Is Brawl more balanced than melee? **Take 2**

[Juggleguy]

How is there even a debate about this? Brawl is so much more unbalanced it's ridiculous.

 

[Fletch]

Marth can still edgehog if M2 tries to Teleport to the ledge.

And this isn't the main reason it's bad for M2, it's Marth's range and priority mostly.

The Mewtwo doesn't have to go for the edge, and I thought you were arguing that this was the reason the matchup is bad. The matchup is bad because of Marth's range and speed.

 

[Yuna]

Marth can still edgehog if M2 tries to Teleport to the ledge.

Mewtwo doesn't have to go for the ledge. His 2nd jump and Up B are just that good.

And this isn't the main reason it's bad for M2, it's Marth's range and priority mostly.

Stop trying to prove that the match-up is bad, prove your own claim that it's worse than DK vs. D3. D3 outranges and out-prioritizes DK a lot, he can outcamp DK (who lacks projectiles) with Waddle Dees and high priority (and safe) attacks whereas if DK does anything, he'll get grabbed (pretty much).

And what happens when he gets grabbed? 0-Death. What happens when Marth grabs Mewtwo? Not zero to death.

I've seen one video of a DDD vs DK in a tournament was the DDD was screwing up the infinite.

Because he sucked... and hadn't set the C-stick to grab.

Also Tiers don't define necessary balance. In Melee Peach High tier vs Ice Climbers high tier was bad as well.

You are game balance/tiers with tournament results. Game balance and tiers do not dictate tournament results.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

The Mewtwo doesn't have to go for the edge, and I thought you were arguing that this was the reason the matchup is bad. The matchup is bad because of Marth's range and speed.

The Death combo before was arguing against the infinite statement made before.

As for the actual match-up I've been stating why it's bad over and over, Marth's range and priority are what make the match bad for M2.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

You are game balance/tiers with tournament results. Game balance and tiers do not dictate tournament results.

Results show such at high levels of play.

Higher tiered characters will show up more often than low tiered characters.

It shows who is more likely to show up, not who will show up.

 

[Yuna]

As for the actual match-up I've been stating why it's bad over and over, Marth's range and priority are what make the match bad for M2.

As opposed to the DK vs. D3 match-up where D3 has very good range, priority and a zero to death infinite which works anywhere on any stage from a single grab. He outcamps DK, so DK can't camp him. When DK approaches (and he will have to eventually), he's risking death every single time.

A single perfect shield will ruin even the best of spaced aerials and attacks and there goes one stock.

Results show such at high levels of play.

Higher tiered characters will show up more often than low tiered characters.

It shows who is more likely to show up, not who will show up.

Or it could just be player choice. Some communities just tierwhore the hell out of their games. Others tierwhore less so.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Yes, it's not even a combo.

K.

It's not a typo. It was you calling something something it is not. That is not a typo. That is misspeaking (mistyping in this case).

Ok, I misspoke, sorry.

Yes, Marth vs. Mewtwo is a highly disadvantaged match-up. Nobody is denying this. It is, however, not worse than DK vs. D3.

If you look back at my previous posts I haven't made this claim. I have stated it is a bad match-up not the worst in Melee, the worst IMO, is Bowser vs Sheik.

As opposed to in Melee where many of the Bottom Tiers could actually chaingrab and just combo the hell out of Fox and Falco?

Yoshi can take advantage of his bad aereal release, if he spaces right and/or is on the right stages, can turn it into a death grab.

Charizard and Squirtle fair fine, Ivysaur not so much.

Jigglypuff also can fight well, while still disadvantaged.

"You also realize this is hard to compare when none of the character boards have even gone through every match-up yet."

You were implying it was too early to tell the gaps between the tiers. Now you're saying it's not. You can't have your strawman and eat it.

We can use what we have now to compare to what we have, if Link's unresolved match-ups go for the better he may be better than Pichu.

We were specifically discussing the distances between each tier.

True.

Link having, at worst 60-40? That's some highly biased BS right there. Also, Brawl's match-ups are just wonky sometimes and the tier list is far from entirely accurate. If Link has, at worst, 60-40s, no matter if he loses almost every single one of his match-ups, he should not be bottom tier.

So either the Link players are highly biased or the tier list is completely off.

If

Although I misspoke again, my apologies, I ment if the rest of his bad match-ups were at worst 6-4 he would shape up.

He still has to deal with a few hard counters, Kirby, Falco, MK.

They claim he has an advantageous match-up against DDD if Link camps and spaces accordingly.

DDD boards have yet to review the match-up.

Who happened to actually not suffer that bad match-ups against many of the Tops and Highs. 90-10 were exceedingly rare, 80-20s were less rare, but still rare.

It wasn't 90-10 heaven, as you seem to believe.

I'm saying 9-1's were the worst not the most numerous, Brawl doesn't have that having 8-2's at worst. Although that isn't something to be proud of either.

You: "This is why Falco and Captain Falcon are beating the characters below them, they placed better at larger tournaments."
Me: "Why? Because they're better than all of the characters below them? Not necessarily. They may just be more popular, they might just be more popular among the very best, with at least one Captain Falcon playing at the highest possible level, etc. Just because a CF has won one tournament (which I very much doubt was large, at least in terms of skill, I mean, you can have 100+ man tournaments have only 2 competent people present), it doesn't mean there's a pattern. Freak accidents happen."
You: If occurs consistently then the character is viable.

