Official Competitive Character Impressions 2.0

[KirbySquad101]

To be honest, outside of 's confusingly low placement, I think I can get behind this list overall; I am still on the fence of being ranked alongside characters that have been performing way better than him, but we'll see.

Like Browny said, I am glad is finally being respectably placed after so many misguided evaluations from players everywhere about the character. Same goes for .

 

[Sean²]

I dunno, I have trouble putting faith in tier lists made for sub goals. They usually have all the same top 5, same-ish top 20 give or take a couple characters, and the same bottom 5. Then the other 45 or so characters get blasted into a mishmash of random placements in mid tier based on...what again? Potential? Lack of data? No top players playing them? If you want to be realistic, put all the characters with next to zero data or results in bottom tier with Mac and call it a day, or just don’t rank them at all. You can’t gauge that a character is mid tier with no data on said character.

They just don’t seem that well thought out to me.

 

[ZephyrZ]

It still seems so strange to me that so many people still rank Ivysaur as equal to or better then PT. Wishes, Pandarian, no Leffen just stick with solo Ivysaur, even if they tend to lean towards her. They all prefer to start matches with Squirtle and will still mix in a little Charizard here and there, and Leffen's can do some cool things with Zard on occasion despite all the smack he talks about that character.

I think it's hard to dispute that PT is objectively better as a package.

 

[Justin Allen Goldschmidt]

I dunno, I have trouble putting faith in tier lists made for sub goals. They usually have all the same top 5, same-ish top 20 give or take a couple characters, and the same bottom 5. Then the other 45 or so characters get blasted into a mishmash of random placements in mid tier based on...what again? Potential? Lack of data? No top players playing them? If you want to be realistic, put all the characters with next to zero data or results in bottom tier with Mac and call it a day, or just don’t rank them at all. You can’t gauge that a character is mid tier with no data on said character.

They just don’t seem that well thought out to me.

I mostly agree with your post. Like, Shulk might be fantastic, but what has anyone actually done with him so far? Meanwhile there's also exactly one great ZSS player and she's in top 20 now, but at least there are *some* results. Tierlists don't need to be based entirely on results, but they should be considered when a character that most players put into high tier for "potential" still hasn't done anything super noteworthy, unless I'm missing something. Slap them up there once they have even one dedicated main or even secondary that does at least one or two relevant things with them, otherwise please make an "I don't know yet" section of your tierlist. Not everyone needs to have an "opinion" (assumption) on literally every single character. Like for me: I couldn't begin to tell you where I think a character like Sonic is going to end up, so I won't even pretend to have an opinion on it. I do like Cosmos' tierlist for the most part, but there's always "wtf why, they don't even do anything" picks that wig me out. Still decent overall though. Sorry for the rant.

 

[NINTENDO Galaxy]

Hitbox Viewer for Smash Ultimate is out, go wild.

https://twitter.com/jugeeya/status/1112454453427236864

 

[Idon]

Hitbox Viewer for Smash Ultimate is out, go wild.

https://twitter.com/jugeeya/status/1112454453427236864

First thing I'm looking at is that Pichu ftilt.

 

[TimG57867]

this was real https://t.co/LGHSULUNjp

— HB | Captain L (@captainlsheikah) April 2, 2019

If this is to be believed, it seems CaptainL is serious about becoming a user with Pikachu being the main. And more notably he feels that their matchup coverage isn't that redundant. CaptainL is one of the premier Pichu users and a major innovator of the character thus far. Between this apparent development and ESAM's recent big win, things may be looking up for Pikachu. Will be interesting to see how this development actually pans out. He was exploring Pikachu a lot more in locals leading up to this major.

 

[Heracr055]

I mostly agree with your post. Like, Shulk might be fantastic, but what has anyone actually done with him so far? Meanwhile there's also exactly one great ZSS player and she's in top 20 now, but at least there are *some* results. Tierlists don't need to be based entirely on results, but they should be considered when a character that most players put into high tier for "potential" still hasn't done anything super noteworthy, unless I'm missing something. Slap them up there once they have even one dedicated main or even secondary that does at least one or two relevant things with them, otherwise please make an "I don't know yet" section of your tierlist. Not everyone needs to have an "opinion" (assumption) on literally every single character. Like for me: I couldn't begin to tell you where I think a character like Sonic is going to end up, so I won't even pretend to have an opinion on it. I do like Cosmos' tierlist for the most part, but there's always "wtf why, they don't even do anything" picks that wig me out. Still decent overall though. Sorry for the rant.

In addition to Marss we also have Choco in Japan, who unfortunately doesn't leave Japan often to play. We're also at the cusp of Prime Saga so we'll see some other fairly strong ZSS players get a chance to show their stuff in a couple of weeks.

 

[Rizen]

Hitbox Viewer for Smash Ultimate is out, go wild.

https://twitter.com/jugeeya/status/1112454453427236864

Is there a place where I can view these online without having to mod my switch?

 

[DelugeFGC]

Is there a place where I can view these online without having to mod my switch?

I'd like to know the same, as good as this looks I'm not itching to risk getting banned over it.

