Meta Link's Metagame Thread (Informative Quotes Can Be Found in the OP)

[Rizen]

I don't see jab 2 cancels as that much worse except loosing the death lock. Link also has a decent roll and and can jab 1 or 2>roll back and reset if not done predictably.

 

[Elessar]

The problem with Jab 2 cancels is that it's too slow and it doesn't combo into anything. You can use it and run away, but you can't cancel consistently (not to say at all) into a utilt or a grab.

 

[ZSaberLink]

Maybe someone should make a video showing Link before and after the patch and show how useless his first jab has become. Title it "Link's jab 1 from good to worst jab in game" and then get lots of people to watch it. Since hyperbole of Link's jab lock seemed to get it nerfed heavily, maybe we can use the same approach to bring it back to something more normal...

 

[zeldasmash]

Here is a video talking about it. And this is also a video that makes cry now because of what we had before.

 

[Rizen]

I wish I had the ending lag data for jabs. Jab 2 seems to only be a frame or 2 slower than pre-patch jab 1 to cancel. Although not a true combo, Link can probably cancel it with a good success rate.

Frankly, Ganon still wins the worst jab award.

 

[KenMeister]

I wish I had the ending lag data for jabs. Jab 2 seems to only be a frame or 2 slower than pre-patch jab 1 to cancel. Although not a true combo, Link can probably cancel it with a good success rate.

Frankly, Ganon still wins the worst jab award.

Nah, I'm pretty sure that would be Samus. lol

 

[zeldasmash]

Nah, I'm pretty sure that would be Samus. lol

Samus's jab was designed with mindgames in mind (lol). Samus' actually has uses. Ganon's barely has any.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

I wish I had the ending lag data for jabs. Jab 2 seems to only be a frame or 2 slower than pre-patch jab 1 to cancel. Although not a true combo, Link can probably cancel it with a good success rate.

Frankly, Ganon still wins the worst jab award.

Pre-patch jab 1 had a frame advantage that would get better depending on the opponent's percent. I'm guessing that at 0% it had either a 4 or 5 frame advantage (on hit obviously), and by the time they get to around 100% you have roughly a 9 to 10 frame advantage. Jab 2 however has a 1 to 2 frame advantage that does not get better as the opponent's percent gets higher. The only way to make this better would be to factor in landing lag as well for those poor characters who fall fast and can't DJ in time, but even then, it would have to rely on the Jab 1 not popping them too high up, and even then you're looking at a maximum frame advantage of maybe 4 or 5 if I was generous for the sake of argument. But then we'd be talking about a character like Fox who can Jab us before we do anything anyway. Pro tip, if you don't go all the way to Jab 3 on Fox, it's in his advantage now. Jab 2 is only useful against bad players.

So no. I personally wouldn't say they are comparable.

 

[Rizen]

Pre-patch jab 1 had a frame advantage that would get better depending on the opponent's percent. I'm guessing that at 0% it had either a 4 or 5 frame advantage (on hit obviously), and by the time they get to around 100% you have roughly a 9 to 10 frame advantage. Jab 2 however has a 1 to 2 frame advantage that does not get better as the opponent's percent gets higher. The only way to make this better would be to factor in landing lag as well for those poor characters who fall fast and can't DJ in time, but even then, it would have to rely on the Jab 1 not popping them too high up, and even then you're looking at a maximum frame advantage of maybe 4 or 5 if I was generous for the sake of argument. But then we'd be talking about a character like Fox who can Jab us before we do anything anyway. Pro tip, if you don't go all the way to Jab 3 on Fox, it's in his advantage now. Jab 2 is only useful against bad players.

So no. I personally wouldn't say they are comparable.

So we don't have exact numbers? Darn.
Of course jab 1 cancels were better but I have to disagree about jab 2 cancels being useless except vs bad players. If you use Fox, with his frame 2 jab as an example then jab 3 is best. If you jab 2 cancel on characters with slower options like Link, TL, DDD, Bowser, Palutena etc it has uses. Link's jab also has better reach than most character's quick ground options.