We were specifically speaking about Captain Falcon (in part) and his placements. You then were implying that Captain Falcon was viable. Don't go off-topic and bring in irrelevant facts when replying to a direct quote with something that apparently has nothing to do with what is quoted.

Very well, I agree randomly low tiered character who normally aren't viable can top once in a blue moon.

The point I'm trying to express is if we claim a character was unviable yet the character is conistently topping, which captain falcon isn't, then we need to review why that character is topping.

Captain Falcon is not topping consistently at high levels of play.

At 0%? At 20%? At 30%? At 40%? It does not kill at 0%. In fact, I'm pretty sure it doesn't even necessarily kill at 40%. Mewtwo happens to have one mighty 2nd jump and Up B. As long as he doesn't outright die from it, he could quite conceivably make it back.

If Marth starts the combo when Mewtwo is at the 20-40 range and end it with a tipped Dair it should be easy to edgeguard if he tries to recover.

This sentence makes no sense. Are you saying you erased some parts of your posts while missing others? Or that I have? Or do you mean to say "You're honestly telling me have never erased..."?

And that's some mighty screw up to end up with a sentence in essence reading (and I paraphrase because I'm too lazy to go back and quote it):
"Fox and Falco can both infinite Peach and Link".

What the heck did you originally write about Falco, anyway?

Fox and Falco can Piller the cast.

My head: No, pillering isn't an infinite on a shield as the opponent can roll out of it.

Fox and Falco can Piller the cast.; Erasing the underlined part.

My Head: Fox can infinite a few characters.

Fox and Falco could infinite Peach and Link but it was very hard to perform, nor do I think it was attempted due to the technical difficulty of it.; added the bolded part.

I missed it while fixing my post. My mistake.

I feel stupid enough misposting that, I mained Falco in Melee, I didn't notice it until you pointed it out.

Did they even attempt to recover after eating the Dair? Was the name of the stage they were playing on "Yoshi's Story" and they got Daired relatively far down (stage-level or below-ish)?

I've seen people die from Peach's fthrow on Final Destination at 115%. Needless to say, they sucked.

Yes they did try to recover, yes some of the times I've seen this it was on Yoshi's Story.
Yes most of the people in my area sucked and still suck.

It's not worse than DK vs. D3.

I never claimed this.

Finally, a valid argument.

I'll tell you this, your impressions of how badly the Bottom Tiers in Melee and how not-so-badly the Bottom Tiers in Brawl are grossly incorrect. Kirby gets ***** by everyone? If by everyone, you mean three characters (only two of whom are Top Tier).

You said it yourself, there are different levels of ****.

Kirby was only super ***** by three characters, ***** by seven to nine others, and softly ***** by the rest. He has a few neutrals against some lower tiered characters.

Stop trying to prove that the match-up is bad, prove your own claim that it's worse than DK vs. D3. D3 outranges and out-prioritizes DK a lot, he can outcamp DK (who lacks projectiles) with Waddle Dees and high priority (and safe) attacks whereas if DK does anything, he'll get grabbed (pretty much).

And what happens when he gets grabbed? 0-Death. What happens when Marth grabs Mewtwo? Not zero to death.

Who said you need an infinite to make an unwinnable match-up.

Marth outranges M2, is faster than M2, out prioritizes M2.

If I wanted to show the worst match-up in Melee I would have picked Shiek vs Bowser.

As opposed to the DK vs. D3 match-up where D3 has very good range, priority and a zero to death infinite which works anywhere on any stage from a single grab. He outcamps DK, so DK can't camp him. When DK approaches (and he will have to eventually), he's risking death every single time.

A single perfect shield will ruin even the best of spaced aerials and attacks and there goes one stock.

Response above.

Or it could just be player choice. Some communities just tierwhore the hell out of their games. Others tierwhore less so.

This is true, our community doesn't tierwhore as badly as other games.

 

[IrArby]

Well Yuna has pretty much summed up the DK/D3 matchup and I'm sure that even a great DK will have little chance.

Your right in that DK/D3 doesn't prove the game is unbalanced (IMO because the game is incredibly matchup based and tiers mean less here) so we'll revert back to the older litmus test that everyone has been using. I'm referring ofcourse to the bottoms vs. the tops.

As we've already illustrated, Fox and Falco suffer CGs and juggling type combos from over half of the cast. Pichu is only one of these characters.

And as far as I know (I'll check the Melee boards in case I am) the IC's didn't have any big disadvantage against Peach. I don't play either character much so I'll check but I hardly think this is comparable to Dk/D3 or MK/Falcon.

 

[Fletch]

ICs are at a disadvantage since d-smash separates them, but it's definitely winnable at the highest level. Match of Wobbles beating Cort:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTKgqczY2SM

 

[1048576]

D-Smash separates them and makes Nana face the wrong way, so she can't grab ledge. It's a five frame gimp move. A crouch-cancelled D-Smash will beat out any IC aerial. Peach can hover above IC to not get grabbed, and she can camp with turnips.

Peach single-handedly keeps IC's out of top tier. 8-2 Peach.

 

[Yuna]

If you look back at my previous posts I haven't made this claim. I have stated it is a bad match-up not the worst in Melee, the worst IMO, is Bowser vs Sheik.

Then please explain the following quote:
"It made a DK vs DDD match-up but worse, is it an infinite? no."

Because it only makes sense if one interprets it as "Marth's death combo on Mewtwo (which isn't really a death combo) makes that one match-up like DK vs. D3... only worse."

