Official Competitive Character Impressions 2.0

[SapphSabre777]

I have a lot to write after watching the first tournament after an exodus and hiatus of sorts, but this tournament should be seen and received with nothing short of excitement for Ultimate, personally. I'll try and separate my thoughts into sections, because this is going to get a bit wordy:

Spoiler: Tier Lists and Characters

Looking at VoiD's tier list, and other comments such as Nicko's pre-top 8: IluZ | Nicko on Twitter: "wanted to say to me, if youre trying to win why would you not play high tiers i was that person who played bottom tiers and believed that i could overcome it but i learned that my results were never gonna be consistent the moment i played high tiers, they did become consistent" / Twitter , there are a couple things that weigh in my mind.

I think that we may need to have a better understanding of the characters themselves, namely about a character's abilities. People, myself included, have looked at characters with rose-tinted lens about how much "untapped potential there is", and how "innately good or bad a character is" (guilty as charged on both), but Leo's win with , a character that has varying opinions on where he is on the tier list that can be seen on this very thread, really puts a new spin on it all that has me excited: looking at a character not based on potential, but how malleable their strengths and weaknesses are around a player's strategies, abilities, and tendencies. It took a bit to find the words for it, but Leo's showed a scenario where a character's strengths can reach new highs and weaknesses can be made less apparent with a player's own fundamental understanding of the game and the character they play. Another player also showed that to an extent with Elegant and his , getting a very respectable 4th place with a character that he has not only stuck with, but understood the ins-and-outs of the character. It hits a point where the "greater consistency" reaches to be a non-factor simply because the player's malleability of advantages and disadvantages of their character allows them to make their character really good with the tools give. How malleable a character is, on the other hand, is something that cannot be explained through the lens of potential, but rather the real-world showcasing of the character through games and sets.

The fun thing about the above is that such outlooks on characters really require a great player with great understanding of the game and/or a specialist of said character to really display the above, and it leads me to a point that was mentioned a while back: character representation will be one of the strongest things given to any character in a game this size. With more character representation for a particular character comes the ability for that character to find a player that has great fundamentals and can push the elements of that character higher through neutral, advantage, disadvantage, et cetera. Look at how a character in is so strong with not just how many players there are playing him and getting results, but also the players like Charlie that are pushing him to be a monster by showcasing how malleable his toolkit is, along with Tea and , and even with Rickles and Bassmage with and . It's a case where in-game results REALLY matter as they are oft a byproduct of the player and how they use their character, their "tool", so to speak, and show to those looking at potentially playing the character of the sort of things that they can do because they can literally see their performances and potentially join in and compliment the characters and their abilities.

This also has the opposite effect that can damage a character's reputation and outlook due to the lack of representation. is the biggest one that comes to mind, for as "broken" as ESAM advertises him, not as many people play Pikachu for how "broken" he is and has not won a supermajor despite being a so-called "top-3 character", leading to people like Idon above doubting such a claim and Pikachu overall suffering a bit from lacking players that can physically show the character's malleability in-game. Characters like have their criticisms against them unchallenged due to a lack of representation and people showcasing the character in-game outside of the very few in Jejajeja and Jesuischoq, basically making him look like the low to even bottom tier that he is perceived and with a "rigidness" that he cannot be seen as expanded upon, literally in a competitive sense. There are also characters that we have seen that have been damaged from character switches and ergo less representation and chances in seeing the character show their malleability, such as and , sometimes as a result of a nerf in the case of the former and buffs to other characters for the latter. It kind of reinforces that buffs and nerfs only really work in this game if there is a noticeable shift in results in-game AND/OR representation to showcase the character.

In short, this is a very exciting point in Ultimate's timeline where we have a bit of an Enlightenment Period, where players are starting to explore characters and how far they can push them with their own given abilities, such as with Leo, Elegant, WaDi's announcement (even though he used another character at the end of Top 24), and so on. I think looking at character results and more importantly, representation, will be just as, if not more important, than the abilities of the characters themselves.

Spoiler: Post-Riptide Thoughts

is going to definitely rise in the public eye. Not so much top 20 imo, but enough to where they are regarded very positively and have their representation grow greatly as a result of this. When players like Leo show what a character can do and win, it is nothing short of the best thing a character could have going for them.

will also continue to grow, considering the continued dominance by Tweek. This character's burst options are more insane than thought, but also has room for improvement, what with Tweek's banana play being counter-played and some of his normals not really being used, showing off Tweek's banana reliance and Monkey Flip reliance at times thanks to Leo and even Spargo and Elegant. This character will start to get crazy once we see further development, if it happens.

is definitely a character to look out for, considering the success of the Steve mains in this tournament. 9th, 25th, and 49th twice on a character with a bunch of upsets (Dabuz, ATATA, and Chag), and while the resurgence to offline Steve is something that will eventually be learned, so too will there be a better handling of offline from the Steve players themselves, especially with so many high-end players this character has. Can only go up from here.

got a well-deserved 5th in this event by a different player than expected. Goblin came to this tournament to make a statement about him and his character, and boy did he do so with his Loser's Run, beating Stroder, MuteAce, Epic_Gabe, Yonni, and Dabuz in a row before being taken out by Elegant. Roy mains should rejoice with the prospect of another great Roy player showing their prowess with the character.

/ is perhaps the 2nd biggest character story after Byleth, what with the hodge-podge of mixed results and usage. Cosmos was eliminated very early and Leo's usage of them was rather limited. Even moments where Sparg0 opted with create some interesting thoughts about the character overall, despite the group of people that have picked them up. They are definitely extremely strong, but the idea of "how strong" was not as well-defined as I once thought. I guess only time will tell.

 

[Nemesis561]

Ah yes, the Smashboards Pika discussion. Gotta love it. Look, the character is unquestionably ridiculous and is definitely top 5 (imo) at least when played at highest level. But, unlike many of the other top tiers in this Game, the level of execution needed to play him at this level is extremely difficult, and when you factor in things like pressure, tournament nerves and time (most people are not willing to put in the amount of time needed to master this character when there are much much easier characters to play who are as good or nearly as good), it's just not worth it for many. This is why you almost never see Pikachu do anything at the local/regional level, because most players at this level are simply not good enough to bring out the best in the character to exemplify the reasons why the characters is top tier, as opposed to an Aegis for example who's top tier traits are obvious and jump off the page.

That's the reason you don't see many Pikachus, Shulks, Sheiks etc because we're humans at the end of the day and you have to factor these things in to the equation. Pikachu is still amazing but we'll never see results from the character unless you get a handful of Pikachu specialists in attendance at these tournaments.