Reading the frame data from before the patch:
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=PzTjdtx8
Jab1
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 80° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 95° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 30b/37g 361° Slash
Max Damage: 2.5%
Enables transition to next jab state on real frame 10

Jab2
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 50° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 60° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 78° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 90° Slash
Max Damage: 5%
Enables transition to next jab state on real frame 10

Jab3
Frame 6-10: 5% 70b/50g (KO@ 394%) 30° Pierce
Max Damage: 10%

Jab 2 does have slight kb growth. IDK what jab 2's IASA frames are but I think we should not discount jab 2 cancels as an option until we know for sure Link will be at too much of a frame disadvantage to act. It has potential to be useful.
I'm not saying loosing jab 1 cancels weren't a huge loss or jab 2 cancels are a substitute. But they could be an option.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

Of course jab 1 cancels were better but I have to disagree about jab 2 cancels being useless except vs bad players. If you use Fox, with his frame 2 jab as an example then jab 3 is best. If you jab 2 cancel on characters with slower options like Link, TL, DDD, Bowser, Palutena etc it has uses.


Jab 2 does have slight kb growth. IDK what jab 2's IASA frames are but I think we should not discount jab 2 cancels as an option until we know for sure Link will be at too much of a frame disadvantage to act.

I used Fox as an example of a character who can't double jump before he lands, and it just so happened to be that there weren't many. Link, Toon and Palutena can all DJ before they land, meaning we have no follow ups on them whatsoever. They get to DJ roughly 1 (or if I'm being generous, 2, though I honestly think it's 1) frame after we are able to act out of the second jab. Think about that for a second. The Jab 1 to 'X' combos worked because the character couldn't even DJ in time by the time they were hit by 'X'. Jab 2 is only useful on people who don't know what to do or who can't react to being Jabbed and buffer a simple DJ just in case we don't use Jab 3 this time, therefore, as per my previous statement, Jab 2 is only useful against bad players.

Jab2's knockback growth is so small it's barely worth mentioning. Go to training mode, make a character jump in front of you, make them land on the second Jab at 0% then do the same on 999%. Try this with like any other move that doesn't have set knockback. Then in the real world where characters won't be getting past like 150% (give or take), see if you can spot the difference between the opponent being hit by jab 2 at 0% compared to 150%. Negligible is not a word I throw around lightly.

 

[TNS|Quake]

I did some sets and labbing last night against my friend who's been fighting my Link for months. Any followup from Jab 2 is not even remotely as reliable as those were from Jab 1, much less a good idea at all in some matches. If they don't react you can hit them with something but I can tell you from experience that the offline sheiks and falcons in my area are not going to be missing many opportunities to exploit this weakness. Those matchups just went from bad to nightmarish.

So I'm relying more on d-tilt. It seems safe on normal shield, it spaces well, and it can shield poke into a potential combo/followup at the right percentages and shield healths. Mix confirmed jabs up with some d-tilts, throws, more jabs, or z-airs out of there depending on the opponent

 

[KenMeister]

So we don't have exact numbers? Darn.
Of course jab 1 cancels were better but I have to disagree about jab 2 cancels being useless except vs bad players. If you use Fox, with his frame 2 jab as an example then jab 3 is best. If you jab 2 cancel on characters with slower options like Link, TL, DDD, Bowser, Palutena etc it has uses. Link's jab also has better reach than most character's quick ground options.

Reading the frame data from before the patch:
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=PzTjdtx8
Jab1
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 80° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 95° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 30b/37g 361° Slash
Max Damage: 2.5%
Enables transition to next jab state on real frame 10

Jab2
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 50° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 60° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 78° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 90° Slash
Max Damage: 5%
Enables transition to next jab state on real frame 10

Jab3
Frame 6-10: 5% 70b/50g (KO@ 394%) 30° Pierce
Max Damage: 10%

Jab 2 does have slight kb growth. IDK what jab 2's IASA frames are but I think we should not discount jab 2 cancels as an option until we know for sure Link will be at too much of a frame disadvantage to act. It has potential to be useful.
I'm not saying loosing jab 1 cancels weren't a huge loss or jab 2 cancels are a substitute. But they could be an option.

So in other words, it doesn't have set knockback, meaning we can possibly "string" in an Upsmash or DownSmash after jab 2 without it being gimmicky?