Yoshi can take advantage of his bad aereal release, if he spaces right and/or is on the right stages, can turn it into a death grab.

Charizard and Squirtle fair fine, Ivysaur not so much.

Jigglypuff also can fight well, while still disadvantaged.

"Blah, blah, the low tiers can do OK in certain match-ups". Who cares? And since when was this not true for Melee? Contrary to popular belief, the Bottoms and Lows didn't magically get 90-10:ed or 80-20:ed by everyone else.

We can use what we have now to compare to what we have, if Link's unresolved match-ups go for the better he may be better than Pichu.

If Link's worst match-up is 60-40, then he's not Bottom Tier. He's not even Low Tier, he's Mid at worst, High at best.

And what would this all prove? That the original tier list was wrong, that people's impressions of Link were wrong. Not that the game is more balanced because Link wouldn't be a real Bottom Tier if this is the case.

If

Your "if" was placed in the wrong spot. It sounded like you were implying that there's a high probability of it being true.

Although I misspoke again, my apologies, I ment if the rest of his bad match-ups were at worst 6-4 he would shape up.

And if so, all it would prove would be that people were wrong about him.

I'm saying 9-1's were the worst not the most numerous, Brawl doesn't have that having 8-2's at worst. Although that isn't something to be proud of either.

Brawl has 90-10s. Brawl has 95-5s. Brawl has 99-1s, practically.

The point I'm trying to express is if we claim a character was unviable yet the character is conistently topping, which captain falcon isn't, then we need to review why that character is topping.

If it's being done by a single person (and no one else comes even close to doing what they do), then it's just the player. If it's being done by several people, maybe our impressions of the character are wrong. Maybe they are viable, maybe their spot on the tier list should be higher than we think it is.

You brought this argument up in conjunction with CF. It appeared as if you were linking the two, implying CF was placing high consistently.

If you're speaking merely hypothetically, "If a character we think is unviable consistently places high...", why bring it up at all? It's a no-brainer. And it's even happened before. Guess what, Donkey Kong and Ice Climbers were both much lower on the tier list before certain people stepped forward and showed the world just what these characters are capable of.

If Marth starts the combo when Mewtwo is at the 20-40 range and end it with a tipped Dair it should be easy to edgeguard if he tries to recover.

But it would not be 0-death. Whacking someone off the edge and then edgeguarding them successfully is not comboing them. It is not 0-death. And also, why the hell is this relevant? Marth can do it to everybody.

Mewtwo's 2nd jump and Up B happen to reach very, very far, so it works less well on him than against people with inferior recoveries!

Fox and Falco can Piller the cast.

What the hell does this have to do with anything? Why would you even bring it up? It's like bringing up Peach's <insert aerial here> into dsmash. Wow, shield pressure.

Very relevant to bring up when speaking about infinites (on hit). There is absolutely no combo in these games which puts you in perpetual blockstun (save for a Mr. Saturn rethrown several times at close range)(and it would be impossible to infinite someone on shield, even if the blockstun was perpetual, since one's shield would eventually give out).

Yes they did try to recover, yes some of the times I've seen this it was on Yoshi's Story.
Yes most of the people in my area sucked and still suck.

Then why should we care and why would you bring them up as examples of how the game works? "Oh, Marth has a death combo on Mewtwo because I've seen it work on sucky players!"

In Melee, I DI Sheik's F-tilt on reaction. The vast majority of the times, the most Sheik ever gets on my Peach (or Zelda or Sheik) from an F-tilt is one single follow-up move (usually an aerial, Fair or Nair). But of course, since sucky playes do not DI Sheik's F-tilt on reaction, sometimes not even after being hit by it twice or thrice, I guess it's some kind of guaranteed triple F-tilt combo into Fair into death because they'll just get edgeguarded easily.

Or we could ignore what sucky players can and cannot do when discussing play at the highest level of play.

I never claimed this.

Explain the quote then.

You said it yourself, there are different levels of ****.

Kirby was only super ***** by three characters, ***** by seven to nine others, and softly ***** by the rest. He has a few neutrals against some lower tiered characters.

Kirby's match-ups weren't that bad. He was ***** by, like, 4 or so people. The rest were "soft *****" (a few) to pretty OK match-ups.

Also, this is pretty much still true for many Bottom Tiers in Brawl.

Who said you need an infinite to make an unwinnable match-up.

Not me. It's just that D3's infinite on DK is just so good it makes the match-up much worse than Marth vs. Mewtwo.

Marth outranges M2, is faster than M2, out prioritizes M2.

And this isn't true for DK vs. D3? Heck, this isn't true for Pikachu vs. Fox?

If I wanted to show the worst match-up in Melee I would have picked Shiek vs Bowser.

Which isn't as bad as DK vs. D3. It might not even be as bad as Pikachu vs. Fox.

This is true, our community doesn't tierwhore as badly as other games.

This was meant to prove that tournament results do not conclusively and irrefutably prove anything if theorycraft proves the opposite.

 

[victra♥]

The new tier list and it's related chart really supports your earlier statement Yuna. About the distance between tiers etc.

 

[Nintendude]

I don't get why people insist that Mewtwo vs. Marth is an awful matchup. It's actually very similar to ICs vs. Marth in terms of approach options because they can play similar shield games in addition to having a great wavedash, and ICs vs. Marth is only slightly in Marth's favor. Mewtwo has some decent combos on floaties as well and he's one of the few characters who does a good job negating Marth's superb edgeguarding. The matchup definitely is in Marth's favor but it's not as horrible as people make it out to be.