 

[Siledh]

Hitbox Viewer for Smash Ultimate is out, go wild.

https://twitter.com/jugeeya/status/1112454453427236864

The hitboxes on his Ganondorf's sword doesn't match previously researched hitboxes.

 

[Omnos]

The hitboxes on his Ganondorf's sword doesn't match previously researched hitboxes.

If you take 5 seconds to scroll down you would have got your explanation about ganons f smash

 

[Siledh]

If you take 5 seconds to scroll down you would have got your explanation about ganons f smash

Yea, that it can't interpolate, which means it's not entirely accurate. Still worth pointing out to anyone who can't be bothered reading a twitter thread for information which should be mentioned at the start.

 

[SwagGuy99]

Pikachu has 79 weight which is about as light as Kirby surprisingly enough. So it's not like he's hard to KO.

He's harder to KO than Pichu though and he also has slightly more range to contest Ganon with as well. I still think vs isn't a great matchup, but if makes one mistake, it can be pretty easy to capitalize off of it as .

there are simply better all-round characters than him, more than 10.

Who exactly? Being a top tier doesn't nessesarily make you an all-rounder. While there are some top/high high tier all-rounders () I would find it very hard to justify some other Top/High high tiers (like ) as being all-rounders.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Cosmos posted his own personal tier list and while I'm not particularly in the mood - and kinda tired altogether - of discussing the minutiae of someone's ordering (even though I think the characters that encompass the top 20 is a fair selection considering how most characters are really good in this game), I find it kind of interesting that he considers Olimar sixth best/an S-tier gatekeeper rather than an actual S-tier character. And I highly doubt MU bias is reflective of that position considering he believes Olimar is one of the few bad matchups his main has.

Personally I think the character may as well be the best character in the game, but maybe someone can make a compelling reason as to why that might not be the case. Everything about Olimar just seems kind of stupidly overtuned and haphazardly designed to the point that I'm not really sure what weaknesses he really has.

CosMos seems to have a good grisp on the metagame. I personally think Ike's better than Shulk however. Mario should be a little higher up, Link could be moved up a tier because of results, G&W and Villager aren't better than Diddy in my humble opinion (I do appriciate his Diddy ranking tho). But otherwise it's quite solid!

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

It sure is odd how so many people admit that they don't know enough about most characters to rank them properly, while also consistently putting them in the same place as everyone else. Almost like they're too afraid of having a different opinion...

At least he ranked the Pits good. They are severely underrated, possibly the most in the entire game. And good that G&W is finally getting recognised. Imagine people thinking you are bottom tier because 1 move got nerfed, while literally everything else was either buffed hard, or left as it was and his moves are generally very good to begin with.

I agree GaW is sorely underplayed and underrated.

I don't agree that Pit is good though.

Hi Browny!

It still seems so strange to me that so many people still rank Ivysaur as equal to or better then PT. Wishes, Pandarian, no Leffen just stick with solo Ivysaur, even if they tend to lean towards her. They all prefer to start matches with Squirtle and will still mix in a little Charizard here and there, and Leffen's can do some cool things with Zard on occasion despite all the smack he talks about that character.

I think it's hard to dispute that PT is objectively better as a package.

Pokemon trainer is definitely anchored by Ivysaur from my perspective, but I do agree with you that the other two Pokemon are undervalued. It's true that Squirtle is sort of a generic, worse version of rushdown speedsters like Pichu and Sheik, but that archetype of character is also inherently strong, and having access to any version of Pichu whenever you want as an Ivysaur player doesn't seem like a bad deal to me.

I think Pokemon Trainer suffers a bit from each Pokemon being a little TOO focused on what they do. Squirtle not having much kill power seems like an intentional choice, one I don't like. Charizard being such an example of classic Smash heavy design seems like a bad deal for him (weight and kill power, but no neutral). Ivysaur is a complete character, which is why I think PT is working atm. But you do have other tools in the box if you need them.

I do think Zard is pretty bad though

 

[Victory.IsMyDestinySSB4]

I think it should be important, when considering the current metagame, which characters will rise above the others. At this point in time, we are seeing certain heavies/superheavies fall behind based on sheer frame data putting them at a disadvantage. Such examples include ,,, and . Now, there are exceptions to this, as there are with practically anything. is a beast of a character all to himself and may be a top tier. has combos yet to be explored. And I don't think that we can fairly judge yet.
However, I have always been wondering, when are the so-called "underrated characters" going to rise up? I think has OUTSTANDING combo potential, but I have yet to seen a player finish at a high spot using them. If can shock Frostbite, why can't some other "underrated" character do so?
Discussing the future, here are some movements we may see in the (far) future.
Most of these decisions made are based on how tier lists have changed over the history of previous Smash games, as well as lab training clips, which are quite complex, but may be utilized in the future. Furthermore, there are many characters that top players are utilizing more now than in the past, especially online, which may lead to pockets or mains in the next coming months. Most of these characters will likely be used as pockets.
Going up:
Going down:
Now, I know that is really good at this point. However, people will eventually learn how to space around nair, and parrying will be easier. I'm not predicting a super big fall, but he might not be considered top tier in the future, and will most likely hang around the lower end of high tier.
I feel the most confident regarding. In my opinion, people will likely start utilizing icees against sword characters, since it would require VERY careful spacing to avoid the one-touch-and-you-die scenario.