 

[Rizen]

I used Fox as an example of a character who can't double jump before he lands, and it just so happened to be that there weren't many. Link, Toon and Palutena can all DJ before they land, meaning we have no follow ups on them whatsoever. They get to DJ roughly 1 (or if I'm being generous, 2, though I honestly think it's 1) frame after we are able to act out of the second jab. Think about that for a second. The Jab 1 to 'X' combos worked because the character couldn't even DJ in time by the time they were hit by 'X'. Jab 2 is only useful on people who don't know what to do or who can't react to being Jabbed and buffer a simple DJ just in case we don't use Jab 3 this time, therefore, as per my previous statement, Jab 2 is only useful against bad players.

Jab2's knockback growth is so small it's barely worth mentioning. Go to training mode, make a character jump in front of you, make them land on the second Jab at 0% then do the same on 999%. Try this with like any other move that doesn't have set knockback. Then in the real world where characters won't be getting past like 150% (give or take), see if you can spot the difference between the opponent being hit by jab 2 at 0% compared to 150%. Negligible is not a word I throw around lightly.

Why are you stating frames when you admitted you don't know them?

I'm guessing that at 0% it had either a 4 or 5 frame advantage (on hit obviously), and by the time they get to around 100% you have roughly a 9 to 10 frame advantage. Jab 2 however has a 1 to 2 frame advantage that does not get better as the opponent's percent gets higher.

How do you know the frame advantage doesn't get higher for jab 2 but it does for jab 1?

The problem is you're assuming numbers to support your theory.
Based on the pre-patch frame data jab 1 and 2 are nearly identical except for kb growth and angle. The pull in and push out angles are what kept opponents in jab 1 to another jab 1
Jab 1
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 80° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 95° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 30b/37g 361° Slash
but we could jab 1 cancel to other attacks too. Jab 2 won't link to another jab as inescapably but should have similar frame advantage to cancel to something like Utilt
Jab2
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 50° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 60° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 78° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 90° Slash
The damage is identical, base kb is slightly more, kb growth less than 1/3 but existent and the angles only push outward stopping jab 2 from linking to another jab repeatedly. Unless the IASA frames are significantly worse than jab 1's we should be able to chain jab 2 into things like Utilt for kills at higher %s.
If you can provide the IASA frames and they are significantly worse than jab 1's were, I'll concede it's not an option to cancel it but I don't think assuming something won't work is a good idea.

Also, why do you think characters won't get past 150% in the real world?

So in other words, it doesn't have set knockback, meaning we can possibly "string" in an Upsmash or DownSmash after jab 2 without it being gimmicky?

Or Utilt if we have a good frame advantage, maybe at kill %s.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

Why are you stating frames when you admitted you don't know them?

It's called an educated guess. While I don't know them specifically, I can certainly tell you them as an estimate. Do you have any idea how long I worked with the Jabs? I can literally see the difference in each frame. Training mode '1/4 speed hold' skips two frames at a time if you're super quick. A guess of 1 to 2 frames is more accurate than you know.

How do you know the frame advantage doesn't get higher for jab 2 but it does for jab 1?

It would, but it would be so insignificant that it wouldn't matter. In fact it doesn't matter. I checked. Just like I check everything. I know from experience. I have painstakingly seen 1 frame advantage being gained at a time from percent to percent, and I have narrowed the exact percent it is gained down to a specific percent for each character.

Based on the pre-patch frame data jab 1 and 2 are nearly identical except for kb growth and angle. The pull in and push out angles are what kept opponents in jab 1 to another jab 1
Jab 1
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 80° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 35b/37g 95° Slash
Frame 7- 8: 2.5% 30b/37g 361° Slash
but we could jab 1 cancel to other attacks too. Jab 2 won't link to another jab as inescapably but should have similar frame advantage to cancel to something like Utilt
Jab2
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 50° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 60° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 78° Slash
Frame 6- 7: 2.5% 38b/10g 90° Slash
The damage is identical, base kb is slightly more, kb growth less than 1/3 but existent and the angles only push outward stopping jab 2 from linking to another jab repeatedly. Unless the IASA frames are significantly worse than jab 1's we should be able to chain jab 2 into things like Utilt for kills at higher %s.

Yes. The IASA frames on the Jab 2 are significantly worse. This is what I keep saying. The frame advantage Link gains is way worse for Jab 2. I know this from experience. I can tell you as a fact that the old Jab 1 allowed Link to act much earlier than Jab 2 does. Jab 2 cannot be used in the same way that the old Jab 1 did, even at high percents.