 

[The_Bookworm]

Here is the most Riptide interview with MkLeo:

Some important takeaways from the interview:
MkLeo believes is high tier, but he also believes that not many players at Riptide knew the matchup all too well.
He will continue to use Byleth, but when the time comes when his Byleth is starting to falter in terms of overall performance, as players learn the matchup, he is preparing to refine and release his back into play.
Speaking of whom, he started to revisit his vs topic, as now believes Joker to be superior. The main reason behind is that while he thinks the Aegis is top 3, it is mainly because they are simply "good", and that gameplan-wise they lack any special gimmicks or special comeback factors characters like Joker, Luigi, etc. have.
This is a very interesting take that I kinda felt for a while: they may be the strongest of FP2, but they play far more similarly to a typical Smash character than the other FP2 characters do.



Probably in response to all the Pyra up B at ledges Tweek has been falling for, Rivers tweeted this:

stop letting Pyra do this pic.twitter.com/j49luEePRI

— james (@Rivers3k) September 13, 2021

He also demonstrates that Pyra up B can be dealt with similarly with Chrom's up B, in that Pyra's up B only has 3 active frames before descent.

 

[PK Gaming]

Ah yes, the Smashboards Pika discussion. Gotta love it. Look, the character is unquestionably ridiculous and is definitely top 5 (imo) at least when played at highest level. But, unlike many of the other top tiers in this Game, the level of execution needed to play him at this level is extremely difficult, and when you factor in things like pressure, tournament nerves and time (most people are not willing to put in the amount of time needed to master this character when there are much much easier characters to play who are as good or nearly as good), it's just not worth it for many. This is why you almost never see Pikachu do anything at the local/regional level, because most players at this level are simply not good enough to bring out the best in the character to exemplify the reasons why the characters is top tier, as opposed to an Aegis for example who's top tier traits are obvious and jump off the page.

That's the reason you don't see many Pikachus, Shulks, Sheiks etc because we're humans at the end of the day and you have to factor these things in to the equation. Pikachu is still amazing but we'll never see results from the character unless you get a handful of Pikachu specialists in attendance at these tournaments.

Ultimate Pikachu isn't even 1/10th of as demanding Melee Fox or most technical top tiers in fighting games for the matter. You're severely underestimating what top players are willing to put up with if the result is a genuinely broken character. The reason why Pikachu isn't dominating after 3 years of Smash Ultimate is because the character isn't that good. It's actually that simple.

It's honestly ridiculous how the argument has shifted to "just trust me, the character is actually top 5" without a proper argument. We're just supposed to take it at face value that Pikachu is busted, without regard for tournament performance or metagame presence. I just don't see the point in carrying a torch for that kind of character.

 

[Nemesis561]

Ultimate Pikachu isn't even 1/10th of as demanding Melee Fox or most technical top tiers in fighting games for the matter. You're severely underestimating what top players are willing to put up with if the result is a genuinely broken character. The reason why Pikachu isn't dominating after 3 years of Smash Ultimate is because the character isn't that good. It's actually that simple.

It's honestly ridiculous how the argument has shifted to "just trust me, the character is actually top 5" without a proper argument. We're just supposed to take it at face value that Pikachu is busted, without regard for tournament performance or metagame presence. I just don't see the point in carrying a torch for that kind of character.

Nobody said he's broken. Pikachu is among the best in the game with a much higher difficulty curve than most other top tiers. Also acting like we have not seen Pikachu perform at the highest levels is very silly. His best rep is not going to these events so yes the characters results as a result are not going to be there.

As for the melee comparison, most of the top melee players have an unmatched passion for that game and grind it as it's their primary job (not to say some Ultimate players don't, but the grind culture for melee is much stronger and more prevalent). Not to mention the game has been out much longer. Who's to say if Ultimate was still around competitively 10 years from now that Pikachu wasn't the best in the game, and more top players decided to dedicate the time and effort needed?

I respect the fact that you seem to value results over anything else when measuring a character's worth, but I dont. And that's fine we don't have to agree on that

 

[PK Gaming]

Nobody said he's broken. Pikachu is among the best in the game with a much higher difficulty curve than most other top tiers. Also acting like we have not seen Pikachu perform at the highest levels is very silly. His best rep is not going to these events so yes the characters results as a result are not going to be there.

As for the melee comparison, most of the top melee players have an unmatched passion for that game and grind it as it's their primary job. Not to mention the game has been out much longer. Who's to say if Ultimate was still around competitively 10 years from now that Pikachu wasn't the best in the game, and more top players decided to dedicate the time and effort needed?

I respect the fact that you seem to value results over anything else when measuring a character's worth, but I dont. And that's fine we don't have to agree on that

I wasn't being literal with my comment. "Busted" is usual shorthand for "really good"

The problem with the "his best reps aren't going to events" is that it could apply to literally any character and excuse any poor performance. It's a crutch argument.

I don't care about hypotheticals. "Who's to say what will happen in 10 years" is a meaningless argument. But right now, here in the present, after 3 years, Pikachu's results don't impress for the so-called "best/top 5 character" in the game, and I find it absurd that people keep pushing this same narrative that's been going on since Brawl.

And you completely missed my point about character difficulty. Other games have difficult top tier characters, but those characters are still used because the payoff is more than worth it. Aigis from Persona 4 Arena was ludicrously broken but difficult to use. Carl Clover was difficult to use in the first version of Blazblue but he effectively broke the game. I don't know why you're bringing up passion; Ultimate is a relatively new game, but we're already seeing top players bust their ass off for this game too. Now that actual money's on the line, we'll continue to see top players improve as well, so I wouldn't discount ultimate players grinding to be the best too.

And until proven otherwise (in 2021), Pikachu just isn't that good.

 

[Nemesis561]

I wasn't being literal with my comment. "Busted" is usual shorthand for "really good"

The problem with the "his best reps aren't going to events" is that it could apply to literally any character and excuse any poor performance. It's a crutch argument.

I don't care about hypotheticals. "Who's to say what will happen in 10 years" is a meaningless argument. But right now, here in the present, after 3 years, Pikachu's results don't impress for the so-called "best/top 5 character" in the game, and I find it absurd that people keep pushing this same narrative that's been going on since Brawl.

And you completely missed my point about character difficulty. Other games have difficult top tier characters, but those characters are still used because the payoff is more than worth it. Aigis from Persona 4 Arena was ludicrously broken but difficult to use. Carl Clover was difficult to use in the first version of Blazblue but he effectively broke the game. I don't know why you're bringing up passion; Ultimate is a relatively new game, but we're already seeing top players bust their ass off for this game too. Now that actual money's on the line, we'll continue to see top players improve as well, so I wouldn't discount ultimate players grinding to be the best too.

And until proven otherwise (in 2021), Pikachu just isn't that good.

"You're severely underestimating what top players are willing to put up with if the result is a genuinely broken character." That's what I'm referring to with the broken thing, not when you said busted. You're very entrenched on the results thing and I'm not, that's just where we don't agree so there's no sense in continuing. Also saying Pikachu isn't that good is laughable.