All that being said, most of these opinions are most likely garbage since the patch coming tonight (or 3.0.0) will likely give a lot of the heavies mentioned kill combos like in Smash 4. A similar thing happened, in that and were LAUGHABLY bad before they got kill combos. But all the speculation I am doing is in reference to how things might be if they stay how it is now.

 

[Rizen]

CosMos seems to have a good grisp on the metagame. I personally think Ike's better than Shulk however. Mario should be a little higher up, Link could be moved up a tier because of results, G&W and Villager aren't better than Diddy in my humble opinion (I do appriciate his Diddy ranking tho). But otherwise it's quite solid!

I like Link there because he's not quite as good as other high tiers. But do admit he's getting results and could be in high tier.

I think it should be important, when considering the current metagame, which characters will rise above the others. At this point in time, we are seeing certain heavies/superheavies fall behind based on sheer frame data putting them at a disadvantage. Such examples include ,,, and . Now, there are exceptions to this, as there are with practically anything. is a beast of a character all to himself and may be a top tier. has combos yet to be explored. And I don't think that we can fairly judge yet.
However, I have always been wondering, when are the so-called "underrated characters" going to rise up? I think has OUTSTANDING combo potential, but I have yet to seen a player finish at a high spot using them. If can shock Frostbite, why can't some other "underrated" character do so?
Discussing the future, here are some movements we may see in the (far) future.
Most of these decisions made are based on how tier lists have changed over the history of previous Smash games, as well as lab training clips, which are quite complex, but may be utilized in the future. Furthermore, there are many characters that top players are utilizing more now than in the past, especially online, which may lead to pockets or mains in the next coming months. Most of these characters will likely be used as pockets.
Going up:
Going down:
Now, I know that is really good at this point. However, people will eventually learn how to space around nair, and parrying will be easier. I'm not predicting a super big fall, but he might not be considered top tier in the future, and will most likely hang around the lower end of high tier.
I feel the most confident regarding. In my opinion, people will likely start utilizing icees against sword characters, since it would require VERY careful spacing to avoid the one-touch-and-you-die scenario.

All that being said, most of these opinions are most likely garbage since the patch coming tonight (or 3.0.0) will likely give a lot of the heavies mentioned kill combos like in Smash 4. A similar thing happened, in that and were LAUGHABLY bad before they got kill combos. But all the speculation I am doing is in reference to how things might be if they stay how it is now.

Like I said earlier super heavyweights just aren't a high tier build. They're definitely viable but having such bad disadvantage states they can only go so far.

ICs are an interesting character. Almost nobody uses them but they have high potential.

 

[ProfessorVincent]

I've been thinking about PT as a character that can teach the player the basics of the general rock, paper, scissors of MU dynamics. Similar to how the three Pokemon starter types are meant to teach the player the rps dynamics in that game.

I don't mean to say that this translates exactly in top level or that the character is good for learning MUs in detail, but that this probably explains how the character is designed.

Squirtle, the rushdown, can oppress big slow characters with its combos and great frame data, but loses to swordies' disjoints with decent frame data. Ivy, the swordy, can outrange rushdowns with its disjoints, but is outranged by heavies' hitboxes without having the frame data to make up for it (Ivy is where the rps triangle kinda falls apart because she has a great projectile in her kit that can keep heavies away). Charizard is heavy and has a decent recovery, making him hard to edgeguard and outright kill, and is able to outrange swordies (ideally), but falls apart to rushdown characters.

Based on that, what do you guys think the developers got right or wrong with their design? Undeniably, it seems that the whole thing is skewed towards Ivy a bit much.

 

[Rizen]

I've been thinking about PT as a character that can teach the player the basics of the general rock, paper, scissors of MU dynamics. Similar to how the three Pokemon starter types are meant to teach the player the rps dynamics in that game.

I don't mean to say that this translates exactly in top level or that the character is good for learning MUs in detail, but that this probably explains how the character is designed.

Squirtle, the rushdown, can oppress big slow characters with its combos and great frame data, but loses to swordies' disjoints with decent frame data. Ivy, the swordy, can outrange rushdowns with its disjoints, but is outranged by heavies' hitboxes without having the frame data to make up for it (Ivy is where the rps triangle kinda falls apart because she has a great projectile in her kit that can keep heavies away). Charizard is heavy and has a decent recovery, making him hard to edgeguard and outright kill, and is able to outrange swordies (ideally), but falls apart to rushdown characters.

Based on that, what do you guys think the developers got right or wrong with their design? Undeniably, it seems that the whole thing is skewed towards Ivy a bit much.

I think of as more of an early, mid and late stock trio. has great low% combos but is the 3rd lightest character and struggles to kill. I think people are used to seeing Squirt's strong points and think he's better than Charizard because players usually switch to Ivy before seeing Squirt struggle.

