Guide Drastic Improvement

[Beat!]

Eh, I think he's kinda right in that it would only be a short term solution (unless you plan on actively secondaring this new character, but that raises other problems). Looking at long term, you'd probably be better off focusing on your main.

 

[Strong Badam]

I think there is quite a bit of merit to the idea of practicing up and getting better at a disadvantageous match-up in order to outplay opponents who use that character, in that in doing so you will most likely overall increase your ability in all match-ups with your character.
also kind of why I find Fox/Falco mains complaining about the new "In Best of 5 sets, there are no stage bans" rule in the tentative MBR ruleset kind of amusing, since banning FD in the long run just gives you less practice at the match-up and gives you less practice at avoiding grabs against Marth (which is helpful on ANY stage). I think in the particular match-up the rule doesn't really have much of an effect, since Fox/Falco can now CP to Pokémon Stadium/Dreamland 64 without Marth being able to do anything about it, but yeah.
I should stop banning Yoshi's Story. Gotta get better on that stage.

 

[Sinji]

FOD is also a stage of concern for vs peach. Not saying that it should be banned, but its of concern. When the side platform descends, peach has a free dsmash.

 

[FrootLoop]

I think training up a second character for a specific matchup is a jank strategy because you end up second guessing yourself and you end up in dumb counterpick loops against other people who play multiple characters in tournament, so the set is basically decided by the double blind before game 1. Plus it divides your practice time.

also umbreon the match you linked to a couple times got removed.

 

[Tee ay eye]

It's not a crutch if you're using it to win. It's either good and subsequently a legitimate strategy, or it's not and it's a jank strategy. You shouldn't evaluate things on satisfaction, you should base them on how likely they are to help you win. Hopefully, winning and satisfaction eventually are the same thing.

I think it's a crutch because I think that learning the matchup with your main will ultimately yield greater, more reliable success than just learning the matchup with one character you aren't as good with, only for that one matchup.

First of all, learning the matchup with your main will fix some problems in your overall gameplan with your main (in my experience). In other words, learning why you're bad at a matchup (and obviously, improving on that) will force you to fix holes in your play and will make you a better player overall.

Secondly, I think that counterpicking is a bit of a gimmick strategy in itself. I think the only reason it works is because the counterpicker is not good at the matchup with their main, and perhaps because the person being counterpicked might be weak to the counterpick matchup. I think the strategy can and should backfire if you encounter someone who's good at fighting your counterpick, simply because matchups among the top/high tiers aren't significant enough, in my opinion, to warrant using a character that you are not as good with.

For example, I am a Marth main, and I have a very strong aversion towards Sheik. My Falco is not as good as my Marth, but it would probably bring me more success vs most Sheik players I have trouble with because the holes in my Marth vs Sheik game aren't there or aren't relevant. However, if I were to encounter a Sheik player that was even with me in skill and good vs Falco, I would get absolutely **** on because my Falco is nothing more than a pocket character and can't hang, whereas if I simply learned the matchup with Marth in the first place, I'd be using my best character in a 4-6 matchup (at worst).

tl;dr: I think sticking with your weak matchups will put hair on your chest and make you a more solid player. Ignoring that completely, would you rather play a 5-5 matchup with a character you're mediocre at or a 4-6 matchup with your strongest character?

p.s. Umbreon, the only reason I mentioned satisfaction was because I was replying to blindfreak9's post. I thought he was disagreeing with me on the basis of fun and enjoyment.

 

[King Omega]

Venerable and vulnerable are two very different things. Last paragraph or thereabouts is talking about being respected when it should be talking about being exposed to harm.

I disagree with the multiple characters claim. There is no reason a person cannot maintain similar-but-different skills like that. I think understanding how to play multiple characters comes as easily and in the same way as understanding how to play against multiple characters.

As for the emotion thing--that could be true for some people. Supposing you want to surpass Ken and M2K and Mango combined, then yes, you probably have to play like a machine for 100,000,000 hours with no emotion or thoughts outside your "series of interactions." If you just want to be 'very good?' I doubt it.

Take Isai in the Smash 64 scene for example. He is the undisputed best, consistently dominating the other few top players who consistently dominate everybody else. But he obviously likes the game: He flies to other countries to play new people (with no money on the table), he plays non-p2p online including lag (I've played him), and he practices a couple random characters for a short time before tournaments. That's it. There is no emotionless, lives-and-breathes-Smash-for-the-sole-purpose-of-winning attitude there.

Granted that's 64 (and that's Isai). Maybe Melee works so totally differently.