 

[PK Gaming]

"You're severely underestimating what top players are willing to put up with if the result is a genuinely broken character." That's what I'm referring to with the broken thing, not when you said busted. You're very entrenched on the results thing and I'm not, that's just where we don't agree so there's no sense in continuing. Also saying Pikachu isn't that good is laughable.

The reason we don't agree is because you haven't actually backed up with argument with strong points. "Saying Pikachu isn't that good is laughable" okay, then? Why is my argument off-base?

 

[Nobie]

WaDi's success with Mewtwo at Riptide proved a lot of things to me.

1) WaDi's neutral is fantastic as always, and definitely the best among Mewtwos. But it also shows just how ridiculously important it is for the character. Being so light and such an easy target, you just have to win those interactions, or else. Just watching other Mewtwo play recently, it feels like other players choose the options they want to work and think a little too short-term.

2) Having strong edgeguarding and ledgetrapping vs Pyra/Mythra is a huge deal. Few characters can match them on stage, but if your character can control offstage opponents well (like WaDi did), it can give even characters who don't do great against them a real fighting chance. It's not as simple as "lol just edgeguard," but rather "If you have the tools to edgeguard, you HAVE to use them."

 

[Nemesis561]

The reason we don't agree is because you haven't actually backed up with argument with strong points. "Saying Pikachu isn't that good is laughable" okay, then? Why is my argument off-base?

I gave you my arguments earlier, if you don't think they're good arguments then it is what it is. Anyways, moving on

 

[SKX31]

What the actual hell am I watching?

This man is the best player of all time, wtf.

Art.

He's mastered spacing and timings to the point where he's able to not only get conversions most others might have trouble with (Up B - > Fast Fall B-Air, and he gets that consistently too) but also takes advantage of the hits he gets to a degree few can match. Whether sweet- or sourspot.

He's not only the best at adapting to what opponents do, but also really good at taking an inch and turning it into a mile. Not just with the early % kills he gets, but also how he manages to stay alive for so long.

I respect the fact that you seem to value results over anything else when measuring a character's worth, but I dont. And that's fine we don't have to agree on that

And until proven otherwise (in 2021), Pikachu just isn't that good.

Yes, "potential" is such a wonky term that it's very difficult to actually measure character strengths. How do we measure say technical characters and their playstyles' potential vs. more reaction-based playstyles' potential, for example? On this I kinda agree with PK Gaming here.

However, I should've clarified in my earlier response that "incredibly dangerous" doesn't neccessarily mean Top 5 or even Top 10; because lets face it, Top 5 / Top 10 is a really finicky area as well (where are the dividing lines between Top 10 and the rest of proverbial Top / High Tier?), but if the character still gets OrionRank results on par with and then I do not fully buy that the character's that limited. It's one reason I've felt that the arguments have been needlessly reductive - if one only looks at the relative lack of Pikachus at the top level, then sure Pikachu's placement is extremely suspect. But I can't help but to feel that some of it's just reacting towards the lack of in-game results... to which I'd say:

Can we please wait a month or two before going with a more definite answer? Maister and Tea have both come back in full force, lets see where ESAM and the other Pika mains stack up. If they don't reach the same kinds of results as Maister / Tea / others who play G&W and Pac-Man, sure, I'll buy that ESAM's bold claims turned out to be wildly inflated.

That said, can I buy that Pikachu's not Top 5 (as wonky as that is) right now? Certainly, just as I don't see say as Top 5 - and hell, one can compare Pikachu with G&W since both have one super-prominent main and not many other prominent mains. Yes, I can definetely see VoiD's Pika placement as completely fair assuming the status quo continues. And yes, that tier list came right after Riptide and as such it's partly a reaction to that event and Temple - so we'll have to keep that in mind.

So in the end, we'll have to see.

I can certainly say that if ESAM somehow pulls it all off and takes a major like Tea just did... all hell will break loose since you know the "Pikachu BUSTED" chants would return in full blazing force.

Edit: And just after I posted this, Dabuz releases his new MU chart in video form:

 

[Rizen]

Riptide (1024 Entrants)

1st: MkLeo
2nd: Tweek
3rd: Sparg0
4th: Elegant
5th: Maister
5th: Goblin
7th: Lui$
7th: Dabuz

Spoiler: Top 24

9th: LingLing
9th: WaDi
9th: naitosharp
9th: yonni
13th: Kobe
13th: Myles
13th: loaf
13th: Epic_Gabriel
17th: Fatality
17th: LeoN
17th: Anathema
17th: TonyZTank
17th: Tilde
17th: Yoomoo
17th: MuteAce
17th: Kurama

Spoiler: Top 48

25th: Jake
25th: BigBoss
25th: Pandarian
25th: Ned
25th: Zinoto
25th: Stroder
25th: Ronnichu
25th: ZD
33rd: T3 DOM
33rd: MVD
33rd: Darkshad
33rd: SKITTLES!!
33rd: Wisdom
33rd: Marss
33rd: Ismon
33rd: Zomba
33rd: Stocktaker69
33rd: Myran
33rd: ATATA
33rd: Rickles
33rd: Kofi
33rd: Pellonian
33rd: DRO
33rd: Toast

Spoiler: Top 96

49th: Yoda Cage
49th: Onin
49th: Niko
49th: Chag
49th: Juanpi
49th: Geist
49th: ApolloKage
49th: varun
49th: Quark
49th: SHADIC
49th: Cosmos
49th: IcyMist
49th: Eden
49th: Sogoodpop
49th: Grayson
49th: BassMage
65th: Seth
65th: Zie
65th: Jakal
65th: Sytonix
65th: Phuzix
65th: Shadow_PR
65th: Atomsk
65th: BlazingPasta
65th: Beast
65th: Syrup
65th: Luma
65th: Dew2
65th: sebayee
65th: Meden
65th: Aaron
65th: A Coward
65th: Dragneel
65th: Uncivil ninja
65th: Vivi
65th: Colorondo8
65th: Clique
65th: Puppeh
65th: Skilly
65th: SP Tatsu
65th: Mj
65th: Rivers
65th: Skitz
65th: Ravenking
65th: Doorstop
65th: Dietsoda
65th: Kyros
65th: Kola

Analysis coming later. Gotta study as I have classes tomorrow.

I said that were broken day 1. Here's a post about why they're so good. Keep in mind that Pythra started at a deficit on Orion ranks because regions like Mexico (where Spargo and MKLeo are) were still playing online when Japan moved offline. They've skyrocketed up the list. Posts like this aren't looking so far-fetched any more.

The more I play as and against , the more I get the feeling they're going to be the next . Mythra's attacks are stupidly fast for her Lucina like reach and Sheik like agility and then Pyra's very strong. Mythra alone could be top tier.