's the most well rounded and probably a better character than the other two. But, like with squirtle, you never see how c****y Ivy's recovery is because players switch to Charizard. Ivy's recovery is like Belmont's without the uppercut for near the stage. Ivy can't even tether the ledge from under it.

is the heaviest, with the best recovery and strong kill moves; best suited for late game. The thing is all Charizard's heavyweight issues are always present. Char was my low tier main in SSB4 and something I complained about, which still applies, is Char's head sticks out in front. It looks like Char has a great grab and big hitboxes but his head occupies most of that space before he shifts it to attack. Char's forward disjoint isn't very good, unlike many other super heavies like DK.

At the end of the day Ivy's the best but none of the three would be great solo and they don't have to be. PT is a high tier team that can switch as necessary.

 

[Justin Allen Goldschmidt]

I've been thinking about PT as a character that can teach the player the basics of the general rock, paper, scissors of MU dynamics. Similar to how the three Pokemon starter types are meant to teach the player the rps dynamics in that game.

I don't mean to say that this translates exactly in top level or that the character is good for learning MUs in detail, but that this probably explains how the character is designed.

Squirtle, the rushdown, can oppress big slow characters with its combos and great frame data, but loses to swordies' disjoints with decent frame data. Ivy, the swordy, can outrange rushdowns with its disjoints, but is outranged by heavies' hitboxes without having the frame data to make up for it (Ivy is where the rps triangle kinda falls apart because she has a great projectile in her kit that can keep heavies away). Charizard is heavy and has a decent recovery, making him hard to edgeguard and outright kill, and is able to outrange swordies (ideally), but falls apart to rushdown characters.

Based on that, what do you guys think the developers got right or wrong with their design? Undeniably, it seems that the whole thing is skewed towards Ivy a bit much.

The only thing I feel they got wrong is having Charizard's air speed be so low, with aerial jumps that short. Extremely slight buffs to both (in the realm of 3-8% for speed and 7-12% for jump height) would make his strengths matter more, in my opinion.

 

[FLGibsonIII]

I think it should be important, when considering the current metagame, which characters will rise above the others. At this point in time, we are seeing certain heavies/superheavies fall behind based on sheer frame data putting them at a disadvantage. Such examples include ,,, and . Now, there are exceptions to this, as there are with practically anything. is a beast of a character all to himself and may be a top tier. has combos yet to be explored. And I don't think that we can fairly judge yet.
However, I have always been wondering, when are the so-called "underrated characters" going to rise up? I think has OUTSTANDING combo potential, but I have yet to seen a player finish at a high spot using them. If can shock Frostbite, why can't some other "underrated" character do so?
Discussing the future, here are some movements we may see in the (far) future.
Most of these decisions made are based on how tier lists have changed over the history of previous Smash games, as well as lab training clips, which are quite complex, but may be utilized in the future. Furthermore, there are many characters that top players are utilizing more now than in the past, especially online, which may lead to pockets or mains in the next coming months. Most of these characters will likely be used as pockets.
Going up:
Going down:
Now, I know that is really good at this point. However, people will eventually learn how to space around nair, and parrying will be easier. I'm not predicting a super big fall, but he might not be considered top tier in the future, and will most likely hang around the lower end of high tier.
I feel the most confident regarding. In my opinion, people will likely start utilizing icees against sword characters, since it would require VERY careful spacing to avoid the one-touch-and-you-die scenario.

All that being said, most of these opinions are most likely garbage since the patch coming tonight (or 3.0.0) will likely give a lot of the heavies mentioned kill combos like in Smash 4. A similar thing happened, in that and were LAUGHABLY bad before they got kill combos. But all the speculation I am doing is in reference to how things might be if they stay how it is now.

I think Nana's AI is holding back ICs more than anything at this point. Her bad AI legitimately gets the ICs killed.

 

[SwagGuy99]

I like Link there because he's not quite as good as other high tiers. But do admit he's getting results and could be in high tier.

Like I said earlier super heavyweights just aren't a high tier build. They're definitely viable but having such bad disadvantage states they can only go so far.

This isn't necessarily true. It's kind of hard to deny that is probably a high tier character even with his poor disadvantage state because his strengths in his advantage state are able to make up for those disadvantages a lot of the time. may be similar but I don't think that he's being played enough currently in Ultimate to be able to make a decision on this yet. The real reason IMO that superheavies are often bad isn't always their disadvantage state, it is also that their advantage state isn't good enough to either A. keep them out of disadvantage for long periods of time or B. isn't good enough to make up for disadvantage state along with other weaknesses.

At this point in time, we are seeing certain heavies/superheavies fall behind based on sheer frame data putting them at a disadvantage. Such examples include ,,, and . Now, there are exceptions to this, as there are with practically anything. is a beast of a character all to himself and may be a top tier. has combos yet to be explored. And I don't think that we can fairly judge yet.

I agree with all of this except I don't think you can say is going to drop because frame data puts him at a disadvantage as his frame data is actually a lot better than every other superheavy except maybe and it's still better than a lot of the normal heavyweights too.