 

[Stevo]

great read, looking forward to the neutral position thoughts

 

[Battlecow]

Take Isai in the Smash 64 scene for example. He is the undisputed best, consistently dominating the other few top players who consistently dominate everybody else. But he obviously likes the game: He flies to other countries to play new people (with no money on the table), he plays non-p2p online including lag (I've played him), and he practices a couple random characters for a short time before tournaments. That's it. There is no emotionless, lives-and-breathes-Smash-for-the-sole-purpose-of-winning attitude there.

Granted that's 64 (and that's Isai). Maybe Melee works so totally differently.

Isai tried really hard to get good at smash 12 years ago, and continues to try fairly hard (see the first-hit uair shenanigans he pulls with fox, and the recent explosion of his Yoshi). Combine that with the kind of talent that let him be 2nd in the world at melee without playing outside of tourney. Isai doesn't have to go as tryhard as Umbreon suggests because he's already the best; whether a new challenger to the throne would force him to put in extra superhard work remains to be seen.

 

[gnosis]

Not sure if it's been pointed out but the example video in your mix-up/limited strategies section is no longer available. You use it later on too when you talk about styles/mindgames.

Any chance of a replacement vid? I'm a visual kinda guy and while I feel like I get what you're saying I'd love to see it in action.

I mean I assume that sort of thing would be in any match between good players so you could just tell me to go youtubing, but you make it seem like such a perfect example.

 

[Adam Worth]

Ha! Kinda old but very fun to see. I really enjoy everything about this game.
Have a nice day!

__________
Adam
Polyethylene Sheet
PVC Panels

 

[DRGN]

I've fought with this for quite a while. My main used to definitively be Sheik, but I started playing her less, in favor of many other characters. I would still use her in tournament though, and when I lose, disappoint myself as I felt I didn't do as well as I could or should. I still like playing her, but I don't think she's as good as my Samus now (who, in turn, I now use mostly in tournaments).

I think you can expand your skill to multiple characters, while usually only slightly hurting the skill of your main. But the thing is, if you do this you're not improving your total ability as much as if you focused on one character. Because your main isn't improving (or at least not as fast) to keep up with the metagame. Especially not as fast as those others who play a character more exclusively. It's true that you can learn a trick or various opponent abilities/mentalities with a different character and apply it to your main or other characters, but unfortunately, for the most part, time spent not being your main probably means you're not improving the maximum that your level of skill can offer.

However, along with the concept of trading overall ability to gain match-up advantage when facing competition, there is another big factor to consider: the particular opponent's match-up experience. That's more important that what "the book" says. If you're confident you know the match-up and that they don't so much, then you should probably go for it (assuming you're not lower than C tier).

 

[Qlaw]

so- what you're saying is; never, EVER, main someone below mario? Got it.

Als- i disagree with the emotion of the game. I think if you're the type of person that can play happily, win or lose, then go for it. As long as you learn while losing/winning

 

[DRGN]

so- what you're saying is; never, EVER, main someone below mario? Got it.

No, not really. I was mostly referring to playing competitively, like planning on winning sets in tournaments.

First of all, it's important to take the level of play into consideration here; character imbalance is brought out more at higher levels of play (stressing the strengths/weaknesses in characters through better spacing, punishment (combos), edge-guarding, etc. brings out some character's flaws more than others). At lower levels of play it doesn't matter so much.

Also, if you're just playing to have fun and emphasis isn't on winning then you can be whoever you want. But in tournament against real good players, the problems in a bad character will be exploited too much for them to be viable, unfortunately. Though this isn't always absolute (a good player might find a particular weakness or pattern in the opponent's game and focus on it enough to outweigh the character disadvantage), just [fairly good] probability. But it's not too smart to bet on bad odds if you're concerned with the results.

 

[Sinji]

Ha! Kinda old but very fun to see. I really enjoy everything about this game.
Have a nice day!

__________
Adam
Polyethylene Sheet
PVC Panels

Well said I guess.

 

[Qlaw]

No, not really. I was mostly referring to playing competitively, like planning on winning sets in tournaments.

First of all, it's important to take the level of play into consideration here; character imbalance is brought out more at higher levels of play (stressing the strengths/weaknesses in characters through better spacing, punishment (combos), edge-guarding, etc. brings out some character's flaws more than others). At lower levels of play it doesn't matter so much.