Let me ask you this: how many tournaments was winning or getting top 3 at the same point after her release? I'm pretty sure Pythra are doing at least as well. Spargo and Leo have been winning tournaments with her or getting 2nd everywhere including going solo Pythra. Cosmos might not be doing as good as them but he's still won multiple tournaments including the very stacked Mega Smash Mondays 240 which qualified him for Summit. Pros like Cloudy have also shown Pythra's MU charts are comparable to SSB4 Bayo's too.

But I don't think Ultimate will end up like SSB4 because the dev team is more open to nerfing characters. After seeing Joker get nerfed twice in significant ways I think Pythra will get the same treatment.

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

New r/smashbros tier list

Oh, and Pyra/Mythra are not the next , the character's BS but they don't have extensive zero-to-death potential, a lot of reward in their combo game with no risk, Witch Twist being frame 4 unable to be ledgetrapped OOS that can start combos, Witch Time (Which is way more broken then Foresight) and some of the best recovery mixups in the whole game.

Comparisons between the two are dumb, and this is coming from someone who thinks Pyra/Mythra are top 2. Smash 4 Bayo was a broken, overcentralizing meta force, with a 14% overall win/usage rate at nationals at the end of Smash 4's lifespan, only 1% less then .

 

[Sucumbio]

New r/smashbros tier list

View attachment 330159

Oh, and Pyra/Mythra are not the next , the character's BS but they don't have extensive zero-to-death potential, a lot of reward in their combo game with no risk, Witch Twist being frame 4 unable to be ledgetrapped OOS that can start combos, Witch Time (Which is way more broken then Foresight) and some of the best recovery mixups in the whole game.

Comparisons between the two are dumb, and this is coming from someone who thinks Pyra/Mythra are top 3. Smash 4 Bayo was a broken, overcentralizing meta force, with a 14% overall win/usage rate at nationals, only 1% less then .

.
Would you say bottom tier need specific redesign or could the balance team help at all?

 

[PK Gaming]

Art.

He's mastered spacing and timings to the point where he's able to not only get conversions most others might have trouble with (Up B - > Fast Fall B-Air, and he gets that consistently too) but also takes advantage of the hits he gets to a degree few can match. Whether sweet- or sourspot.

He's not only the best at adapting to what opponents do, but also really good at taking an inch and turning it into a mile. Not just with the early % kills he gets, but also how he manages to stay alive for so long.





Yes, "potential" is such a wonky term that it's very difficult to actually measure character strengths. How do we measure say technical characters and their playstyles' potential vs. more reaction-based playstyles' potential, for example? On this I kinda agree with PK Gaming here.

However, I should've clarified in my earlier response that "incredibly dangerous" doesn't neccessarily mean Top 5 or even Top 10; because lets face it, Top 5 / Top 10 is a really finicky area as well (where are the dividing lines between Top 10 and the rest of proverbial Top / High Tier?), but if the character still gets OrionRank results on par with and then I do not fully buy that the character's that limited. It's one reason I've felt that the arguments have been needlessly reductive - if one only looks at the relative lack of Pikachus at the top level, then sure Pikachu's placement is extremely suspect. But I can't help but to feel that some of it's just reacting towards the lack of in-game results... to which I'd say:

Can we please wait a month or two before going with a more definite answer? Maister and Tea have both come back in full force, lets see where ESAM and the other Pika mains stack up. If they don't reach the same kinds of results as Maister / Tea / others who play G&W and Pac-Man, sure, I'll buy that ESAM's bold claims turned out to be wildly inflated.

That said, can I buy that Pikachu's not Top 5 (as wonky as that is) right now? Certainly, just as I don't see say as Top 5 - and hell, one can compare Pikachu with G&W since both have one super-prominent main and not many other prominent mains. Yes, I can definetely see VoiD's Pika placement as completely fair assuming the status quo continues. And yes, that tier list came right after Riptide and as such it's partly a reaction to that event and Temple - so we'll have to keep that in mind.

So in the end, we'll have to see.

I can certainly say that if ESAM somehow pulls it all off and takes a major like Tea just did... all hell will break loose since you know the "Pikachu BUSTED" chants would return in full blazing force.

Edit: And just after I posted this, Dabuz releases his new MU chart in video form:

Believe me, I want to be wowed. I want to see a brand new character blaze on the scene and tear things up. It's both fun and exciting, lending more credence to the idea that this game is truly special when it comes to character viability

But I'm not impressed by Pikachu's current results and I doubt it'll change in the near future. It had 3 years to prove itself. 2 months isn't going to substantially shake things up imo. But we'll see

 

[blackghost]

ok some of yall are out of control.
there is no smash 4 bayo or brawl meta knight in ultimate stop being dramatic and extreme this community as a whole needs to stop that. theres a whole bunch of posts as to why mythra and pyra cant be smash 4 bayo.
i know a lot of people here dont watch other fighting games but leo winning with fudementals on an average character is stuff that happens when a player is good enough and has sound enough fundamentals and game knowledge. Justin wong and Daigo built their legends on doing such things. justin wong won umvc 3 evo with storm on lead and Daigo was winning with ryu. these characters have no major tricks just strictly adhering to fundamentals and not overreaching with the character. That doesnt mean those characters were secret top tiers or something it just means at a certain level player skill and comfort with characters can overide other factors like tier lists.

no byleth is not higher than mid tier. byleth does have solid matchups vs a lot of common high tier characters particularly if he gets to slow the game down.
but anyone else notice what Leo did immediately when tweeks sepiroth came out? he IMMEDIATELY sped the game up. why? Because he doesnt want to play that game vs a character who is better at it. Leo is one of the few players that doesn't just spew MU theory and their lists he truly understands what characters do and what people will want to try to do against him, and you can see it in his play. A lot of players people know and like are great players, but they are slow to adapt and address issues in their game. Not to bang on him but for me fatality comes to mind on that end.

I wouldn't say leo is the first smash player to truly make a character his own and clearly lead the character's meta. I would say lima does that for bayo, riddles with kazuya, void on shiek, and a few others come to mind.

 

[Thinkaman]

Even I, self-appointed pope of the Pikachu skeptics, thinks Pikachu is quite good. Heck, I think Pikachu is better than his results suggest.

Whenever someone says Pikachu is not that good, they surely mean that he's not "top 2" as everyone says--not that the character is bad.


On the flip-side, Doc is #49 on OrionStats atm, higher than 32 other character. In other words, Pikachu is closer to Doc than the top, and Doc is closer to Pikachu than the bottom.

 

[Arthur97]

I assume it's a typo; there was a brief time where optimal Falco was theorized to be as good as Fox.

Yes, it was a typo. If memory serves there was also a time in Melee where it was debated who was better between Marth and Roy.

