Just pick a top tier.

[Astartes]

People are acting like the tier list is set in stone which is a hilarious lie. the metagame is constantly growing and that is why the backroom changes the list every six months. sure metaknight and snake are always going to be top tier but the other characters change their placement all the time. so when people develop the metagame of the characters who arent the "best" they are actively changing the tier list.

 

[boss8]

lol no one cares about what TC has to say or stingers......ill continue to main who i want to main.....IMO.....


THERE ARE NO SUCH THING AS TIERS!!!

having a passion in the character you play will excel you above any limit you have ever imagined.....

i know because i have been there.....its pretty sweet....

i also dont want to become another zombie maining MK....snake...etc....

did u ever stop to think how much fun it is to play the character that that person has choose???

sure m2k and etc wins turneys....but who says they have fun??? plus they have expectations....if they lose to anyone who uses a character below GaW then its auto fame....for example...FOW

 

[stingers]

 

[Spambot]

Not a lot of high-tiers suit my play-style. I'm not very good at using projectiles like grenades or Shuttle-Looping people into oblivion, so I would rather use a character that has a good aerial game and happens to be really cute.

 

[Beta Knight]

If someone wanted to be the best smash player in the world, they would be stupid to not pick a top tier. Sure they could spend hours and hours perfecting their low tier character, but it's all just time wasted they could have spent getting better with an actually good character.

Now that's not to say they would be bad at the game, they would be very good with their character if they practiced 24/7, and would probably win a lot of tournaments. But if you're looking to be the best you can possibly be, it is foolish to pick an inferior character.

 

[Titanium Dragon]

Sirlin has an article about why you're wrong.

The reality is that top tier characters, firstly, are not necessarily the best characters in the game. Tiers are not in the game, but in the metagame, and that is a very important distinction. A top tier character may not truly be the best in the game, but may SEEM to be the best due to the current meta. However, someone may unlock their potential, or simply play them better. The lower tier a character is, the more likely they are to be underrated, and the more potential they are likely to have to be unlocked. If you don't try, then you won't know.

Secondly, the less a character is played, the better they become because the less used to that character other players are. This doesn't mean necessarily that it will make a bad character top tier, but you can sometimes beat people who are "better" than you and playing "better" characters by playing a random character they're not used to facing, and thus will mess up spacing/timing/ect. against.

Thirdly, the real metric is matchups, so if you have a variety of characters you're good with, you have a better chance of finding a character who can counter whatever their pick is. A character can be "top tier" but have a bad matchup against a certain character (or player's playing style, even!) and then, if that's your only character, you're doomed, while the player playing the "bad" characters knows how to circumvent it.

Fourth, not everyone can be the best smasher in the world. However, if you become the best in the world at character X, that's a lot more meaningful than being the tenth best Metaknight in the world. No one cares about the tenth best metaknight, but the best Yoshi is interesting. So it gives you an alternative goal.

Fifth, the purpose of a game is to have fun. Thus, things which maximize your fun are more important than things which give you an edge in winning. This may seem to contradict the "Playing to Win" mentality, but if you aren't enjoying playing the game, then you won't play to win at all.

Sixth, it gives you a big advantage in terms of hidden information. If you have a big stable of characters you're good with (or even just a few), it is much more difficult for your opponent to scout you. They think they're going to play against your Metaknight and you pull out Fox, this can throw them off and put them at a psychological disadvantage.

Seventh, playing a character who well suits your playing style will often result in stronger play than one which does not. If you specialize in a certain sort of play, it is better to play a character who is well-suited for it than to play someone who isn't.

And finally, the more you master all aspects of the game, the better you get at it. Playing a weaker character can make you stronger not only with them, but with your stronger character as well, and indeed it may be even more beneficial, especially if someone pulls out a random character who you happen to know well due to playing them as well.

People who think that you should only play top tier characters are scrubs themselves. They've created an artificial rule in their head which appears nowhere in the game.

 

[Dsull]

^what he said

i never associated any of the SSB characters in tiers till recently, and only because it made it a little easier to divide the characters up into groups based on the learning curve. The final project is like what ^he^ said, who youre fighting and how you use your guy.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

Lol. Brawl is not so complex that some gamebreaking revolutionary "something" will be discovered that somehow will knock Metaknight from S/S+ tier.

It was readily apparent from a few months of playing this game that Metaknight and Snake are far and beyond the power curve in comparison to the rest of the characters. In the time since, this has only become more apparent.