 

[philbobjoe]

I'm saying 9-1's were the worst not the most numerous, Brawl doesn't have that having 8-2's at worst. Although that isn't something to be proud of either.

Lol.
Toon Link boards currently have Captain Falcon as a 9-1 matchup. And Toon Link is in D-rank.

 

[Yuna]

The new tier list and it's related chart really supports your earlier statement Yuna. About the distance between tiers etc.

Obviously.

I was operating under the influence that the tier list was not fully accurate. Guess what, it wasn't :D.

 

[IrArby]

I don't get why people insist that Mewtwo vs. Marth is an awful matchup. It's actually very similar to ICs vs. Marth in terms of approach options because they can play similar shield games in addition to having a great wavedash, and ICs vs. Marth is only slightly in Marth's favor. Mewtwo has some decent combos on floaties as well and he's one of the few characters who does a good job negating Marth's superb edgeguarding. The matchup definitely is in Marth's favor but it's not as horrible as people make it out to be.

ICs actually get edgeguarded more harshly than Mewto as his recovery allows him to disappear. Other than that, the ICs can really punish a Marth that messes up his spacing by grabbing him. One grab can very likely equal death for Marth and he has no big time combos against them.

 

[Nintendude]

ICs actually get edgeguarded more harshly than Mewto as his recovery allows him to disappear. Other than that, the ICs can really punish a Marth that messes up his spacing by grabbing him. One grab can very likely equal death for Marth and he has no big time combos against them.

Where did I claim that ICs get edgeguarded less harshly than Mewtwo? ICs get ***** off the edge. I was arguing why the matchup isn't much more unbalanced than ICs vs. Marth, which is almost even. And yeah, of course ICs can punish Marth well but only if Nana is right by to start wobbling, and that doesn't happen often against good Marths. Mewtwo's combos are better than solo Popo's as well.

 

[1048576]

It happened against Ken three times in one match...

 

[Nintendude]

It happened against Ken three times in one match...

Yeah, a whopping one match, and if you watch the match you will see that all 3 of them seemed like freak accidents lol. One he just got mindgamed and jumped into Wobbles as he respawned (nothing to do with character matchup properties there), one he got grabbed at 9% after a tech chase on a platform and could have easily gotten out but didn't, and the other time Nana actually set up for it with a really lucky jab as Wobbles was approaching.

 

[1048576]

Well, Ken counterpicked, so obviously they weren't all freak accidents.

 

[Nintendude]

Well, Ken counterpicked, so obviously they weren't all freak accidents.

What? That makes no sense at all. Ken switching to Luigi only indicates that he thinks he has a better chance winning as Luigi, and SCC may have been one of those tournaments that Ken wasn't really trying much at.

 

[IrArby]

IC's don't have to wobble you to do a Sh*t ton of damage. I think Marth taking 70% (arbitrary number please don't quote me on 70% or anything) damage from one grab is a big deal compared to the much less guaranteed combos M2 does on Marth

 

[Nintendude]

Except you'd likely see around half that number, and Mewtwo can meet that. I don't feel like arguing with people who don't know what they are talking about -_-

 

[IrArby]

Well, more ICs have beat Marths than M2s have so even if I don't know the matchup its kinda obvious that you don't know it as well as you think since you've obviously missed why everyone who does know it considers Marth to be a much harder match for M2 than for ICs. Not saying I know the matchup well but its clear you don't either. Theres no need to be on freakin high alert.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Sorry for the late reply, anyways...

Then please explain the following quote:
"It made a DK vs DDD match-up but worse, is it an infinite? no."

Because it only makes sense if one interprets it as "Marth's death combo on Mewtwo (which isn't really a death combo) makes that one match-up like DK vs. D3... only worse."

My mistake then.

I'll recant that and go with Bowser vs Shiek.

"Blah, blah, the low tiers can do OK in certain match-ups". Who cares? And since when was this not true for Melee? Contrary to popular belief, the Bottoms and Lows didn't magically get 90-10:ed or 80-20:ed by everyone else.

They didn't all get 8:2'd. 8:2's were still there.

If Link's worst match-up is 60-40, then he's not Bottom Tier. He's not even Low Tier, he's Mid at worst, High at best.

This is why I said unresolved, as in the ones they haven't gone over yet. He would still have three or so hard counters keeping him out of high tier, possibly even mid.

And what would this all prove? That the original tier list was wrong, that people's impressions of Link were wrong. Not that the game is more balanced because Link wouldn't be a real Bottom Tier if this is the case.

It would prove he doesn't belong in bottom and that he's better than Pichu.

Your "if" was placed in the wrong spot. It sounded like you were implying that there's a high probability of it being true.

Considering a few characters they haven't done, I'm doubtful on this.

It is still possible.

And if so, all it would prove would be that people were wrong about him.

It would prove he's not as bad as Melee's bottom tiers.

Brawl has 90-10s. Brawl has 95-5s. Brawl has 99-1s, practically.him.

8-2 is as bad as those chaingrab match-ups get, according to the character boards, at least the DDD vs DK ones agree on that number.

If it's being done by a single person (and no one else comes even close to doing what they do), then it's just the player. If it's being done by several people, maybe our impressions of the character are wrong. Maybe they are viable, maybe their spot on the tier list should be higher than we think it is.

You brought this argument up in conjunction with CF. It appeared as if you were linking the two, implying CF was placing high consistently.

It applies to every character. If a character is placing better contently then they should be looked into.