Also, yes, how are Pyra and Mythra anything like 4 Bayo? They're good, but not overwhelming. Plus, as has been pointed out, nerfing them isn't the easiest task in the world as they don't really have anything individually that nasty.

 

[Thinkaman]

Yes, it was a typo. If memory serves there was also a time in Melee where it was debated who was better between Marth and Roy.

This is correct, but only if you go back to the earliest possible release period, when no one knew anything. In many circles, Link was also floated as a top tier in this brief moment.

Plus, as has been pointed out, nerfing them isn't the easiest task in the world as they don't really have anything individually that nasty.

I actually think--if you actually wanted to--it would be pretty easy to nerf them however much you wanted. They have specific standout moves.

is very dependent on uair, and to a lesser extent nair. They are both standout low-risk, high-reward moves, and adding tiny amounts of endlag/landing lag to either would have an immediately noticable impact without ruining her.

nair is similar. It's very, very lethal for a borderline zero-risk move. There are lots of ways to reduce it from an amazing move to merely great. This is all a repeat of Ike, frankly.

Contrast with Smash 4 Sheik/Diddy, whose power was spread out over a dozen+ moves and came with no underlying weakness anchoring them, or Bayo, who had a very intricate and complex kit whose capabilities were hard to understand. (A surprising amount of Bayo's power ended up coming from fair1, which was not on the general radar initially.) Those cases, as well as imo Joker and Palutena (who also have an abundance of stellar moves), are harder balance problems to solve.

 

[Ziodyne 21]

I would also say maybe add some additonal endlag to Pyra's dair or adujst knocbsck angle so its not such a easy bake kill confirl from from up-air or up-smash. Those comfirms can kill at shockingly low percents on platform stages like battlefield

 

[Firox]

Imagine seriously subscribing to tier lists when Byleth can win a stacked supermajor

Don't get me wrong, they're useful as a general guideline. But it's clear for Smash Ultimate, it's not a hard and fast rule

It's actually a great testament to how amazingly well balanced the game is. In the right hands, virtually any character can be a serious threat. I think with very few exceptions, any character could be tournament-winningly good, it's just that a lot of the pros confine their picks to the ones that give the most reward for a relatively lower amount of training. As a social experiment, it would be fun to watch Leo murder people with something like Kirby or Lil Mac just to show that a player's skill is more critical to success than the digital limits of a given character. (Watch Leo win a major with Mac and then all the tier lists start claiming that Mac is high tier. lol)

 

[SapphSabre777]

It's actually a great testament to how amazingly well balanced the game is. In the right hands, virtually any character can be a serious threat. I think with very few exceptions, any character could be tournament-winningly good, it's just that a lot of the pros confine their picks to the ones that give the most reward for a relatively lower amount of training. As a social experiment, it would be fun to watch Leo murder people with something like Kirby or Lil Mac just to show that a player's skill is more critical to success than the digital limits of a given character. (Watch Leo win a major with Mac and then all the tier lists start claiming that Mac is high tier. lol)

As tempting as having my main be picked up by Leo for an experiment is nice, I'd rather have him stay at Byleth for that character meta's sake, just to be fair. Having a top player play a character like him and love playing as him is a rarity and a terrifying prospect for others to face in the future.

However, I think pros have another key benefit to playing higher-tiered characters: the amount of resources, guides, and experience the character meta has makes it drastically easier for a pro to play that character and understand their inner workings. Compare that to a character like Kirby whose character meta is...to be blunt...committing a lamenting spell akin to 4 and staying stagnant as a result outside of the handful of players like Jeja and Jesuischoq, and trying to master and make a character with very little information and representation becomes more daunting and taxing to the player. The good news, however, is that one good player is all it takes for a character to take off, represent, and give data to every other player maining the same character to accelerate the process. Peanut with Little Mac, Atomsk with Dedede, Rickles with Ganondorf, and so on can attest to that, even with the difference in tiers and public reception. Difficulty of learning a character is somewhat parallel to how much representation for that character, since more players of them means more to study, and vice versa.

With what happened at Summit and at Riptide, and with Ultimate reaching its twilight days before the final DLC is launched, freelancing one's mains and pushing to maximize the character through one's own skill is becoming a staple to players no matter where their character falls on the tier list. This only means that characters that stagnate in this regard or lack representation (be it via results or literally) will crash hard during this time period, imo.

 

[Sucumbio]

It's actually a great testament to how amazingly well balanced the game is. In the right hands, virtually any character can be a serious threat. I think with very few exceptions, any character could be tournament-winningly good, it's just that a lot of the pros confine their picks to the ones that give the most reward for a relatively lower amount of training. As a social experiment, it would be fun to watch Leo murder people with something like Kirby or Lil Mac just to show that a player's skill is more critical to success than the digital limits of a given character. (Watch Leo win a major with Mac and then all the tier lists start claiming that Mac is high tier. lol)

I watched a lot of pros grind quick play and even streams like dabuz number 1 zss or from 4 Era pro went Ganondorf and still whoop everyone 3 stocked or my favorite the it takes my first two stocks to get one off you then final ko in 19 percent but yeah.

I also believe many of the Ultimate cast is viable which is why to me a tier list is not so much about viability but is more of a reflection of the player's characters from easiest to hardest to win with everything else being equal.

But anyway Training eh I'd say more work as in the vein of everything you gotta do to win a tournament. If you have already beaten down every obstacle and the last focus is who you use then sure use a character who's "easy to pick up" I guess but the training part won't be less because of it in fact in DLC 2 you've got 2 or 3 that seem to be meant for serious grinding even though you can pick them up and dominate locals because Sakurai a genius.

 

[Minix0]

I fail to see what is even remotely technical about Pikachu. Honestly I don't think he's the best anymore either. I don't think its Pythra either though, Pyra really isn't a good character and people overrate Mythra's strengths. Top 10 sure, but top 5? ROB, Peach, Wolf, Joker and Pika say hi.

Speaking of technicality though, there isn't a single character in the game as technical as Melee Fox, bar maybe ICs, but that's pushing it.

 

[Sucumbio]

I fail to see what is even remotely technical about Pikachu.

The first thing that comes to mind is spacing. You don't mash buttons to do that you have to be perfect in micro movements and timing to get the kind of reward you need to match other high tiers

 

[Envoy of Chaos]

The first thing that comes to mind is spacing. You don't mash buttons to do that you have to be perfect in micro movements and timing to get the kind of reward you need to match other high tiers

That’s true for any character though. If you misspace moves (with the exception of a handful) you get punished for it. That’s not pikachu specific. Pikachu doesn’t really have anything that stands out as difficult that’s unique to him aside Up B angles and Tjolt. Low range isn’t unique to him, lightweight isn’t, long combos and strings aren’t. There isn’t anything about Pikachu that’s makes him such an investment when compared to actual technical characters such as Peach or Shulk.