As for the rest of the S and A tier characters that are considered "High Tier," the only significant changes that I could see happening are the drop of Kirby into Middle, and the rise of IC's to S.

I guess feel free to mock me all you want if I'm wrong and something does get discovered that shakes the foundation of this game.

 

[kr3wman]

Why would people mock someone who's right?

That'd be pretty stupid.

 

[SmashChu]

From what I've seen of other fighting games, it's all about knowing the match-up, not that they exist. C.Falcon can stomp Meta-Knight if C. Falcon knows the match-up better then Meta-Knight knows his. There may also be hidden potential (Marth was decent until Ken revamp the character and made him top tier). You can also use it as an element of surprise. With Meta-Knight not having any bad match-ups, a lot of arrogance Meta-Knight players probably don't know the match-ups, so these players can exploit their knowledge of Meta-Knight and their opponent's ignorance.

There were a lot more reasons mentioned here, but there are lots of reasons why someone may want to play a low tier character. It may also be more fun

 

[LuLLo]

From what I've seen of other fighting games, it's all about knowing the match-up, not that they exist. C.Falcon can stomp Meta-Knight if C. Falcon knows the match-up better then Meta-Knight knows his. There may also be hidden potential (Marth was decent until Ken revamp the character and made him top tier). You can also use it as an element of surprise. With Meta-Knight not having any bad match-ups, a lot of arrogance Meta-Knight players probably don't know the match-ups, so these players can exploit their knowledge of Meta-Knight and their opponent's ignorance.

There were a lot more reasons mentioned here, but there are lots of reasons why someone may want to play a low tier character. It may also be more fun

True this, I went to my first Brawl tourney with Ike only and defeated Holland's best/2nd best MK, which resulted in lots of ''LuLLo's Ike is boss'' thingies. To every tourney I went, I was that one guy you should look out for, cause his Ike rocked, every player I brawled with said I was the best Ike they've ever seen.
...Well, that's all nice and stuff, but I've never placed top 10 or anything, even though I'm one of the best Ikes in Holland/France/Germany etc according to many top people.
So I decided to pick up ZSS to cover my bad matchups and hopefully place good in a tourney, but she went stale after a few months of playing and my interest for her was gone.
Since recently, I've been playing Wario, and he really fits me, after a few days of playing, top players said I was better with Wario than with Ike. I choose Wario for being a high tier, and actually grew fond of him and his playstyle.
The thing is, everyone thinks I'm a good player, all top players say it, but my main (Ike) is just holding me back, I've been playing with him since Brawl came out and still I don't place in tourneys. So next tourney (this sunday) I'm going to play Ike and use Wario for bad matchups or better players. Hopefully I'll place this time.

So you see, it's a mix for me, I really enjoy being a good Ike and getting lots of respect for it, but I also really want to place in a tournament, so I'm glad I finally found a top-tier who fits me good, since the rest of the top-chars are just not my thing. It also felt like I was cheating on Ike for picking up Wario, I never wanted to pick a top-tier for just being a top-tier, but I'm glad I did, because now I finally have a chance to place in a tourney AND get the respect-benefits for maining Ike.

 

[Ulevo]

Logistically speaking, everything the topic creator emphasized is 100% correct. There may be other reasons for choosing a character that isn't S Tier, but none of them involve success or winning beyond anything in a small scope. I find it funny people are actually replying and attempting to argue this.

Topic is redundant.

 

[Astartes]

I was wondering where would u think the cut-off would be for top-tier characters. Is just S tier top or is A tier viable as well.

 

[Nic64]

Thirdly, the real metric is matchups, so if you have a variety of characters you're good with, you have a better chance of finding a character who can counter whatever their pick is. A character can be "top tier" but have a bad matchup against a certain character (or player's playing style, even!) and then, if that's your only character, you're doomed, while the player playing the "bad" characters knows how to circumvent it.

Meta Knight doesn't have bad matchups, gg matchup weaknesses

Fourth, not everyone can be the best smasher in the world. However, if you become the best in the world at character X, that's a lot more meaningful than being the tenth best Metaknight in the world. No one cares about the tenth best metaknight, but the best Yoshi is interesting. So it gives you an alternative goal.

The tenth best MK in the world is going to have a hell of a lot more potential to profit and win than the best Ganondorf in the world. Realistically, the tenth best MK is far more important.

I only happen to know who the best Yoshi is because he's from my region, the top 10-20 Meta Knight's are more recognizable.