I
However, I have always been wondering, when are the so-called "underrated characters" going to rise up? I think has OUTSTANDING combo potential, but I have yet to seen a player finish at a high spot using them. If can shock Frostbite, why can't some other "underrated" character do so?
Discussing the future, here are some movements we may see in the (far) future.
Most of these decisions made are based on how tier lists have changed over the history of previous Smash games, as well as lab training clips, which are quite complex, but may be utilized in the future. Furthermore, there are many characters that top players are utilizing more now than in the past, especially online, which may lead to pockets or mains in the next coming months. Most of these characters will likely be used as pockets.
Going up:
Going down:
Now, I know that is really good at this point. However, people will eventually learn how to space around nair, and parrying will be easier. I'm not predicting a super big fall, but he might not be considered top tier in the future, and will most likely hang around the lower end of high tier.
I feel the most confident regarding. In my opinion, people will likely start utilizing icees against sword characters, since it would require VERY careful spacing to avoid the one-touch-and-you-die scenario.

I agree with this except I don't feel like will move down. he has so much room to grow as he has three characters who can all be utilized in different ways.

 

[Ziodyne 21]

In a surprsing move/ Tweek just posted on his twitter page that He actullay does not like Ultimate , giving a very detailed list on the reasons why



https://twitter.com/TweekSsb/status/1113245965941649408

"I overall dislike the gameplay, but I DO like a handful of characters. Things are too unreactable/unpublishable. Everything is just so safe.​

Without perfect pivoting there’s no micro movement to punish all these things with no lag. And so many things are safe on parry PLUS so many things are unreactable by parry. You have to get so many reads just to MAYBE win neutral.​

I respect the way they made this game. They sped it up, added a lot of universal things to make characters faster and more viable. But the results are the opposite of what you’d expect. This game is very campy/defensive but I feel like it may not look like it at first glance (?)​

The universal things they added also made the game lose a lot of flavor to me. A lot of these characters just have a safe aerial they use as a hit confirm for follow ups. And it just happens over and over.​

As for professional play, I also dislike it. Everyone is so afraid to commit because everything is so safe and unreactable. They just stick to their safe neutral tools that will lead to follow ups if they get a hit.​

I rarely see anything “cool” especially in tournament play. This doesn’t irk me too much because I’m a competitor and I play to win, but still, I love smash and I hate that this game can be really boring.​

Spectating has never been more different than playing. The game seems perfectly fine but playing it can be really frustrating when it just feels like I have to get lucky in neutral.​

There’s also something that may be more of a personal thought but I hate all these small hurtbox top tiers. Most of your moves have no chance of hitting them while they can 0 to death you easily. Extremely dumb imo."​

​

​

Wow.. anyone agree or find any truth in any of the points he brought up?​

 

[Yikarur]

Ivysaur is massively overrated. Squirtle is the best pokemon for sure.
But you can't rank them in a vacuum anyway.

Ivysaur is the easiest to play and you get a lot reward from simplest things. This results in a steamroll where people play more Ivysaur, because at this early state of the game characters like Ivy are much stronger, and if they switch to another pokemom they get bodied, because they mainly played Ivysaur, because it's their best pokemon, because they got the most results out of her etc.

For a lot Pokemon Trainer Players playing Squirtle is like playing the obvious much worse Secondary of a player who mains a "normal" character. Then they get bodied and go back to their main and thus the "secondary" doesn't get better.

This is the history of Ivysaur players and I'm really looking forward to a full developed pokemon trainer in the future, while all Ivy players will fall behind.

 

[NairWizard]

In a surprsing move/ Tweek just posted on his twitter page that He actullay does not like Ultimate , giving a very detailed list on the reasons whyweetedthat He actullay does not like Ultimate that much , giving a very detailed list on the reasons why



https://twitter.com/TweekSsb/status/1113245965941649408

"I overall dislike the gameplay, but I DO like a handful of characters. Things are too unreactable/unpublishable. Everything is just so safe.​

Without perfect pivoting there’s no micro movement to punish all these things with no lag. And so many things are safe on parry PLUS so many things are unreactable by parry. You have to get so many reads just to MAYBE win neutral.​

I respect the way they made this game. They sped it up, added a lot of universal things to make characters faster and more viable. But the results are the opposite of what you’d expect. This game is very campy/defensive but I feel like it may not look like it at first glance (?)​

The universal things they added also made the game lose a lot of flavor to me. A lot of these characters just have a safe aerial they use as a hit confirm for follow ups. And it just happens over and over.​

As for professional play, I also dislike it. Everyone is so afraid to commit because everything is so safe and unreactable. They just stick to their safe neutral tools that will lead to follow ups if they get a hit.​

I rarely see anything “cool” especially in tournament play. This doesn’t irk me too much because I’m a competitor and I play to win, but still, I love smash and I hate that this game can be really boring.​

Spectating has never been more different than playing. The game seems perfectly fine but playing it can be really frustrating when it just feels like I have to get lucky in neutral.​

There’s also something that may be more of a personal thought but I hate all these small hurtbox top tiers. Most of your moves have no chance of hitting them while they can 0 to death you easily. Extremely dumb imo."​

​

​

Wow.. anyone agree or find any truth in any of the points he brought up?​

Players like ZeRo and Tweek are used to being dominant because they can react to everything in neutral. They have super fast reaction times and can set up situations where they can twitch-respond to a move like a dash attack, and others can never get to their level of play because they aren't physically capable of similar reactions.