Also, why do you think characters won't get past 150% in the real world?
.

What bothers me most about this quote is it tells me you're being argumentative for it's own sake. I did specifically add 'give or take' in brackets after the 150%, but you know what, this point doesn't even matter. Why did you bring it up?

And most importantly, why is my credibility being brought into question? Seriously. When did that happen? What did I do to deserve it?

 

[Zerker]

So basically, to get any mileage out of Jab 2's IASA frames, we're going to have to read and trash our opponent like one of Robin's tomes, in order to get a string going. Great.
Do we have any frame advantages at all on shield?

 

[Drigo Toes]

Guys, chill out! geez

Fighting against other doesn't make Link a better char. Investigating and creating new tools instead!

I could just play a couple of matches (against one ultra spammy link with a horrible lag, a couple of mewtwo and a lucina). I can say that jab 1 and 2 has way more KB know. It would be nice if someone with knowledge about this things can confirm this. If this is correct, we maybe can do some interesting things out of Jab 2.

Facts: Against Link, i wiffed second jab with myself in 50%~ and him on 100%~ because of KB (no roll, DJ or other things). I wiffed 4 third jab against all my oponnents in the same scenario (more or less %, nothing too strange).

 

[Zerker]

So I'm relying more on d-tilt. It seems safe on normal shield, it spaces well, and it can shield poke into a potential combo/followup at the right percentages and shield healths. Mix confirmed jabs up with some d-tilts, throws, more jabs, or z-airs out of there depending on the opponent

Does D-tilt knockback shields at all? Or knock us back?

 

[KenMeister]

Guys, chill out! geez

Fighting against other doesn't make Link a better char. Investigating and creating new tools instead!

I could just play a couple of matches (against one ultra spammy link with a horrible lag, a couple of mewtwo and a lucina). I can say that jab 1 and 2 has way more KB know. It would be nice if someone with knowledge about this things can confirm this. If this is correct, we maybe can do some interesting things out of Jab 2.

Facts: Against Link, i wiffed second jab with myself in 50%~ and him on 100%~ because of KB (no roll, DJ or other things). I wiffed 4 third jab against all my oponnents in the same scenario (more or less %, nothing too strange).

So wait, jab 2 had set knockback before the patch, and now it suddenly has a small amount of knockback growth....What? Can you confirm that with something to back it up?

 

[KenMeister]

Does D-tilt knockback shields at all? Or knock us back?

No I don't believe it does, but it does shield poke. The only move I can think of off the top of my head that pushes back shields is Fsmash, but I could be wrong.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

Do we have any frame advantages at all on shield?

With Jab 2? Of course not.

I can say that jab 1 and 2 has way more KB know. It would be nice if someone with knowledge about this things can confirm this. If this is correct, we maybe can do some interesting things out of Jab 2.

Getting hit up higher only makes it even more impossible to do something out of Jab 2. When they go to DJ away, they'll already be high up.

Does D-tilt knockback shields at all?

Of course it does. Just not a powershield.

So wait, jab 2 had set knockback before the patch

No it didn't, and that's not what he said.

The only move I can think of off the top of my head that pushes back shields is Fsmash, but I could be wrong.

You are.

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

Jab's a little more risky now. I keep trying to Jab 1 -> U-tilt but stupid me, we can't do that anymore. Kinda hurts our options huh?

 

[KenMeister]

Dammit, I freaking hate it when I double post, when I'm trying to merge my posts together....Urgh.

Anyhoo, back to the topic on hand, I'm having a hard time adjusting to these changes as well. Alot of my mindgames stemmed from throwing out Jab 1 as a way to either poke or force a reaction. Is there anything we can use Jab 1 for without necessarily following up with Jab 2?

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

Dammit, I freaking hate it when I double post, when I'm trying to merge my posts together....Urgh.

Anyhoo, back to the topic on hand, I'm having a hard time adjusting to these changes as well. Alot of my mindgames stemmed from throwing out Jab 1 as a way to either poke or force a reaction. Is there anything we can use Jab 1 for without necessarily following up with Jab 2?

The problem is, we literally can't do a thing until the entire animation is finished. By that time, the opponent could very well react quick enough to punish us bad.

It seems like doing the full jab combo (or at least up to jab 2) is more safe then stopping at jab 1 at this point.