But while it is prudent to play good characters, the tier list doesn't mean much, it's just one perspective on where characters stand relative to each other. Your own opinions should be more reliable for your own purposes.

 

[Dsull]

i've never even heard of a "pro" yoshi lol shows how unnoticed that char goes. Yet another example of the less common char players not getting the recognition they need.
Bet if the best MK in the world lost to the best Olimar, noone would know who the Olimar was just that an MK actually lost to an Olimar. If they even know that much, that is.

 

[SmashChu]

Meta Knight doesn't have bad matchups, gg matchup weaknesses

Sagat in SF4 has no bad match-ups. Heck, unlike Meta-Knight, he has good match ups against most of the top tier characters. Meta-Knight is only 5:5 with the top characters and 6:4 with Dedede making him very beatable, espcailly if too many players play Meta-Knight in which case everyone knows his tricks. If you fight a character like Diddy, Snake or Falco, it may still be better to counter pick then stick with Meta-Knight as you may make a match in your favor rather thern be the best character with 50/50.

The tenth best MK in the world is going to have a hell of a lot more potential to profit and win than the best Ganondorf in the world. Realistically, the tenth best MK is far more important.

I only happen to know who the best Yoshi is because he's from my region, the top 10-20 Meta Knight's are more recognizable.

Not nessisarily. If the 10 Meta-Knight is still beaten by the 56th Diddy, then he is still low and not making money.

 

[Big-Cat]

Sagat in SF4 has no bad match-ups. Heck, unlike Meta-Knight, he has good match ups against most of the top tier characters. Meta-Knight is only 5:5 with the top characters and 6:4 with Dedede making him very beatable, espcailly if too many players play Meta-Knight in which case everyone knows his tricks. If you fight a character like Diddy, Snake or Falco, it may still be better to counter pick then stick with Meta-Knight as you may make a match in your favor rather thern be the best character with 50/50.

Yes, Sagat has no bad matchups (at least until SSF4), but mind you that he doesn't have matchups beyond 7:3 in his favor and it's not like you see anything beyond 8:2 (Seth vs. Zangief in Seth's favor) in the game where as I'm usually hearing stuff like 9:1 and 8:2 matchups are more common in Brawl.

 

[ShaunLalihatu]

Seriously, why would you bother playing a lower tier character? You're not gonna win.

The reasons I can think of why anyone would rather be paying a lower tier character, is because you want to win using the character you think that suits you best (regarding fighting style and favorites).

Another reason you'd rather be playing lower tier characters is because you don't want to be forced into only use of 'GodTier' characters..
Mentioning several fighting games, including Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Street Fighter IV.

Then again, why would you bother playing God/High Tier charcters only.
Because you want to win? There is nothing wrong with 'wanting to win' , but seeing these matches MK vs. MK is boring.. Don't you think?

It limits you a lot in the game itself, and that tells me it is possible that you are not enjoying your game time while playing.
I know it has been said a lot of times, but it is not about winning or losing..
It is about participating, having fun while still being able to have competitive play and a reasonable challenge that comes with it.

Why not just have a game with one character, but 35 of 'em colored all differently so you can distinct them from each other. Is that what you want?
Why not just have a game called 'Ultimate Super Sagat Fighter IV Turbo EX 2 Plus Alpha EO - The Next Generation Part 2 - The Sequel' and just have one character GodTier and that's it. Competitive play at it's best..

So the real question is 'Why would you bother playing only GodTier characters?'

 

[Prawn]

i've never even heard of a "pro" yoshi lol shows how unnoticed that char goes. Yet another example of the less common char players not getting the recognition they need.

You're dumb.

lrn2GreenAce

I only happen to know who the best Yoshi is because he's from my region, the top 10-20 Meta Knight's are more recognizable.

Green Ace is the best yoshi bar-none. So unless you're from New England you're wrong.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

i've never even heard of a "pro" yoshi lol shows how unnoticed that char goes. Yet another example of the less common char players not getting the recognition they need.
Bet if the best MK in the world lost to the best Olimar, noone would know who the Olimar was just that an MK actually lost to an Olimar. If they even know that much, that is.

That's not a fault of the community, that's your own fault for not paying enough attention ^_^

When Samboner beat UltimateRazor (Fox v. Snake), there was a pretty significant amount of press. Low tiers get a TON of recognition when they win when they shouldn't (i.e. Reflex Wonder).

So yeah... you couldn't possibly be more wrong.

