buyed something like this. Ie: mixer.

But we should drop this subject because is very off topic.

 

[SKX31]

What?? Nintendo is the one who makes smash, no company will be doing anything with competitive smash unless nintendo allows it.

Microsoft is interested on platform services, this isnt the first time they buyed something like this. Ie: mixer.

But we should drop this subject because is very off topic.

Yeah, agreed. I should clarify though, since I'll admit it was poorly formulated: considering Ludwig raised $40K+ for a Melee tournament, I wouldn't be surprised if that eventually cascades or something similar starts to happen with Ultimate at some point. Other than that I'm not thinking big corps: I'm thinking more grassroots a la BTS (who proudly state that they're an e-sports producing corp). That's honestly why I suspect Nintendo will have a harder and harder time "controlling" the scene... although that possible chain of events will take a while.

To go back on topic:

Edit: Also, because this fits this thread more, here are Larry Lurr's thoughts on Wolf.

Don't entirely agree with Larry's take (I'd argue that Wolf's D-Tilt is a bit better than his U-Tilt since he benefits from tech-chases a lot.) but his overarching point is an important point to make. The nerfs haven't harmed him that much, and he still is a potent swiss army knife on the offensive end. I get the personal impression that he does struggle a bit when being comboed / juggled (his Dair isn't the fastest if I'm not mistaken)... but that's evidently not a breaking issue for the character since a lot of characters arguably struggle worse with that.

 

[SwagGuy99]

Elegant just made this yesterday.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Compared to his previous matchup chart for Luigi, this one is overall much less top heavy with a handful of characters having been shifted around a bit.

 

[TennisBall]

Elegant just made this yesterday.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Compared to his previous matchup chart for Luigi, this one is overall much less top heavy with a handful of characters having been shifted around a bit.

I feel like there are definately some more losing matchups, but the thing is is that Elegant is so good that he can just beat those characters and he thinks it's mostly his character when he really is just outplaying them. I do think Luigi is quite good but I think Top 20 is a bit much personally.

 

[Nobie]

Every matchup chart I see makes me think about how little we actually know about Ultimate because there are so many dang matchups in this game, even for one character.

Good MU knowledge can be so hard to come by (10x so in this COVID age) that it makes me think that top tiers aren't solely defined by winning matchup spreads so much as who has the best general strategies to compensate for relative lack of familiarity. Wolf pretty much plays the same game against everyone, for example.

In fact, I wonder if, even supposing there exists a character who has a reliable winning strategy against every character in the game but required very specific and non-generalized practice, it would still be less practical than just choosing someone who can just default to doing the same old things.

 

[Hippieslayer]

Capitancito's gunner on Vgbootcamps youtube channel looked pretty nice. Made a good case for charge shot too which I think is gunners best neutral-b. It's just a very nice charge shot, I find it a lot better than other characters charge shots such as sun salutation or samus ditto. How good is gunner really? Surely the lag benefits gunner more than most, and gunner does struggle with rushdown and pressure.

Irregardless one thing is for sure: If you are not using bomb drop as your down-b with gunner then you're doing it wrong.

It's gunners best projectile because it enables a ton of strategies: you can use it for kill confirms (its easy to combo it into gunners powerful uair and you can use other moves to combo into the bomb as well), you can use it to control space in a myriad of ways (having a bomb in front or behind you cuts out a lot of the opponents options, putting it on platforms lets it control a off space), you can edgeguard with it (and hitting a recovering opponent with it will send them upwards allowing for confirms into aerials or even stronger moves such as f-smash while standing on the ledge), you can ledgetrap with it (and this is very effective on triplats where you can put the bomb on the platform by the ledge), and you can recover from disadvantage with it by dropping it and then airdodging or di'ing into it for protection.

It's downside is that it can be hit into gunner, this shouldn't happen a lot unless you are being predictable with your projectile spamming.
Speaking of projectile spamming: gunner's gotta be the best at pure projectile spamming having pretty much five spammable projectiles in bomb drop, the two different missiles, grenade or charge shot and lastly forward air. No other character can very their projectile spamming like this or cover both the air and ground the way gunner can with bomb drop and instant double jump missile.

I think the characters a mid tier offline, but a high tier online. Also Ganon is bottom tier trash and so is Dr Mario.

 

[Rizen]

I haven't posted much because I don't play wifi and we're in the dark age of smash with covid. This however is terrible! Nintendo updated the switch and changed values for gamecube controllers so it's harder to do tilt inputs. This video's a must watch.

 

[Nah]

This however is terrible! Nintendo updated the switch and changed values for gamecube controllers so it's harder to do tilt inputs. This video's a must watch.

....why would they even do this in the first place, like what's the point?

 

[Lacrimosa]

....why would they even do this in the first place, like what's the point?

So you'll buy the expensive Pro-Controller.

Speaking of Smash:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

(Note the date but seems like Europe got an Orion Ranking and unlike the EUPR they included Non-European tournaments which is...dumb?)