Also, if you're just playing to have fun and emphasis isn't on winning then you can be whoever you want. But in tournament against real good players, the problems in a bad character will be exploited too much for them to be viable, unfortunately. Though this isn't always absolute (a good player might find a particular weakness or pattern in the opponent's game and focus on it enough to outweigh the character disadvantage), just [fairly good] probability. But it's not too smart to bet on bad odds if you're concerned with the results.

well, yeah, i know this. my comment was pure sarcasm btw.

but you see, the problem with most people picking the higher tiers is that those characters metagame will increase even more, widening the gap making more people want to main those characters, repeat pattern here.

At least, that's how i feel

 

[Mr. Ganondorf]

Extremely good read. Also especially liked the guy that contributed the MTG article about "Bruce." I thought it was going to be related to "Spike" which is the nickname for the type of player in magic that is focused on winning, and I guess Bruce is the antithesis of that. The sales company I work with calls it "Mr. Mediocrity." Need to lose, Bruce, Mr. Mediocrity, w/e you call it, that is the number one limiting factor of every player in every game ever, I'm convinced of it.

It's soooo much easier to just coast into a tournament on cruise control, hoping you do better than last time with no game plan, but having lots of excuses for your losses, than to put in the work beforehand and believe that's why you deserve to beat everyone there, even the people "better" than you. That's always been my biggest obstacle, never feeling like I "deserved" to beat the established/good players because they were "better than me". I can count all of my "big upset wins on good players" on one hand because my Bruce is/was so strong. I am dead sure the one tourney I beat LuninSpectra, when he beat me in tourney at least 5 times before that, was because his Bruce got the better of him that day and I reaped the lucky rewards. However, I can proudly say that my Ganon ragequitting all over I Killed Mufasa 3 is the reason I beat Scar at a tournament right after that. After he destroyed me at a Berkeley tourney and then the smashfest that served as fodder for his combo video, I got so pissed and became absolutely determined I'd beat him at the next tourney. Practiced insanely hard, even got matched up against a Falcon first round to get me warmed up. Barely won as Fox and then again as Ganon. It was the day before the Super Bowl and I remember thinking, "The crowd that just watched that happen is bigger than the crowds that will be gathered around the TV at most Super Bowl parties tomorrow. Sweet."

I'm not sure why I like that story so much or decided to share it, but I guess my point was simply that for me, and possibly lots of other players, we need to remember to have our "Inner Game" down solid for tournaments. That confidence that says "I deserve to win because I've practiced so much and played with the best so much. I'm going to win all day today." And never forgetting that for a single stock, not a single second, in game or between games.

Edit: Went back and actually read the most recent comments. Seems a lot of people were stuck on the whole "stick to one character" thing. Accidentally mained Ganon cuz I couldn't handle Falcon's fastness back in 2002. Haven't been able to dethrone Ganon as my main, even though it's hard freaking work beating Sheik/Fox/Falco. Mained Fox and Falcon back in 64 days, so I took up Fox to beat Sheik. Now I want to use him against Falco/Falcon and other Foxes too. What do? My Ganon will always be better especially in fair matches like Marth, Peach, Samus etc. Fox is much easier to beat Sheik with though. But everyone knows how to fight against Fox. Wat do?

 

[Strong Badam]

Remember this? Yeah, watch it again. Look at that godlike positioning. Note that both falco's character and move placement are almost technically perfect. Note that the entire match is [remove options] > [gain position] > [get essentially free damage/kill] > [repeat]. If you understand what I'm talking about at all, it's in this video.

This video was taken down.

 

[volcarious]

The thing about making friends is hard for someone like me, because I live in a small town, where no one plays Super Smash Bros. and I can't afford to go to tournaments, so when I play I'm stuck playing by myself. Hopefully someday I can afford to go to a tournament and makes friends who also play Super Smash Bros.

 

[Thanos828]

^ I kinda know that feel. I basically started the competitive Melee scene in my town/school this summer. I'm basically waiting until I graduate before I can stop using transportation/parent johns as an excuse not to go to tournaments.

 

[-DR3W-]

Amazing post Umbreon.

 

[crawlshots]

Umbreon, you have a gift for wording things super well.

 

[Varist]

Your link for

Innovation
2. Limited

is down. youtube account terminated.

edit: under Tight Gameplay, you linked to the same match. Also needs replacin' or rehostin'

 

[GaDGNum]

Spy Software for Mobiles

Yes, really. So happens. Let's discuss this question. Here or in PM.

 

[Shade]

Very solid advice and a good read! This is pretty much the mindset I have for the game just trying my hardest to get the actual drive to play the game enough.

 

[Doomolish]

Where's the OP? :'( This was my favorite thread on the whole site.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Wow, I made some really good posts in this thread

Good ****, me.