 

[SmashChu]

Yes, Sagat has no bad matchups (at least until SSF4), but mind you that he doesn't have matchups beyond 7:3 in his favor and it's not like you see anything beyond 8:2 (Seth vs. Zangief in Seth's favor) in the game where as I'm usually hearing stuff like 9:1 and 8:2 matchups are more common in Brawl.

Smash is designed as a 4 player fighting game and since the competitive community bottle necks the game, that's not that bad. Most of the low characters are 4vs characters, ones who do well in that arena but not as much in others (Link and Ganondorf especially), so they'll have bad match-ups because their strengths are not as relevant to 1v1 battles and their weaknesses are more prevalent. Smash will never be well-balanced for the current rule set and the only way to change it is to put items on (included Final Smashes) more stages and make a 4vs circuit. Otherwise, it's fairly well balanced at the top.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

So you're saying the game is so broken the only way to fix it is to occasionally give characters the option to spontaneously delete 1 or 2 stocks from their opponents with absolutely no skill required?

 

[SmashChu]

So you're saying the game is so broken the only way to fix it is to occasionally give characters the option to spontaneously delete 1 or 2 stocks from their opponents with absolutely no skill required?

No, your saying that.

One of the flaws of the Smash Bros community is they are too ban happy, and the fact that people were considering a ban on meta-Knight (who has worse match ups the Segat in SF4 and is no where near the saturation of Chun Li in SF3) shows that.

Items are considered broken, but no one thinks twice about it. As a result, the game will remain broken. The community has to open up to using items and FSs. They are a part of the game as anything else and taking them out has created a bottle neck and it shows in the game's balance and how the Smash bros. community is looked down upon. I think what needs to be done is try items out in tournament play and ignore the "reaction." They have never been tried at Brawl except for Evo.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

People have discussed use of FS's at length in the beginning of the game. There are great discrepancies even between the FS's. Some of the are entirely too simple to dodge, and thus are ineffectual, such as Donkey Kong's, while some of them almost guarantee 2 stocks, such as all of the Landmasters.

There is no obligation WHATSOEVER to use all the facets provides in a game. The competitive community makes the game competitive. The freaking developers WANTED this to be a pointless party game, that's why they invented half of the features in the game. Ffs, they added tripping because they thought it would be fun and that dashdancing wasn't a fair tactic.

Please enlighten me how items and FS's will make this game somehow less broken, and the Smash community less "looked down upon"

When items and FS's are in play, people stop playing the game, and it turns into chase after the OHKO, because why would I even bother try to hit you if I can just **** you with an Assist Trophy or a Pokeball.

EDIT: I realized that I probably just got trolled hard by this guy, lol.

 

[SmashChu]

People have discussed use of FS's at length in the beginning of the game. There are great discrepancies even between the FS's. Some of the are entirely too simple to dodge, and thus are ineffectual, such as Donkey Kong's, while some of them almost guarantee 2 stocks, such as all of the Landmasters.

1)There are videos on how to dodge all of them. It's not an excuse now. Also, isn't there discrepancies with the game already. How does that make sense?
2)They are still just as much a part of the game. Gaps in the super moves exist for all fighting games, yet they were never banned in them. Why are they so different here?

There is no obligation WHATSOEVER to use all the facets provides in a game. The competitive community makes the game competitive. The freaking developers WANTED this to be a pointless party game, that's why they invented half of the features in the game. Ffs, they added tripping because they thought it would be fun and that dashdancing wasn't a fair tactic.

The competitive community is ignorant of everyone but themselves. There is a good reason this is "Baby's first competitive fighting game."

You also have to be pretty dumb to see no skill in items or FS. It may be because you never see them as anything more as stuff you can't control (PROTIP:You can control them, you just haven't figured it out yet).

Please enlighten me how items and FS's will make this game somehow less broken, and the Smash community less "looked down upon"

FS are part of the balance. The teir list will tip if FS are in the metagame. Meta-Knight has a weak FS, for instance. This puts hinm at a competive disadvantage when a Smash Ball is out as he can do very little with it compared to his oppontnent. It will also change up the match ups as it adds a new dynamic.

As far as being hated, here is the situation:
There are two groups who hate competitive smash community. The other competitive fighting game communities who think Competitive Smash is a joke (because they turn off half of the game) and the rest of the Smash fans as the compeitive community tried to force their way of playing onto these players who did not what to play that way.