Captain Falcon is clearly the result of a single tournament, therefore he isn't better than is current placement on the tier list.

Sonic however has jumped ten spots from where he should be, none of his placements are from a single user, I beleive, and he has been continuing this gradual climb for a while.

I'm still skeptical of his rise, I think it's more so people are too busy saying he sucks to actually learn the match-ups against him.

If you're speaking merely hypothetically, "If a character we think is unviable consistently places high...", why bring it up at all? It's a no-brainer. And it's even happened before. Guess what, Donkey Kong and Ice Climbers were both much lower on the tier list before certain people stepped forward and showed the world just what these characters are capable of.

It was more so the state Sonic's and Captain Falcon's current jumps in ranking.

But it would not be 0-death. Whacking someone off the edge and then edgeguarding them successfully is not comboing them. It is not 0-death. And also, why the hell is this relevant? Marth can do it to everybody.

Mewtwo's 2nd jump and Up B happen to reach very, very far, so it works less well on him than against people with inferior recoveries!

Very well, I'll cease using this match-up.

What the hell does this have to do with anything? Why would you even bring it up? It's like bringing up Peach's <insert aerial here> into dsmash. Wow, shield pressure.

Very relevant to bring up when speaking about infinites (on hit). There is absolutely no combo in these games which puts you in perpetual blockstun (save for a Mr. Saturn rethrown several times at close range)(and it would be impossible to infinite someone on shield, even if the blockstun was perpetual, since one's shield would eventually give out).

This is why I didn't post it and erased it. It didn't make sense to the argument.

Then why should we care and why would you bring them up as examples of how the game works? "Oh, Marth has a death combo on Mewtwo because I've seen it work on sucky players!"

In Melee, I DI Sheik's F-tilt on reaction. The vast majority of the times, the most Sheik ever gets on my Peach (or Zelda or Sheik) from an F-tilt is one single follow-up move (usually an aerial, Fair or Nair). But of course, since sucky playes do not DI Sheik's F-tilt on reaction, sometimes not even after being hit by it twice or thrice, I guess it's some kind of guaranteed triple F-tilt combo into Fair into death because they'll just get edgeguarded easily.

Or we could ignore what sucky players can and cannot do when discussing play at the highest level of play.

Although 50-70% of the people who played Melee at that time sucked, the few good people still did this against the only two Mewtwo Players, me and my friend, unforuntatly I was only semi competent with Mewtwo, so almost all of the time I opted him for Zelda/Shiek, Falco, Roy, and Mario.

My friend however was good with him, however he still fell to to Marth's "Death Combo" as I put it.

Explain the quote then.

Explained above.

Kirby's match-ups weren't that bad. He was ***** by, like, 4 or so people. The rest were "soft *****" (a few) to pretty OK match-ups.

Also, this is pretty much still true for many Bottom Tiers in Brawl.

I think we have have different values for **** and soft ****,

I think 8-2 and worse is super ****

7-3 is ****

6-4 is soft **** or ok matchup.

Not me. It's just that D3's infinite on DK is just so good it makes the match-up much worse than Marth vs. Mewtwo.

I'll concede you are correct on this.

And this isn't true for DK vs. D3? Heck, this isn't true for Pikachu vs. Fox?

You are correct on this, that it is true for those match-ups.

Which isn't as bad as DK vs. D3. It might not even be as bad as Pikachu vs. Fox.

I really think it's worse than that Fox vs Pikachu Match-up. The DK vs DDD, I'd say it's on par with badness.

This was meant to prove that tournament results do not conclusively and irrefutably prove anything if theorycraft proves the opposite.

They don't, but they at least should be considered in thoerycrafting.

 

[Nintendude]

Well, more ICs have beat Marths than M2s have so even if I don't know the matchup its kinda obvious that you don't know it as well as you think since you've obviously missed why everyone who does know it considers Marth to be a much harder match for M2 than for ICs. Not saying I know the matchup well but its clear you don't either. Theres no need to be on freakin high alert.

There's also only like 2 people in the country willing to use Mewtwo in a tournament match (and they would normally use high tiers vs. any good Marth) so obviously more ICs have beaten Marths. You don't have any point to argue with. The matchup is so underexplored in practice that it is all based on theory, and unless you have some good counters to my arguments I'll consider myself correct.

Red Ryu, I'm 99% sure that you and your friends who "don't suck" aren't nearly as good as you think they are. Do they have any tournament record at all? You seem to be spewing out the general consensus of whatever nonsense the general population of these boards comes up with. You have to immerse yourself in a high level atmosphere to actually understand the games.

 

[IrArby]

How are you "correct"? Your argument is just as unexplored. First you say, M2s matchup with Marth isn't any worse than ICs (you think). Then you say, the matchup is underexplored in practice. Sounds like Theorycrafting to me. Seriously, you discredited your own argument. Your first idea was based on theory. Obviously, your not one of the two M2s in the country willing to use him in a tournament.

If its all theory, you certainly can't assume your correct in saying that M2 has it just as hard as ICs have it.

You essentially argued these in order

1. The conventional way we read the Mewto/Marth matchup is wrong because theoritically (blah blah . . . ) and

2. Mewto's matchup is hardly worse than ICs (a sorta similar character in this matchup) but

3. the whole Mewto/Marth matchup is more based on theory than practice since good Mewtos don't play it (hmmm perhaps this is an indicator of something here). Nonetheless inspite of the validity of this statement

4. I'll consider myself correct on theoritical points 1. and 2.

I didn't counter your argument of an ICs/Mewto having equall mathcups against Marth because (as I was honest enough to say) I didn't know the matchup well enough. As I said before, neither do you since (as you said) its mostly theory. If its theory, your would-be "correct" answer is nothing but untested theory.