 

[Thinkaman]

I mean Quick Attack stands out as a uniquely high-finesse move, one of the most in the game for sure, but l wouldn't go attributing more to it than that.

 

[PK Gaming]

It's actually a great testament to how amazingly well balanced the game is. In the right hands, virtually any character can be a serious threat. I think with very few exceptions, any character could be tournament-winningly good, it's just that a lot of the pros confine their picks to the ones that give the most reward for a relatively lower amount of training. As a social experiment, it would be fun to watch Leo murder people with something like Kirby or Lil Mac just to show that a player's skill is more critical to success than the digital limits of a given character. (Watch Leo win a major with Mac and then all the tier lists start claiming that Mac is high tier. lol)

It's absolutely a rare privilege... To be able to pick just about anyone and succeed.

As someone who's always been burned by how the Smash games are balanced (my favs tend to be mediocre or outright garbage lol) and basically reliant on mods like Balanced Brawl and Project M to get enjoyment out of competitive Smash, Ultimate has just been so... refreshing

I don't really have any excuses for a loss. For a give match. 99.9% of the time I lost because my opponent outplayed. And while that's true for just about every fighting game ever, lopsided character imbalances don't feel that pronounced here.

 

[The_Bookworm]

Ok, finally got quite a lot of my campus work done. Finally going to apply in my analysis on Riptide 3 days after the event has concluded.


With MkLeo winning the whole event with pretty much solo Byleth when leaving the lower bracket behind, this is a pretty big reputation boost for the character. The character will continue to be one of the most scarce in high level play, but who knows? Maybe this performance will inspire others to pick up the character. Likely not, but those are predictions.
All other thoughts related to this can be covered with MkLeo's interview, most notably hinting at the return of the Joker.
Showed up this tourney, but probably not the way people thought was going to happen. People were worried that the character was going to swarm this tournament, but that wasn't the case at all. Only "3" Aegis players made it to top 97, with Cosmos placing 49th, Sparg0 getting 3rd, and MkLeo getting 1st. However, MkLeo largely stopped using them in the latter portion of the bracket (additionally, his early bracket sets were dangerously close). Sparg0 was the only true showcase of the duo in this event, although he also used a good amount of Cloud as well.
While Sparg0's performance is still a very good showcase of the character, this is still a far cry from the domination people was expecting with the character due to the last few notable events.
The character was also being hyped up quite a bit in doubles. I remember people earlier in the thread saying that the character is even crazier in doubles, even better than in singles, and even putting up comparisons to SSB4 Cloud. The truth is that they only did very solidly. The only Aegis players that made it to top 24 in doubles is MkLeo (alongside Sharp) and Sparg0 (alongside Epic_Gabriel), with a 4th and 2nd placement, respectively. The two didn't even use the Aegis exclusively, as MkLeo has played some Byleth and Sparg0 with Cloud. So yeah... definitely not as crazy as some people were making it out to be.
Continues to not be the offline demon that some people thought he was going to be. There is Ned getting 25th and Niko getting 49th. Pretty solid, but that is it. Tweek's only on-stream appearance of the character (outside of Squad Strike) was getting washed by Leo's Byleth in grand finals. Right now, his placements is painting a "very solid, but no where near amazing" picture of the character as of right now. Maybe that will change in the future. Right now, it is unknown if Tweek will consider investing in the Sephiroth after the beating his Diddy took vs MkLeo.
Oh yeah, this character got 4th in a supermajor. The character got some very solid results in the online era, but it is a far cry from the offline era stuff Elegant was putting out. However, Elegant decided to pull a late 2017 and one-up everything he has done so far. Defeating Jake, SKITTLES!!, LingLing, and Goblin in his wake, as well as taking Sparg0 to game 5 last stock (in which he had no offline Aegis exp), Elegant ran a tear throughout the tournament, essentially putting Luigi back on the map yet again.
Speaking of low mobility, high reward on-hit characters, this character finally got some presence in the offline scene yet again after so long. We have yonni getting 9th beating Myran, ATATA, and Dabuz; Jake getting 25th beating Shadow_PR, Chag, and Wisdom; Onin and Eden each getting 49th. Fairly scattered results overall, but still pretty notable regardless.
To note that each of the Steve player's loses showcased on stream, with the exception of the yonni vs Goblin match where it was very close, looked pretty convincing. This character is mad weird yo.
Probably Mewtwo's first big tournament placement since SDX's placements during the first few months of the game's lifespan. WaDi showed up big time with the character, defeating MVD and most notably Sparg0 with the character. However, in his sets vs Tweek and Lui$, the matches looked pretty rough for the character, with the exception of the first game vs Tweek where it was relatively close. WaDi had to pull out his other character to combat them, although he still felt short in the end.
There is a bit of a bird infestation this tournament, not led by Larry Lurr funnily enough. Tilde obtained 17th, while we got Kofi and Pellonian getting 33rd, as well as Ismon using him alongside Wario to get 33rd. The high level Falco players really want to spread the agenda to this tournament. Very solid placements from this character overall this tournament.
Both of these guys finally got at least... something at a bigger event. Rickles got 33rd and BassMage got 49th while beating Kola. Still not very great, but this tournament may unironically enough be the best placement of both of these characters, which kinda says a lot. Not sure if they will be able to repeat said performance, but both of these characters will scrap any W's as they possibly can.


Other things to note more player-specific:
After a some rather lacking placements the last few months, Maister finally got his grove back in this tournament, getting 5th while losing only to his fellow Mexican sword masters MkLeo and Sparg0, who he has historically have trouble with.
After over a year of extremely mixed results and being pushed away from the center of attention in favor of fellow Roy main Kola, Goblin finally hit a massive W in a big tournament, taking 5th place and enduring many grueling close matches against other high profile players.

Top 24 is a major scrapfest of many characters. We have very well-establish character specialists of Fatality and LeoN, who could easily get farther, but is in the middle of a very stacked part of the bracket. Loaf's 13th placement may be the best placement of an American Wario player not named Tweek. We also have a player and notably two players in an era without Samsora. Just some examples of the craziness of this phase of the bracket.

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

Ok, finally got quite a lot of my campus work done. Finally going to apply in my analysis on Riptide 3 days after the event has concluded.
Showed up this tourney, but probably not the way people thought was going to happen. People were worried that the character was going to swarm this tournament, but that wasn't the case at all. Only "3" Aegis players made it to top 97, with Cosmos placing 49th, Sparg0 getting 3rd, and MkLeo getting 1st. However, MkLeo largely stopped using them in the latter portion of the bracket (additionally, his early bracket sets were dangerously close). Sparg0 was the only true showcase of the duo in this event, although he also used a good amount of Cloud as well.
While Sparg0's performance is still a very good showcase of the character, this is still a far cry from the domination people was expecting with the character due to the last few notable events.