Ultimate nerfed reactive play really hard.

This game lets you press unreactable buttons as mixups, and our top reactive players do not like that at all.

 

[meleebrawler]

In a surprsing move/ Tweek just posted on his twitter page that He actullay does not like Ultimate , giving a very detailed list on the reasons whyweetedthat He actullay does not like Ultimate that much , giving a very detailed list on the reasons why



https://twitter.com/TweekSsb/status/1113245965941649408

"I overall dislike the gameplay, but I DO like a handful of characters. Things are too unreactable/unpublishable. Everything is just so safe.​

Without perfect pivoting there’s no micro movement to punish all these things with no lag. And so many things are safe on parry PLUS so many things are unreactable by parry. You have to get so many reads just to MAYBE win neutral.​

I respect the way they made this game. They sped it up, added a lot of universal things to make characters faster and more viable. But the results are the opposite of what you’d expect. This game is very campy/defensive but I feel like it may not look like it at first glance (?)​

The universal things they added also made the game lose a lot of flavor to me. A lot of these characters just have a safe aerial they use as a hit confirm for follow ups. And it just happens over and over.​

As for professional play, I also dislike it. Everyone is so afraid to commit because everything is so safe and unreactable. They just stick to their safe neutral tools that will lead to follow ups if they get a hit.​

I rarely see anything “cool” especially in tournament play. This doesn’t irk me too much because I’m a competitor and I play to win, but still, I love smash and I hate that this game can be really boring.​

Spectating has never been more different than playing. The game seems perfectly fine but playing it can be really frustrating when it just feels like I have to get lucky in neutral.​

There’s also something that may be more of a personal thought but I hate all these small hurtbox top tiers. Most of your moves have no chance of hitting them while they can 0 to death you easily. Extremely dumb imo."​

​

​

Wow.. anyone agree or find any truth in any of the points he brought up?​

Isn't he describing min-maxing in every Smash game? Finding who has the safest buttons that lead to the greatest reward, which in turn leads others to fear committing to anything around them? Even Sakurai noticed this at least since Smash 4.

Even if the game does turn out to be more "defensive", I think spectators can respect it more in the form of dancing around the stage trying to weave around hitboxes than just running up and shield(grab)ing.

 

[KirbySquad101]

To keep the conversation running, I think Sonix had very similar thoughts about the game as well that he shared just about a day ago:

My biggest gripe with Ultimate is the lack of creativity and depth the game has. Top tiers are straight forward, advantage state is linear, very few movement options to mix up from, there’s barely any conditioning involved as both input buffering and shield sucks. Pretty boring

— LG Sonix (@UltimateSonix) April 1, 2019

I can see where's he coming from; the transition from to hasn't been the smoothest for most Sonic players (I'm actually not too sure if 6WX mains him or not). Combined with the fact that way more things are safe in Ultimate than they were in 4, I think things have been really bumpy for certain players.

 

[blackghost]

Going up:
.

would you kindly explain this analysis regarding bayo, luigi, and IC's?

 

[Justin Allen Goldschmidt]

To keep the conversation running, I think Sonix had very similar thoughts about the game as well that he shared just about a day ago:

My biggest gripe with Ultimate is the lack of creativity and depth the game has. Top tiers are straight forward, advantage state is linear, very few movement options to mix up from, there’s barely any conditioning involved as both input buffering and shield sucks. Pretty boring

— LG Sonix (@UltimateSonix) April 1, 2019

I can see where's he coming from; the transition from to hasn't been the smoothest for most Sonic players (I'm actually not too sure if 6WX mains him or not). Combined with the fact that way more things are safe in Ultimate than they were in 4, I think things have been really bumpy for certain players.

To be honest, it's because the game feels more and more like it's going back to its roots. Yeah it's simple, but it was always supposed to be. Simple characters being the best? Melee Fox, Falco, (EDIT Marth, and Puff fit that pretty well (Peach...not so much, but Armada is a legend for a reason). Stuff being pretty safe is a good thing in my book. Maybe at the tippy-top level stuff is "too safe" and players play lame, but you'll always get players like Nairo and Mango that go for the big money, perhaps sometimes go out like busters, but still. At basically all other levels of play, the game feels better than ever in my opinion, more characters (even by percentage of the cast) are viable *and* fun than ever, and the game seems to have plenty of depth so far in the first few months, it just doesn't take ten years to find it in 2019 like it used to back in 1998 or 2001, etc. I dunno man, I think he just needs to take a break and re-evaluate if what he wants in a Smash game is just what he was doing in the previous one. That being said.... wasn't his name really made as a Cloud player for the bulk of his Smash 4 career? I know he played other characters (great DK), but like.... It doesn't get much safer or simpler than that. Reactable, sure, but most of the game was slower of course. All that being said, if he doesn't like it anymore, it would be healthier for him to move on, right? It's a game, even if he's playing to win money. It would take far more money than what a Smash player wins from even major tournaments to get me to constantly do something I no longer enjoy.