 

[KirbyKaze]

I'm the quintessential "Spike".

 

[Deleted member]

i'm revamping the content over the next 2 months. i plan to elicit help from dr peepee, cactuar, and kirbykaze as well, as we all share pretty much the same mentality concerning the game.

it should be up by christmas day. it's a long wait, but it's also a ****ing lot of work and i want it done well.

edit: my current version is full of holes and references to myself for areas to fill in, and it's still 18 pages single-spaced in MS word. it's ****ing long.

 

[EthereaL]

Ironically, I have been planning to post in this thread for a couple of days now.

I'll wait until I read the full version.

 

[S l o X]

looking forward to it, i feel like im very close to "good" just gotta figure out exactly what im doing wrong.

 

[Divinokage]

Well I can quickly say that confidence is a HUGE factor to how well you can improve.

 

[Keblerelf]

that's ********. Confidence can only help me if I know what I'm doing. Telling someone who wants to get better to "be confident" is like telling a failing student to get better grades by "trying harder".


Confidence comes from competence.

 

[Divinokage]

I said it was a factor, there's obviously other reasons to how you can improve. ANY champions have overwhelming confidence in themselves from the start of their journey. If you can't even trust yourself, how the **** can you make the correct choices to how you want to improve.. you'll generally fall short a lot of the times.

 

[ShroudedOne]

I think people overuse (or misuse) the word "confidence" when talking about getting better. But that's probably because I don't think it's that big of a deal (obviously you have to know that what you're doing works, but it doesn't really go beyond that, imo).

 

[Divinokage]

Having great confidence also helps you not get nervous in tournament. If you truly believe in yourself then how can anyone truly stop you? Only you, yourself can stop you. There's no one but you on your road to victory.

 

[Izuhu]

Ok are we talking about being confident or delusionally cocky? Because I know people who think their so good but in reality their not really good at all.

Anyways confidence will only get you so far, but motivation and determination can get you out there. People need to understand that the more you play this game, the better you'll get. But to get better you have to ask for critique and advice, or you'll just end up in a giant stalemate making no progress what so ever. Its like an exercise the more you do it, the better you'll get at it, because their is no such thing as doing something or in this case playing something over and over again and not get better at it. Like Kage said your your own worst enemy. You defeat yourself by getting better.

 

[Divinokage]

Well you need to be confident enough where you can see the reality of things and not get too cocky because that brings you tunnel vision and having a blind mindset and also not be too weak or depressed where you criticize yourself in a bad way.. like saying I suck, I can't do it, it's impossible... etc. You just need a good balance.. you have to believe you can do it, you have to believe that you will succeed and of course at the same time do the proper training to get there.

What do you think of Mango when you see him play? He has overwhelming dominance over anybody because he has everything a champion needs. You will generally play by his rules when you fight him because he can do that to you.. sure he might seem cocky on the outside but he really truly believes that he'll crush you and his road is all that matters. It's the way it should be.. he wasn't always best in the past but he probably always believed he was the best.. I think it's the only mentality that will make you the best anyhow... if you see any other champions in any sports for example, it's generally the same way too.

 

[Deleted member]

how well you perform depends on your ability to press buttons. it has nothing to do with how you feel about it.

even if i were weak-minded enough to accept baseless concepts like fate, i would still reject "confidence" in smash because i've been here 10 years, which is apparently 8 more than you need to see how worthless it is.

i think mango beats people that he is better than because he is better than they are at super smash bros melee.

 

[Divinokage]

If it really is that simple or easy then a lot more people would be godlike I'd say. In anything you want to succeed in, you need the deep understanding of how things work so in order to find that, what do you really need?

How can you learn everything about something when you limit yourself? Someone that doesn't believe he can succeed or do it will never succeed. You need a lot of **** if you want to be the guy on top of everyone else.

What about in tournament? Pressing buttons won't help you when you are constantly being influenced by your opponent's actions. Then there's also people watching you from all over the world.. those things matter a lot, again if you dont believe you can beat your opponent or you are too scared to fight some big name then it's over for you. You have to be confident in yourself so that you can deal with these things a lot easier.

 

[EthereaL]

Lack of confidence leads to hesitation or self-implemented mental roadblocks.

how well you perform depends on your ability to press buttons. it has nothing to do with how you feel about it.

You don't believe someone's mental state can impact their performance?

Pressing buttons won't help you when you are constantly being influenced by your opponent's actions.

You don't think using your controller will help you?

I think you should both reconsider each other's arguments.