If it says anything, Sparg0 still used less then ProtoBanham used to win Kagaribi 4, and people still consider Kagaribi 4 to be a Min Min win.

 

[KirbySquad101]

I think there was only 3 sets Sparg0's Cloud had a major impact in, and that was against Lui$ (who he took 2 games off from with), LingLing (who he also took 2 games off from with), and Maister (who he managed to 3-0 with only Cloud). To my knowledge, he went all Pythra against Kobe, LeoN, Tweek, WaDi, Pandarian, and Elegant (outside of game 1 in that set).

For the record, I still think it's pretty easy to sell the Aegis as a top 3/5 character all things considered, but I do think fears that they would completely throw Ultimate's balance off kilter have been safely quelled for now at least.

Speaking of Sparg0, this tournament did make me confused as to why he was so ready to drop his Cloud now that I look back lol. His wins against LingLing and Maister with Cloud looked far more convincing than they did with Pythra, and it wasn't like he wasn't doing well at the tournaments where he mostly went the Buster Sword wielder. At the very least, he shows strong counterpick promise for future tournaments.

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

Speaking of Sparg0, this tournament did make me confused as to why he was so ready to drop his Cloud now that I look back lol. His wins against LingLing and Maister with Cloud looked far more convincing than they did with Pythra, and it wasn't like he wasn't doing well at the tournaments where he mostly went the Buster Sword wielder. At the very least, he shows strong counterpick promise for future tournaments.

I'd argue the Cloud win against Maister was just as convincing as the win he had with Pyra/Mythra at Cherry's Glasmine 001 over Maister, so I'll reinstate that he wasn't playing at his best at the SWT (his mental was fractured during that day). Clearly that wasn't the case at this tournament, considering he got 3rd again and the top 3 was the exact same as Summit.

In any case, Riddles made a post talking about Cloud.

Cloud is top tier

— Liquid | Riddles (@RiddlesMK) September 17, 2021

Sparg0 doesn't agree

Nah

— FaZe Sparg0 (@Sparg0ssb) September 17, 2021

My personal opinion is that Cloud loses to too many relevant characters such as , , , , / , , , and possibly to be top tier. Struggling with a lot of relevant characters IMO stops you being a top tier just naturally.

 

[Rizen]

I'm bored so here's my MU chart. All this is IMO and based on offline tournaments.
-1.5

-1

Even

+1

+1.5

Need more experience


Some things to note:
-1 is a slight disadvantage and -2 is a disadvantage. YL slightly beats a large chunk of the cast but never beats (or loses to) anyone hard enough to warrant a +/-2. This is because YL is light- sometimes dying as early as 80%, can struggle to kill before 130% and can get beatten up in disadvantage. This means although YL has imo the best neutral in the game he'll have to deal a considerable amount more damage to his opponent than vice versa. Most of his MUs boil down to "how well can the opponent slip through his projectile spam and how hard can they punish YL in advantage?" You'll notice what YL hates the most are big disjoints. That's because YL has a poor disadvantage state vs them and small hitboxes himself. In many MUs his F4, 6f landing lag Nair can help him escape a lot of chains and his Dair covers below him very well. These plus bombs help make up for his average mobility stats in disadvantage. Big disjoints beat all these options. He gets walled hard.

I'll answer any questions.

 

[Hydreigonfan01]

Probably won't be seeing too much / action at Low Tide City. Sparg0 isn't going.

Yea... It looks like I won't be able to attend low tide anymore for personal reasons. Sorry

— FaZe Sparg0 (@Sparg0ssb) September 18, 2021

 

[sleepy_Nex]

My personal opinion is that Cloud loses to too many relevant characters such as , , , , / , , , and possibly to be top tier. Struggling with a lot of relevant characters IMO stops you being a top tier just naturally.

Cloud does well vs Palu. It's an even mu.

 

[The_Bookworm]

SWT: Europe Ultimate Regional Finals

1st: Glutonny
2nd: sisqui
3rd: Tarik
4th: Sintro
5th: Peli
6th: Tomberry (DQ'ed in loser's)

7th: Tru4
7th: Snormanda
9th: Noxumbra
9th: Longo
9th: Freetox_
9th: Raflow
13th: Vidad
13th: SuperStriker
13th: Rinor
13th: iRefuse


Some of the top European players dropped out of this event, namely Bloom4Eva, Sillintor, PurpleDebo, Lucretio, and Homika, and replaced with other high level players. Notably Sintro and Peli are two of the replacements, and they move on in the Smash World Tour.

 

[RonNewcomb]

but the One Cardinal Sin Thou Must Not Do is normalize to roster size. A game ought not be deemed "more balanced" just because it has fewer characters, or "less balanced" because it has more.

This line of thinking implies idiotic and self-contradicting conclusions, such as:

• Deleting Pichu and Bowser from Melee would make it a far more balanced game, greatly improving its competitive scene.
• Brawl must be the most balanced Smash game because over 70% of its roster was represented by top 100 players, the highest of all 4 games.
• Allowing Miis to compete in Smash 4 negatively impacted the game's balance more than Bayonetta+Cloud combined.
• An Ultimate tournament with 32 unique mains used in the top 32 is disappointing because only 39% of the roster was used.

"Balance" being defined in any way relative to roster size means it ceases to be a measure of player experience (aka how many characters you see and play against) and is instead measuring... something else imaginary, some abstract theoretical that cares more about the Pichu vs. Bowser melee matchup than the actual competitive scene.

It's a lazy rainy Sunday (and I'm de-stressing from GG:Strive) so I'm replying to a 10-day-old post.

I disagree.

We should absolutely take roster size into account when deciding how balanced or not a game is. I'd say the entire point of balancing is seeing the whole roster, in tourney, maximized by players. A game with a roster of 8 characters that are evenly matched is absolutely more balanced than that same game after were added as DLC. Removing those two characters from that lower tier improves balance regardless if the removing is done either by deleting them from the game or buffing them out of that tier. Different methods but same result: everyone's at the same baseline of power.

Sure, the competitive experience is greatly changed by adding characters who are above the baseline, and not changed hardly at all by adding characters who are below the baseline. (The competitive experience isn't necessarily poor with the same ditto in top 8 all the time if that character is dynamic, creative and interesting. Spectator experience, greatly less so.) The tiers above base are weighted differently than the tiers below base.

There's more than one definition of balance depending on if you're a dev or a competitor. One S+ tier character in a balanced game is, for the dev, very close to balanced since the game's literally one nerf away from nirvana, even if the competitor says there's no balance at all. They are simultaneously both right. Maybe say, who's more right depends on the speed of the patch cycle. Or a TO with a ban hammer.