 

[NotLiquid]

"I respect the way they made this game. They sped it up, added a lot of universal things to make characters faster and more viable. But the results are the opposite of what you’d expect. This game is very campy/defensive but I feel like it may not look like it at first glance (?)"

​

Between this and Melee drama, is this finally the turning point where Smash players realize that fighting games, by virtue, are most optimally played when mastering defensive aggression? Smash 64 players were ahead of the curve on this pickup.

Ultimate ain't some perfect game, but it is telling that it's specifically the players who had gamed Smash 4's mechanics to rise up and become the best that have the biggest problems with it, and it's ironic given that they were nowhere near as outspoken when it came to that game despite it having a myriad of issues. Smash 4 devolved to a point where everything was unsafe, and it felt like the worse game for it. It forced the game to be defensive, but it was the worst kind where you wish actually you had more defensive options to make up for shortcomings.

Without a game having safe defensive options, you lose the desire to be aggressive.

 

[blackghost]

Ultimate ain't some perfect game, but it is telling that it's specifically the players who had gamed Smash 4's mechanics to rise up and become the best that have the biggest problems with it, and it's ironic given that they were nowhere near as outspoken when it came to that game despite it having a myriad of issues. Smash 4 devolved to a point where everything was unsafe, and it felt like the worse game for it. It forced the game to be defensive, but it was the worst kind where you wish actually you had more defensive options to make up for shortcomings.

i mean people played this game for a week and said zer0 is never gonna be head of this game. the players that will succeed will be the ones that go for broke: nairo, void, mars, captain zack, ect. these players will suceed in this game.

also important note smash 4 pre patch vs post patched changed ALOT and Nintendo was ahead of the curve on certain nerfs: kill throws on fast characters were nerfed before they even became an issue. in ultimate its very possible they may make a large adjustment again.

 

[Rizen]

In a surprsing move/ Tweek just posted on his twitter page that He actullay does not like Ultimate , giving a very detailed list on the reasons why



https://twitter.com/TweekSsb/status/1113245965941649408

"I overall dislike the gameplay, but I DO like a handful of characters. Things are too unreactable/unpublishable. Everything is just so safe.​

Without perfect pivoting there’s no micro movement to punish all these things with no lag. And so many things are safe on parry PLUS so many things are unreactable by parry. You have to get so many reads just to MAYBE win neutral.​

I respect the way they made this game. They sped it up, added a lot of universal things to make characters faster and more viable. But the results are the opposite of what you’d expect. This game is very campy/defensive but I feel like it may not look like it at first glance (?)​

The universal things they added also made the game lose a lot of flavor to me. A lot of these characters just have a safe aerial they use as a hit confirm for follow ups. And it just happens over and over.​

As for professional play, I also dislike it. Everyone is so afraid to commit because everything is so safe and unreactable. They just stick to their safe neutral tools that will lead to follow ups if they get a hit.​

I rarely see anything “cool” especially in tournament play. This doesn’t irk me too much because I’m a competitor and I play to win, but still, I love smash and I hate that this game can be really boring.​

Spectating has never been more different than playing. The game seems perfectly fine but playing it can be really frustrating when it just feels like I have to get lucky in neutral.​

There’s also something that may be more of a personal thought but I hate all these small hurtbox top tiers. Most of your moves have no chance of hitting them while they can 0 to death you easily. Extremely dumb imo."​

​

​

Wow.. anyone agree or find any truth in any of the points he brought up?​

Tweek's not wrong, although a lot of what he said is opinion. I'll go ahead and say it: parries are a bad mechanic. They're very difficult to do, risky and have poor reward. For CQC it's so much easier to simply use everyone's f3 jump squat to do an OoS option. The only time parries are consistent is vs range attacks you see in advance. If parries guaranteed a smash it might be worth going for them but as Tweek said, a lot of things are safe on parry.

Aerials generally are very safe to throw out. Ike's Nair is fairly spammable. The 6 frames input lag (so I've heard) plus low landing lag makes punishing disjoints harder than previous games. Is this bad? That's a matter of opinion but reacting is certainly weaker in ultimate. Ground games are less important as a result. Ground to air to ground is almost instantaneous.

 

[Minordeth]

Every fighting game favors defensive play and devs have to implement mechanics to overcome that tendency. Guilty Gear gives every character a universal combo breaker as a defensive tool, which in turn makes taking offensive action less risky if you fail and get counter-comboed.

2D and 3D fighters outside of Smash revolve around quick footsies with safe pokes and microspacing until someone makes a mistake or commits.

As someone said in Tweek’s thread, Ultimate feels closer to a traditional fighter than a Smash game. No running through opponents, no movement options without minimal commitment, etc.

I’d be curious to see what Leo thinks about the game, given that he is also in that defensive-reactive mold.

Also, it’s silly to say that there is “barely” any conditioning in a game where Light and Venia succeed off of offensive pressure or movement-based pressure.