The former sees the community as laughable because they are only playing half the game. As far as other competitive communities go, things are rarely banned. Marvel vs Capcom has everything legal despite all the infinite-s. To them, they can't see anyone as a good Smash player from the competitive community as they are not masters of the entire game, just a small part they carved out. It's laughable to them as they never ban anything, yet the competitive community wanted to ban a not broken character. In other words, everyone sees the community banning things that they don't try to over come.

When items and FS's are in play, people stop playing the game, and it turns into chase after the OHKO, because why would I even bother try to hit you if I can just **** you with an Assist Trophy or a Pokeball.

Wow, you're bad at this game. OF COURSE you want to go after them when you have one of those items. You can get so many more kills that way. See, you have no idea about items.

 

[Laos Oman]

The competitive community makes the game competitive. The freaking developers WANTED this to be a pointless party game, that's why they invented half of the features in the game. Ffs, they added tripping because they thought it would be fun and that dashdancing wasn't a fair tactic.

They also added glide tossing, pivot grabbing and individual item selection, all of which improve the competitive side of Smash Bros.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

Glide tossing wasn't an intentional addition, afaik.

Ok, now where to begin...

1)There are videos on how to dodge all of them. It's not an excuse now. Also, isn't there discrepancies with the game already. How does that make sense?

1. You are suggesting that more random luck and discrepancies be added.

The competitive community is ignorant of everyone but themselves. There is a good reason this is "Baby's first competitive fighting game."

You also have to be pretty dumb to see no skill in items or FS. It may be because you never see them as anything more as stuff you can't control (PROTIP:You can control them, you just haven't figured it out yet).

I would sincerely hope the competitive community would not consider the opinions of players of other competitive games or the casual smash community. Neither have any place when making decisions regarding the competitive Smash environment.

The reason this is "Baby's first competitive fighting game" is because it moves a quarter of a snail's pace, due to utter lack of combos or possible follow ups, far too effective recoveries, and the prevalence and ease of camping.

Using items is skillful, but totally in the wrong direction of a healthy fighting game. It entirely homogenizes the characters, and makes them "equal" in that they are all the same. It is not always skillful, however. Randomness does not mesh with competitive spirit. Imagine if you were in a tournament match and you randomly trip, and you get 9 Hammer'd by a G&W because of it, dying at 30%. That **** is standard issue when you play with items. Sometimes you will just die spontaneously due to RNG.

FS are part of the balance. The teir list will tip if FS are in the metagame. Meta-Knight has a weak FS, for instance. This puts hinm at a competive disadvantage when a Smash Ball is out as he can do very little with it compared to his oppontnent. It will also change up the match ups as it adds a new dynamic.

As far as being hated, here is the situation:
There are two groups who hate competitive smash community. The other competitive fighting game communities who think Competitive Smash is a joke (because they turn off half of the game) and the rest of the Smash fans as the compeitive community tried to force their way of playing onto these players who did not what to play that way.

The former sees the community as laughable because they are only playing half the game. As far as other competitive communities go, things are rarely banned. Marvel vs Capcom has everything legal despite all the infinite-s. To them, they can't see anyone as a good Smash player from the competitive community as they are not masters of the entire game, just a small part they carved out. It's laughable to them as they never ban anything, yet the competitive community wanted to ban a not broken character. In other words, everyone sees the community banning things that they don't try to over come.

Bull****. It's commonly known that due to his glide toss, MK is already one of the best characters in this game with items. It doesn't matter if his FS is mediocre because with his multiple jumps and his multi-hit attacks, and the fact that he has about 100 different options at any given time to make you GTFO, he will usually get the Smash Ball. At which point he will mock you by using it on air then killing you legitimately.

Players of other competitive games don't hate Smash because we turn **** off. They hate it because their games have combos and are fast paced and actually interesting to watch. Melee turned off half their stages and all the items, and it is highly respected in the gaming community.

The competitive community doesn't give a rat's *** about how you play in your free time, or with friends. They care that when two people compete in a tournament set, that the best player will be the one who will win. People whine too much about tournament rules, then don't play with them.

Wow, you're bad at this game. OF COURSE you want to go after them when you have one of those items. You can get so many more kills that way. See, you have no idea about items.

Now you're just being stupid. If you can't see why it's a bad thing that you stop playing Smash to play "Chase after the shiny OHKO ball!" then I can't help you. If you want to play a game to chase after a bunch of colorful stuff ftw, play Katamari Damacy.