The only point I argued is that you don't have one.

EDIT: I rewrote point 2 to better reflect what you said. Seriously, that is what you said. The rest of my post was based on you being very hypocritical.

 

[Nintendude]

First you say, M2s matchup with Marth isn't any worse than ICs (you think).

That's NOT what I said.

Seems like most of the rest of your post is based on this interpretation you pulled out of nowhere, so I don't feel like responding to it. Here, I'll summarize for you: I think that Mewtwo vs. ICs plays similarly in terms of approach options (a big factor separating high from low tiers), and Mewtwo's recovery partially negates some of ICs punishment abilities in comparison. ICs vs. Marth is slightly in Marth's favor, therefore Mewtwo vs. Marth is not an awful "90-10" (I hate using arbitrary matchup ratios) but rather just a little worse than ICs vs. Marth. There's no way it is the worst matchup in the game.

What's wrong with theorizing a match when there's little to no actual evidence available? It's the next best thing.

 

[IrArby]

That's NOT what I said.

Seems like most of the rest of your post is based on this interpretation you pulled out of nowhere, so I don't feel like responding to it. Here, I'll summarize for you: I think that Mewtwo vs. ICs plays similarly in terms of approach options (a big factor separating high from low tiers), and Mewtwo's recovery partially negates some of ICs punishment abilities in comparison. ICs vs. Marth is slightly in Marth's favor, therefore Mewtwo vs. Marth is not an awful "90-10" (I hate using arbitrary matchup ratios) but rather just a little worse than ICs vs. Marth. There's no way it is the worst matchup in the game.

What's wrong with theorizing a match when there's little to no actual evidence available? It's the next best thing.

Theres nothing wrong with theorizing matches. Believe it or not I was in agreement with you. That is until you flew off the handel as if I made a disgusting false accusation of you "Where did I claim that ICs get edgeguarded less harshly than Mewtwo?" WOW calm down I really never said you did. I just said they did and "Other than that" my post agreed with you. I agree the matchup isn't as bad as people make it out to be. I just think ICs can do alot more out of a grab/wavedash. I never argued with you that it was the worst matchup in the game.

If you really want a more in-depth opinion I think that fact that theres two ICs makes a big differnece not just because its hard to grab the right one but they can be desynched even if you grab the right one. Then, ICs have more options (other than grab) out of the wavedash (like desynched single ice block). And, Mewtos grab combos on Marth rather look to me as if they can be DI'ed out of. People just don't know how since as you said the matchup is mostly theorized.

Still, what I said is theory as is what you said so you can hardly discredit the way the matchup is now read because of what you or I have theorized. If you discredit the conventional way the matchup is read (yes you did this) based on how you've theorized the matchup (yes you did this), go on to say its a theory based matchup anyway which really isn't proven (yup) and then assume your new theory is correct (did it) because no one directly theoritically disproved you (did that too) then you're being very hypocritical.

In summary, I agree with you about the matchup. Mewto probably has it much better than what people make it out to be as he has similar options compared to ICs (whom are only slightly disadvantaged). Though I still think ICs have more better options overall (I think you might agree on this point also). However, you assuming your theory is enough to discredit the longstanding theory and throwing rude indifference along the way at people is no way to get your veiw point heard.

 

[MyCurse4Life]

Wow this would be very......good

 

[Yuna]

My mistake then.

See, when I tell you you said something, you should go back and double-check to make sure you didn't say it. Because I certainly do not have a habit of making up what people said.

I'll recant that and go with Bowser vs Shiek.

And you'd still be wrong.

1) Melee Sheik has a smaller grab-range than D3.
2) Power shielding in Melee did not remove shieldstun, as opposed to Brawl where you can just perfect shield to negate moves that are only barely safe on block.
3) Melee had, you know, blockstun. In Brawl, if someone blocks your move, you're screwed most of the time.
4) Bowser had plenty of moves which were plenty safe (safe enough to not get grabbed, anyway) by Sheik.
5) Bowser had actual combos, shield-pressure and approach in Melee (not that he was very good at it) as opposed to Donkey Kong who has none of that, plus, Sheik's Needle camping, not as good as D3's Waddle Dee camping.
6) NTSC Melee Sheik's chaingrab on Bowser, not an infinite. 0-death? Sure. But it was a running chaingrab. This means that it did not work (0-death) from anywhere on any stage. Heck, at the right percentages, you could DI up onto platforms and tech, forcing Sheik to end the chaingrab pre-maturely with a Fair or something (or corse, at those percentages, a lot of the time, you will die from the fair). Sheik's Fair in Melee doesn't necessarily kill Bowser with the correct DI 'til the 150%'s unless you're near the edge when you get Faired (and you have, like, 125%-ish already).

What does Donkey Kong have? Nothing. What does D3 have? Perfect shielding any move into a dashgrab into an infinite into death. Trust me, the NTSC Melee Sheik vs. Bowser match-up has nothing on the Donkey Kong vs. DeDeDe match-up.

They didn't all get 8:2'd. 8:2's were still there.

As opposed to the Brawl bottom tiers who never get 80-20:ed, 90:10ed or worse?

This is why I said unresolved, as in the ones they haven't gone over yet. He would still have three or so hard counters keeping him out of high tier, possibly even mid.