 

[NotLiquid]

i mean people played this game for a week and said zer0 is never gonna be head of this game. the players that will succeed will be the ones that go for broke: nairo, void, mars, captain zack, ect. these players will suceed in this game.

It's definitely no coincidence that Marss is actually a fan of the things Tweek takes issue with.

I agree with a lot of what Tweek said. But I like a lot of what he dislikes. The whole defensive thing is really easy to point out just because there's more neutral now. Small characters definitely get much more out of the new design, & microspacing needs more relevance for sure.

— 🍥 Marss (@Marss_NE) April 3, 2019

 

[Envoy of Chaos]

I agree with some that is said, the game plays more like a traditional fighter which can be off putting. I personally don't think that's a bad thing I kinda enjoy the shift because it gives the states of the game more visibility. I do find that some moves are simply too safe to the point it doesn't only encourage aggressive play but also very linear play and parrying isn't good enough to make you want to think twice before throwing them out. But I also do enjoy some of the safety of moves to make it actual blockstrings a thing.

Didn't Puff get a new mechanic that makes whiffs less safe but doesn't affect landed moves or makes them safer? I'd be interesting to see this applied to more characters as well as allowing dash to be canceled at any point. You still can keep the safety of moves but also add more importance on spacing as you'll open yourself to punishment if your just throwing out said hitboxes without regard. Bad idea or no?

 

[meleebrawler]

I agree with some that is said, the game plays more like a traditional fighter which can be off putting. I personally don't think that's a bad thing I kinda enjoy the shift because it gives the states of the game more visibility. I do find that some moves are simply too safe to the point it doesn't only encourage aggressive play but also very linear play and parrying isn't good enough to make you want to think twice before throwing them out. But I also do enjoy some of the safety of moves to make it actual blockstrings a thing.

Didn't Puff get a new mechanic that makes whiffs less safe but doesn't affect landed moves or makes them safer? I'd be interesting to see this applied to more characters as well as allowing dash to be canceled at any point. You still can keep the safety of moves but also add more importance on spacing as you'll open yourself to punishment if your just throwing out said hitboxes without regard. Bad idea or no?

Bowser Jr. has had something like this since 4 on his dair that lets him cancel the landing hit sooner if it connects, and a chunk of Incineroar's moveset is programmed to have him act differently on hit or whiff/block, even if purely aesthetic.

Maybe parries need to be more like Guard Impacts from Soulcalibur where they cause an actual disruption to the opponent's offence. Like ground moves get clanked and air moves cause the attacker to flinch.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I agree with whomever said Smash is just not an aggressive series by nature, or hasn't been up to this point. Melee is the "aggressive" game in the community narrative, but even that game is pretty defensive. Shields, rolls, and airdodges suck, so instead, players use mobility as a defense, and bait offensive options in order to punish them and start long strings. Those strings use a combination of hitstun, tech chases, and edge guarding to accrue damage, and it's during those moments when aggression shines.

Smash Ultimate is similar except defensive options are maybe slightly better and the mobility options just aren't there. That makes the game feel very fighting game esque to me. There are moments of pokes and footsies, and a single hit can often lead to dozens of % if not more. I say this as someone who plays more Street Fighter and Guilty Gear these days than Smash. Platforms are harder to navigate, projectiles are stronger, mobility is much more linear, and shields are much weaker. This leads to there being fewer ways to navigate "around" an opponent's pokes and zoning, which means you have to read the spot and place they will commit to a poke.

We've all been fighting a Wolf that does a lot of SH/FH aerials to zone and space, and the answer for me has been to go to where he's going to be and up air him. That's not degenerate or linear, but it will probably lead to fewer commitments from players over time and a more pensive, careful neutral.

To me, that's okay. It's what I love about competitive games and what I loved about competitive Brawl. In fact, it's what kept me playing it. That game had so many problems, but I liked that the neutral felt tense. What I didn't like is what happened after a zone was broken, which Ultimate has gone a long way towards fixing.

TL;DR: I agree with most of what these players are saying, but I think it has made for a better game, not a worse game. But yes, this is a taste issue for sure.

 

[Game7a1]

Didn't Puff get a new mechanic that makes whiffs less safe but doesn't affect landed moves or makes them safer? I'd be interesting to see this applied to more characters as well as allowing dash to be canceled at any point. You still can keep the safety of moves but also add more importance on spacing as you'll open yourself to punishment if your just throwing out said hitboxes without regard. Bad idea or no?

You're sort of thinking of Rest. If Rest hits something, then Puff can cancel the waking up animation sooner than if she whiffs the move.
Although. I think this condition (which is different from what you're suggesting) would only work on moves with tons of endlag.

 

[ARISTOS]

I hear Tweek's argument but I think the Ultimate's design is actually very good, with the issue lying less in mechanical structure and more in the ways some characters are built where it can feel like certain characters can swing unscrupulously/push every button until something hits while others can not.

I think Lucina and Chrom are the most emblematic of the former while someone like Falco/(K Rool lol) is the latter (where he used to be the former in Melee-maybe that's why people don't like his transition?)