 

[Kitamerby]

Now you're just being stupid. If you can't see why it's a bad thing that you stop playing Smash to play "Chase after the shiny OHKO ball!" then I can't help you. If you want to play a game to chase after a bunch of colorful stuff ftw, play Katamari Damacy.

Best thing I've read all day.

Katamari Damacy ftw.

...so I would rather use a character that has a good aerial game and happens to be really cute.

Meta Knight fits this description.

 

[BEES]

Frankly the only brawl tournaments I would consider going to are low-tier tournaments.

 

[SmashChu]

Ok, now where to begin...

Prepare for ignorance on stilts.

1. You are suggesting that more random luck and discrepancies be added.

This had nothing to do with what I said. It's not luck because if you can't dodge them, it's not the game's fault it's yours. Competitive Smash is built on the fact that these players want easy wins rather then to cope.

I would sincerely hope the competitive community would not consider the opinions of players of other competitive games or the casual smash community. Neither have any place when making decisions regarding the competitive Smash environment.

OK. Just remember that no one cares about the competitive community. Sakurai will still base the game around items, 4 players and lots of stages. Basically, it's adapt or hope that SSB4 doesn't kill all of this.

The reason this is "Baby's first competitive fighting game" is because it moves a quarter of a snail's pace, due to utter lack of combos or possible follow ups, far too effective recoveries, and the prevalence and ease of camping.

Compared to SF4, it moves pretty fast. There are faster fighting games and slower ones. It's Baby's first fighting game because all you guys do is whine and turn off things you all can't use. I've been able to stomp competitive players with items almost all the time because they don't know what they heck they are doing.

Using items is skillful, but totally in the wrong direction of a healthy fighting game. It entirely homogenizes the characters, and makes them "equal" in that they are all the same. It is not always skillful, however. Randomness does not mesh with competitive spirit. Imagine if you were in a tournament match and you randomly trip, and you get 9 Hammer'd by a G&W because of it, dying at 30%. That **** is standard issue when you play with items. Sometimes you will just die spontaneously due to RNG.

None of those arguments are relevant.
1)Items do not Homogenize the characters. All characters have unique swings and unique properties already. The only thing that is similar is how far they throw. Heck, you've talked a lot about Glide Tossing, which proves how different they are.
2)Tripping already exist, so there is already a luck factor. Also, your ignorance shows as the scenario could not exist without someone not getting up. You would never run at a hammer. No one is that dumb. Your best option is to dodge, fire projectiles, or shield grab them. Given, it can still happen if you are running away, but you have two other options to do, so you'll be taking a risk, which does mesh with competitive spirit.
3)All of what you are saying is theoretic as it has never been truly tested. It has only been done in a controlled environment with a few people.

Bull****. It's commonly known that due to his glide toss, MK is already one of the best characters in this game with items. It doesn't matter if his FS is mediocre because with his multiple jumps and his multi-hit attacks, and the fact that he has about 100 different options at any given time to make you GTFO, he will usually get the Smash Ball. At which point he will mock you by using it on air then killing you legitimately.

Wow, you don't know anything about items

First, Glide Tossing isn't that amazing. You are just rolling while throwing an item, one that can still be reflected, blocked or dodged. If you roll back, you're only less likely to get reflectored in the face. If you roll forward, it wont matter as your more likely to get hit by the reflection. You probably won't get the change or be close enough to put pressure on your foe. It was not done at Evo and I've never seen it online despite playing good Meta-Knights. So why is it so amazing?

Also, if you just throw you battering items rather then use them, you suck. Every battering item is better used to attack with then to toss. Tossing is for quick kills or for a needed projectile, but even that is a risk as may lose your item that gives you an advantage. Again, you see the play has a choice and risk to the choices.

Also, seeing as Glide Toss has never been done in tournaments, you can't say he's the best with them. You don;t even know anything about items so you are likely wrong.

Players of other competitive games don't hate Smash because we turn **** off. They hate it because their games have combos and are fast paced and actually interesting to watch. Melee turned off half their stages and all the items, and it is highly respected in the gaming community.

You're wrong on everything

1)Yes, you were hated because you turned everything off. I actually know Street Fighter players and have talked to them.
2)"interesting to watch" is by preference. I actually think Competitive Smash is boring compared to other fighting games.
3)Competitive Melee wasn't respected. It was still very niche compared to most other competitive communities. It's not respected when the game's own fan base hates their competitive community. It only shows it's failures.