I'm sorry, this disagrees with anything I said when? I made a statement, one you had no need to reply to.

It would prove he doesn't belong in bottom and that he's better than Pichu.

But what would it prove concerning game balance and whichever game is more balanced?! All it would prove would be that people got his tier placement wrong the first time around. Yay, who cares?! Pichu is still bottom tier. Link would just move up to another tier.

Of course he wouldn't be as bad as Pichu then! Why would we compare a Bottom Tier to a non-Bottom Tier?

It is still possible.

Yeah, come back to me when it's a reality.

It would prove he's not as bad as Melee's bottom tiers.

Of course he wouldn't. Because he wouldn't be bottom tier.

8-2 is as bad as those chaingrab match-ups get, according to the character boards, at least the DDD vs DK ones agree on that number.

Wait, did you just claim that D3 vs. DK is 80-20?

It applies to every character. If a character is placing better contently then they should be looked into.

If they are placing well played by several people and against the world's best players (not in local or smaller tournaments). And pray tell, which characters is this actually happening with? Or are you just randomly arguing hypothetical (irrelevant) scenarios again?

Sonic however has jumped ten spots from where he should be, none of his placements are from a single user, I beleive, and he has been continuing this gradual climb for a while.

How many Sonics are even able to place Top 16 at major tournaments with high concentrations of skilled players?

Very well, I'll cease using this match-up.

Why did we not see a "I was wrong" tacked on here? You admitted to being wrong several times in this thread, why not another admission here?

Although 50-70% of the people who played Melee at that time sucked, the few good people still did this against the only two Mewtwo Players, me and my friend, unforuntatly I was only semi competent with Mewtwo, so almost all of the time I opted him for Zelda/Shiek, Falco, Roy, and Mario.

My friend however was good with him, however he still fell to to Marth's "Death Combo" as I put it.

You and your friend who "was good with [Mewtwo]" =/= People who matter/People playing at the highest level of skill

Tell me, can you DI Sheik's F-tilt on reaction the vast majority of the time in order to almost never get f-tilted into another f-tilt (or U-tilt)? Do you know how to DI Marth's combos to prevent the Dair from constantly sweetspotting?

Nobody cares what you or your friend can and cannot do. Do not base a match-up on what you and your friend can and cannot do. Because chances are, you might just be doingit all wrong.

I think we have have different values for **** and soft ****,

Obviously.

I think 8-2 and worse is super ****

80-20 is ****.

7-3 is ****

7-3 is a soft counter at best.

6-4 is soft **** or ok matchup.

6-4 is a barely disadvantageous match-up, 55:45 being a neutral, barely disadvantageous match-up.

I'll concede you are correct on this.

We're making progress. For every post of yours, you seem to be conceeding at least two things. With this pace, we'll be done in a week's time.

I really think it's worse than that Fox vs Pikachu Match-up. The DK vs DDD, I'd say it's on par with badness.

Based on what (besides what you and your friend can and cannot do)?

They don't, but they at least should be considered in thoerycrafting.

Of course we consider it. We analyze it. That's what people do when theorycrafting! And if our analysis states that it's just a freak accident or a really good player doing really well against less good players or whatever, well, that's our answer then.

 

[Nintendude]

Question for Yuna/Red Ryu: What's the deal with this Pika vs. Fox matchup and why is it so unfair? And for who?

Theres nothing wrong with theorizing matches. Believe it or not I was in agreement with you. That is until you flew off the handel as if I made a disgusting false accusation of you "Where did I claim that ICs get edgeguarded less harshly than Mewtwo?" WOW calm down I really never said you did. I just said they did and "Other than that" my post agreed with you. I agree the matchup isn't as bad as people make it out to be. I just think ICs can do alot more out of a grab/wavedash. I never argued with you that it was the worst matchup in the game.

You could, you know, not overreact (or not react at all) to stuff like that, and then there wouldn't be these kinds of problems. I'm not sure why that comes off as an attack on you. I prefer to not add random "lols" and smileys to safeguard posts from sensitive people.

If you really want a more in-depth opinion I think that fact that theres two ICs makes a big differnece not just because its hard to grab the right one but they can be desynched even if you grab the right one. Then, ICs have more options (other than grab) out of the wavedash (like desynched single ice block). And, Mewtos grab combos on Marth rather look to me as if they can be DI'ed out of. People just don't know how since as you said the matchup is mostly theorized.

The fact that there are two ICs is a disadvantage as well. Marth is really good at gimping Nana and solo Popo vs. Marth is not fun.

And I think Mewtwo is a lot better off doing a wavedash down-tilt approach from shield instead of wavedash grab. He has really good tilt combos that link into aerials.

Still, what I said is theory as is what you said so you can hardly discredit the way the matchup is now read because of what you or I have theorized. If you discredit the conventional way the matchup is read (yes you did this) based on how you've theorized the matchup (yes you did this), go on to say its a theory based matchup anyway which really isn't proven (yup) and then assume your new theory is correct (did it) because no one directly theoritically disproved you (did that too) then you're being very hypocritical.

In summary, I agree with you about the matchup. Mewto probably has it much better than what people make it out to be as he has similar options compared to ICs (whom are only slightly disadvantaged). Though I still think ICs have more better options overall (I think you might agree on this point also). However, you assuming your theory is enough to discredit the longstanding theory and throwing rude indifference along the way at people is no way to get your veiw point heard.