A perfectly balanced game does not necessarily improve the competitive experience even if it does improve the spectator's. From a player perspective imbalanced games are easier to git gud at since most of the playerbase won't pick a top tier but the competitor will. This gives that competitor a much easier time in pools. The competitor doesn't want balance, they want all the cool characters to be weak. They will play Wario. They will play Birdie.

A well balanced game tends to destroy competitors. Constant character crisis. Can't seem to win reliably with any two cast members let alone one. Even pools are stressful.

Balance improves the fan's experience because they aren't losing on the char select screen. They really can play whomever they want. Some players would rather lose than switch to a known top tier. If their fav is bad enough these players tend to drift away from the game and its scene over time.

Balance improves the spectator's experience. Spectators tend to be fans, and it's no fun watching your sweet dreamy Kirby get curbstomped every rare time he appears. Even without investment, it's little fun watching, say, vs because the outcome is pretty close to a foregone conclusion.

Smash 4 would absolutely be more balanced by deleting two or three DLC, by anyone's definition. It would also be more balanced by emptying out the bottom-tier rung on the ladder, by any method.

 

[WatwatBreton]

Just gonna address this lil bit

A well balanced game tends to destroy competitors. Constant character crisis. Can't seem to win reliably with any two cast members let alone one. Even pools are stressful.

... does it? I gotta say I thought about it and I find the correlation very shaky at best lol. The best argument I could find to correlate your point is that an unbalanced game will let competitors get free wins of people who play bad characters which is... true I guess? But barely changes anything once outside of that low-skill pool - a pool the better player will most likely win against anyway because he's, well, better. I don't think melee top 10 players struggle to get out of pool composed of marth/fox/falco only particularly more than against luigi/ganon/insert mid tier, they're just better and in a game which heavily rewards player skill.

I cooould see the argument that a more balanced game leads to more viable characters picks which leads to a bigger roster size, making it both harder to pick a main (too much choices) and making it more likely you get upset by matchups you haven't seen before? But I feel like this issue is more about big roster sizes and not really about balance.

In any case I'd be curious to hear about a well balanced game that "destroys" competitors. And considering Japan's impressive results with mostly character specialists, Leo pre-covid joker dominance, or Gluttony ruling over Europe with his Wario since the beginning of the game, I'm not sure Ultimate would qualify.

 

[Minix0]

I'm bored so here's my MU chart. All this is IMO and based on offline tournaments.
-1.5

-1

Even

+1

+1.5

Need more experience


Some things to note:
-1 is a slight disadvantage and -2 is a disadvantage. YL slightly beats a large chunk of the cast but never beats (or loses to) anyone hard enough to warrant a +/-2. This is because YL is light- sometimes dying as early as 80%, can struggle to kill before 130% and can get beatten up in disadvantage. This means although YL has imo the best neutral in the game he'll have to deal a considerable amount more damage to his opponent than vice versa. Most of his MUs boil down to "how well can the opponent slip through his projectile spam and how hard can they punish YL in advantage?" You'll notice what YL hates the most are big disjoints. That's because YL has a poor disadvantage state vs them and small hitboxes himself. In many MUs his F4, 6f landing lag Nair can help him escape a lot of chains and his Dair covers below him very well. These plus bombs help make up for his average mobility stats in disadvantage. Big disjoints beat all these options. He gets walled hard.

I'll answer any questions.

I concur for Ridley

 

[Thinkaman]

We should absolutely take roster size into account when deciding how balanced or not a game is. I'd say the entire point of balancing is seeing the whole roster, in tourney, maximized by players.

Removing those two characters from that lower tier improves balance regardless if the removing is done either by deleting them from the game or buffing them out of that tier.

There's more than one definition of balance depending on if you're a dev or a competitor.

A perfectly balanced game does not necessarily improve the competitive experience even if it does improve the spectator's.

I think the difference of perspectives here comes more or less entirely from different definitions of balance.

I tend to exclude "trivial solutions" from actionable concepts--such as, for "balance", I would never include homogonization (making all characters identical) under the definition. Even if that would still fullfill some textbook etymological definition of the word, including it makes the word useless for discussion. (Everyone would have to be constantly clarifying that they mean balance-as-a-player-experience-without-homogonization, and conversations about maximizing balance as a goal have to eternally retread the same boilerplate disclaimers and assurances of what everyone means.)

If you are operating under some broader definition of balance, then sure the matchups of and pals can have whatever relevance your definition provides for them. But by those unweighted, more abstract and roster-relative perspectives you are talking about, it inevitably means and don't matter much because they are only 2.6% and 1.7% of their respective games.

But this is not the lived experience of any player, especially at any level of competition. doesn't have a 3.8% relevance to the competitive scene compared to 's 2.6%, and any way of interpreting/presenting data which would suggest that is not useful for competitive analysis.

You can't have your cake and eat it too: Any definition that allows to be more than 2.6% says has to be 0.0%.

From a player perspective imbalanced games are easier to git gud at since most of the playerbase won't pick a top tier but the competitor will. This gives that competitor a much easier time in pools. The competitor doesn't want balance, they want all the cool characters to be weak. They will play Wario. They will play Birdie.

This is dead on. I think few people connect the dots that top competitors do not want a balanced game. At least, the true alpha-competitor Spike inside them doesn't. (They are allowed to have an inner child like the rest of us.)

Spike doesn't want your character to be good. In fact, Spike would be perfectly happy if your character was banned.

Spike wants to play a game at the exact complexity envelope that is optimal for his practice capabilities and sunk costs. It is in his self-interest to advocate the removal of everything else.

This is the eternal sorrow of stages. And in the rare case it is socially acceptable to do so--like the Miis--they will happily remove characters from the game too, regardless of strength.

A well balanced game tends to destroy competitors. Constant character crisis. Can't seem to win reliably with any two cast members let alone one. Even pools are stressful.

Yeah, we're gonna need some citations on this one chief.

By and large, the more successful eSports tend to be meticulously balanced. LoL and DotA have more balance effort invested than any other games, and remain on top.

Balance improves the fan's experience because they aren't losing on the char select screen. They really can play whomever they want. Some players would rather lose than switch to a known top tier. If their fav is bad enough these players tend to drift away from the game and its scene over time.

Balance improves the spectator's experience. Spectators tend to be fans, and it's no fun watching your sweet dreamy Kirby get curbstomped every rare time he appears. Even without investment, it's little fun watching, say, vs because the outcome is pretty close to a foregone conclusion.

Every part of this is accurate.

Streaming has made balance problems that used to only impact the top 0.001% of players suddenly affect the experience of the entire audience watching. This has become an even bigger argument for balancing "towards the center of the bullseye" than merely the old Sirlin-argument of hoping said "center" is optimally representative.