The competitive community doesn't give a rat's *** about how you play in your free time, or with friends. They care that when two people compete in a tournament set, that the best player will be the one who will win. People whine too much about tournament rules, then don't play with them.

The fact that competitive Poker exist, a game of luck, means your point makes no sense. It's not the nature of competitive games, competitive players or competitiveness in general, it's just you.

Now you're just being stupid. If you can't see why it's a bad thing that you stop playing Smash to play "Chase after the shiny OHKO ball!" then I can't help you. If you want to play a game to chase after a bunch of colorful stuff ftw, play Katamari Damacy.

How is it a OHKO?
1)You can dodge them. Obviously you can't.
2)Not all of them are very powerful. Only the landmasters and Super Sonic are really bad, but is still dodgeable.
3)You have to break the Smash Ball to get it. It takes skill to get it.

Your post is not fact, but personal bias.

Now, let's finish with the wise words of Sam Walton
Never get so set in your ways, you cannot change

 

[BSP]

What is a landmaster going to do against a serious planker? If you drive off to hit them, they roll up. Landmasters can't deal with planking. The only FS that could really be called a OHKO is super sonic.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

I was going to continue the quote war, but then I realized that we're already spamming, and we're entirely off topic. Then again, this entire thread is full of trolls trolling each other, so I don't really know what to think.

I'll tell you what. Post your thesis in the boards as it's own thread. You'll get to see plenty of "ignorance" from a bunch of people who "suck at this game."

Btw, lol @ Melee not being a immensely popular and respected competitive game. I won't even deign that with further response. I'll just lol my way out of this thread.

 

[SmashChu]

What is a landmaster going to do against a serious planker? If you drive off to hit them, they roll up. Landmasters can't deal with planking. The only FS that could really be called a OHKO is super sonic.

It's not easy easy as you think. They can stand over the edge, forcing you to go down, forcing you to die.

I'll tell you what. Post your thesis in the boards as it's own thread. You'll get to see plenty of "ignorance" from a bunch of people who "suck at this game."

Call me rude, but you've only been here since 2008, right around Brawl's release, so you have little knowledge of before the game and the results afterward. I also suspect you know nothing of items save for the hivemind here and numbers. By definition, you are ignorant, and this ignorance breeds whens for me when we play with items. That's how it is. I know my Metagame better then you do.

Until Competitive Smash players use items, FS, and more stages, I will say they suck. If they are so good, then why is so easy for me to win. I use need to move "Off" to "High."

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

Lol, by your logic then, I have the same right to make unfound assumptions about your experience, play ability, and intelligence based on a small, meaningless amount of information.

This reminds of me of some scrubby Lucario who won a game (not the match) vs. someone who greatly outclassed him because he counterpicked Mario Bros., and he had an immense amount of experience playing on that stage. The tournament was small, so there were no stage restrictions.

Winning vs. someone with items on doesn't make you a good player. It makes you good with items. Likewise, losing with items doesn't make one a bad player. Do you see where this is going? They are separate. You yourself admit that the two types of gameplay are worlds apart, and yet you connect skill with one to skill with the other. Absolute hypocrisy.

Why would I ever care if you know the items-legal metagame more than me? Fact of the matter is, I don't really give a ****, since I do not choose to participate in any tournament event that would allow items to be used. I do not do this out of ignorance. Playing items to *me* is not fun. Why would I want to play a game where every 2 or so minutes, I would have to stop fighting my foe to chase after a ball, then spend then next 30 seconds not really fighting, but just defending myself from losing the FS, and finding an opening for it to be utilized properly.

Then a Hammer/Star/Curry spawns, and you spend the next however many seconds chasing after it again, only to once again stop fighting to play Tag-Your-Dead. Or someone opens an Assist Trophy and it's Excitebike, and I spend the next half a minute air camping to not get instantly *****->gimped.

This stuff is funny, but it's not fun. I play Smash for different reasons than you, obviously. I like my fighting games to retain the feeling that I'm actually fighting, not revolving around random objects that the RNG gods decide to blink in front of my face.

 

[TheZizz]

Your assertion is fundamentally flawed in that there are more lucrative competitive scenes than Brawl. In other words, you're wasting your time with a low-tier game!

 

[DaisyBoo92]

TR4Q scrubs lolol

 

[Big-Cat]

Call me rude, but you've only been here since 2008, right around Brawl's release, so you have little knowledge of before the game and the results afterward. I also suspect you know nothing of items save for the hivemind here and numbers. By definition, you are ignorant, and this ignorance breeds whens for me when we play with items. That's how it is. I know my Metagame better then you do.