The thing is I don't even see any theory behind the traditional Mewtwo vs. Marth matchup analysis. Basically people say it's a **** matchup cause it's top tier vs. bottom tier and cause Marth outranges/outprioritizes Mewtwo. A tier difference is not analysis, and what character does Marth NOT outrange/outprioritize? There was no argument to begin with, so I'm laying down my own. Overall though, it seems you agree with my points so I don't see a reason to continue discussing this. Hopefully people will stop trying to use Mewtwo vs. Marth as an example of why Melee is really unbalanced.

 

[brinboy789]

Question for Yuna/Red Ryu: What's the deal with this Pika vs. Fox matchup and why is it so unfair? And for who?

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=186742

 

[Yuna]

Question for Yuna/Red Ryu: What's the deal with this Pika vs. Fox matchup and why is it so unfair? And for who?

You mean sides the fact that Pikachu is better than Fox at pretty much everything in their match-up, plus an 80% chaingrab?

 

[IrArby]

@Nintendude1189: For all intents and purposes, agreed. Theres really not much more to say. I think Mewto stands hardly less chance then the ICs though the fact of their being two ICs is more of a pro than a con especially if the alternative were just one IC as is. Having to focus on KOing Nana is the same as focusing on one weakness in another character. Thats a pro for ICs and a con for whomever they play as all strategies that are very singlely focused like that always have counters.

Were also agreed in saying that Melee is definitely more balanced than Brawl. I'm wondering what we'd consider to be the worst matchup in Melee. Whatever it is, IMO it won't contain Fox as Fox doesn't really hard core **** any character more than Shiek, Marth, or Falco. Strangely, most Brawlers arguing for its balance don't know Melee well enough to say what the worst matchups are so we'd kinda have to supplement their arguments.

 

[JigglyZelda003]

maybe Pichu vs the ICs?

 

[pizzapie7]

It depends on what you believe is balanced, whether you think 1 character being wayyyyyy better then the rest is better then 4 characters being somewhat better then the rest

 

[E.G.G.M.A.N.]

It depends on what you believe is balanced, whether you think 1 character being wayyyyyy better then the rest is better then 4 characters being somewhat better then the rest

Except brawl has 39 characters and melee only has 25.

 

[adumbrodeus]

The thing is I don't even see any theory behind the traditional Mewtwo vs. Marth matchup analysis. Basically people say it's a **** matchup cause it's top tier vs. bottom tier and cause Marth outranges/outprioritizes Mewtwo. A tier difference is not analysis, and what character does Marth NOT outrange/outprioritize? There was no argument to begin with, so I'm laying down my own. Overall though, it seems you agree with my points so I don't see a reason to continue discussing this. Hopefully people will stop trying to use Mewtwo vs. Marth as an example of why Melee is really unbalanced.

Ok, a little explanation on this.

Actually, low tier vs. top tier has something to do with it, though it's not so much Mewtwo's position as Marth's. One of the defining attributes of the top tiers in this game are the fact that they're REALLY GOOD at not getting grabbed.

Marth's general spacing advantages make him particularly good at this, coupled with Mewtwo's relative lack of overall movement speed.

Why's this so important against mewtwo? Because that's pretty much the only way he can kill. His spike is pathetic, his smashes take too long, shadow ball is situational. Really, fair is his only legitimate "other" killer, and it's range is crap, which is a horrible issue against Marth for the exact same reason that grabbing Marth is horribly difficult, his spacing.

In addition, his best non-grab general move (nair) is ripped apart by Marth's spacing.

He does still have bair and dtilt, they're both significantly easier to get off, but there's the majority of mewtwo's options, pretty much gone. He does have some set-ups and such, but overall, mewtwo will have a massive amount of difficultly killing marth at a reasonable percentage, and Marth can kill mewtwo with reletive ease at just about any percent because he's light and floaty. This is just not a fun match.

 

[Masmasher@]

Theres a difference between a character being non viable because they suck as a character and a character not being viable because a faulty engine and a over looked aspect of "brokeness" Fox in this game doesnt suck as a character but becomes unusable because of pikachu. Same for donkey kong because of dedede. Dont bring the arguement of well "dont get grabbed" because it doesnt matter how good you are at somepoint you are going to get grabbed and in the case of pika vs fox that lands you a punishment of 80 damage coupled with a up smash with a possible thunder to kill you off the top. Besides I think its pretty obvious that projectiles dont usually kill so camping has to end with a actual approach to close ranged combat. Melee is far more balanced then brawl. In brawl defense ***** offense most of the time there are exceptions. theres low hit stun coupled with tripping makes no follow up safe someone can attack you during when you are attacking them is ridiculous.
Its relatively simple in most fighting games I.e street fighter, soul calibur, virtua fighter and so on when you attack someone and it hits you you are at frame disadvantage the best thing to do is to block since blocking comes out the fastest most casuals dont get this so they try to attack after being hit only to be hit again (usually a counter hit) the classic situation of I lost to a spammer pops up. If you block your opponent is left at a disadvantage this is the basic concept of offence vs defense (there are other options) though in brawl the person can get out of you follow up and simply attack allowing for a trade off of hits. Even a novice (myself) realizes after a while that this battle of i hit you you hit me concept is stupid and eventualy will go to camp you. The other doesent want to get camped to death so they will camp too this leads to stagnation and boredom( had to throw that in). what happens to those that dont have a good projectile? character specific traits/advanced techs in games are usually good but in brawl most of them are broken and if they arent broken they are completely useless.....