Until Competitive Smash players use items, FS, and more stages, I will say they suck. If they are so good, then why is so easy for me to win. I use need to move "Off" to "High."

You stupidity is showing. You think he doesn't know anything because he joined around Brawl's release? Are you familiar with people lurking? You're also making the baseless assessment that he's ignorant when nothing says that.

What do you mean by YOUR metagame? Is that the one where items are forced to be on, and no one has a say in what they want aside from characters, and where people act like complete jerks to those who don't want to play the same you do when what they want is within the boundaries of the game? If that's the case, I think I'm safe to assume that it's rather lonely.

Ledger pretty much has said what I had in mind so I won't bother repeating it.

I also second the idea that you should go ahead and post your "thesis" in the main boards. I'm quite curious to see what the results will be like.

 

[Mike B]

Drop the game and play Chess, is my honest opinion...

 

[SmashChu]

Lol, by your logic then, I have the same right to make unfound assumptions about your experience, play ability, and intelligence based on a small, meaningless amount of information.

No, because that made no sense.

If need be, I'll explain why I can and you can't.

This reminds of me of some scrubby Lucario who won a game (not the match) vs. someone who greatly outclassed him because he counterpicked Mario Bros., and he had an immense amount of experience playing on that stage. The tournament was small, so there were no stage restrictions.

Why is competitive smash based on scenario rather then real evidence?
Basically, Lucario won by skill. He knew Mario Bros better then the player you call "vastly better." How can he be vastly better if he lost? Using the stage to your advantage is a skill, so he was more skillful.

Winning vs. someone with items on doesn't make you a good player. It makes you good with items. Likewise, losing with items doesn't make one a bad player. Do you see where this is going? They are separate. You yourself admit that the two types of gameplay are worlds apart, and yet you connect skill with one to skill with the other. Absolute hypocrisy.

It Makes you good with items.
Items take skill
Therefore, the item user is skillful. It's just none of you can use them. If items were on, the balance of Smash would falter. CPU won Evo because he knew them better then Marth.

Why would I ever care if you know the items-legal metagame more than me? Fact of the matter is, I don't really give a ****, since I do not choose to participate in any tournament event that would allow items to be used. I do not do this out of ignorance. Playing items to *me* is not fun. Why would I want to play a game where every 2 or so minutes, I would have to stop fighting my foe to chase after a ball, then spend then next 30 seconds not really fighting, but just defending myself from losing the FS, and finding an opening for it to be utilized properly.

Never get so set in your way, you can not change.

Then a Hammer/Star/Curry spawns, and you spend the next however many seconds chasing after it again, only to once again stop fighting to play Tag-Your-Dead. Or someone opens an Assist Trophy and it's Excitebike, and I spend the next half a minute air camping to not get instantly *****->gimped.

Not every item has to be on Einstein. Some are really powerful, while others are not. Also, you think Excitebike is powerful? You really don't know items.

This stuff is funny, but it's not fun. I play Smash for different reasons than you, obviously. I like my fighting games to retain the feeling that I'm actually fighting, not revolving around random objects that the RNG gods decide to blink in front of my face.

Personal bias. You only assume that it's a game of chase because you know nothing better. You are very ignorant.

 

[Ledger_Damayn]

This will be my last post regarding this matter, considering that you are just repeating yourself, and have long ago stopped providing any interesting or meaningful argument.

Oh please, you can just shove it You made a huge analysis of my experience based on NOTHING but the date upon which I entered Smashboards.

You. Sir. Are. An. Ignoramus. Please repeat as often as necessary to ingrain this message into your skull. There are different types of skills. To say that the skill necessary to be able to beat someone on a stage in which someone has no familiarity and turtles spontaneously ram you up the butt is the same skill necessary to beat someone with no items on in a neutral stage doesn't even make any sense.

It is the same thing as saying that because I am skillful at poker, makes sense that I should be able to own you at DDR. The status "skillful" only applies to the context of which it was earned in, no more.

Lol, do not pull that "inability to change" crap on me. What I posted was simply my preference. It is the same god****ed preference that you have to play with items, with no flexibility towards playing without. It is a choice. YOU have the ability to host item tournaments. Go out and do it if you care so much. If it really is a better format, people will catch on and start hosting their own. What will not help is playing random competitive players with items on and lol'ing at them about how much they suck universally at all things, because apparently skill is that easily transferable.