Don't do the full jab I was over exaggerating on that, but still.

 

[KenMeister]

The problem is, we literally can't do a thing until the entire animation is finished. By that time, the opponent could very well react quick enough to punish us bad.

It seems like doing the full jab combo (or at least up to jab 2) is more safe then stopping at jab 1 at this point.

Don't do the full jab I was over exaggerating on that, but still.

That almost sounds like Melee Link's crappy jab when you think about it.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

Is there anything we can use Jab 1 for without necessarily following up with Jab 2?

It's a stretch, but if someone is just off-stage and you are standing near the edge, you could Jab them just once. This would make them fall past the ledge as they are unable to grab it for a short period of time after being hit, which often catches people off-guard still for some reason, and if they don't have their DJ, it puts them in a bad position.

 

[A_Phoenix_Down]

We might be able to follow up on that Jab with a D-air too considering they make that mistake, but that's all or nothing and situation-heavy.

I can't really think of anything else that would make Jab 1 viable at this point.

 

[Rizen]

It's called an educated guess. While I don't know them specifically, I can certainly tell you them as an estimate. Do you have any idea how long I worked with the Jabs? I can literally see the difference in each frame. Training mode '1/4 speed hold' skips two frames at a time if you're super quick. A guess of 1 to 2 frames is more accurate than you know.


It would, but it would be so insignificant that it wouldn't matter. In fact it doesn't matter. I checked. Just like I check everything. I know from experience. I have painstakingly seen 1 frame advantage being gained at a time from percent to percent, and I have narrowed the exact percent it is gained down to a specific percent for each character.


Yes. The IASA frames on the Jab 2 are significantly worse. This is what I keep saying. The frame advantage Link gains is way worse for Jab 2. I know this from experience. I can tell you as a fact that the old Jab 1 allowed Link to act much earlier than Jab 2 does. Jab 2 cannot be used in the same way that the old Jab 1 did, even at high percents.


What bothers me most about this quote is it tells me you're being argumentative for it's own sake. I did specifically add 'give or take' in brackets after the 150%, but you know what, this point doesn't even matter. Why did you bring it up?

And most importantly, why is my credibility being brought into question? Seriously. When did that happen? What did I do to deserve it?

It needs more testing then. I've tested on training mode too. I'm not one to throw away a potential kill setup with frame advantage, even if it isn't guaranteed. I'm a low tier player.

Well at first you said it didn't get more of a frame advantage at all and now you say it does. I think it has potential at realistic %s. It's not like jab2 cancels are anything new. We used them all the time in Brawl and before the jab 1 cancel death combo made it obsolete.

I never said jab 2 is nearly as good as jab 1. The argument is if jab 2 cancel has uses and I'm seeing evidence at higher %s it might.

You brought the 150% thing up not me. IDK why you brought it up either.

I kind of slept on this. What bugged me is you ignored my points with saying it only works on scrubs- a read with a frame advantage is not a bad thing. My evidence wasn't inaccurate. You need to stop looking at this in black and white; it's a frame advantage for jab 2 cancels that leads to a relatively easy read instead of 5% more damage from jab 3. A 2 frame advantage or possibly 3 or 4 at higher %s on certain characters is useful. Even a character above you with no double jump is a great setup. I'm not willing to throw that away with the comment 'it only works on scrubs' that's like saying 'don't flame choke with ganon and try to follow up because it's not guaranteed'.

I mean I have a lot of respect for you but I'm not always going to agree. That doesn't make me wrong or mean I don't know what I'm talking about. In many cases jab 3 is the best way to go but imo jab2 cancel has uses and not just on scrubs. I'll look into it and you can do what you want.
I get annoyed by 'ad hominem' arguments like when you assumed I hadn't played with customs and simply didn't want to learn all of them in that debate. (I had in fact tried all the character customs I've unlocked, built sets for each and played vs people several times with customs. I agree with Seagull they're powerful exploits that bring SSB4 back to the Brawl meta of avoidance and planking. It's not that they can't be overcome but I don't want, for example, the villager MU to revolve around trip sapling near the edge and explosive balloon planking. That was really stupid and even though Link has a good anti-planking game I could see other characters having a bad time getting around it. SSB4 is the most balanced smash game and customs would ruin that.
Saying jab2 cancels only worked on scrubs felt like you were ignoring my data and using an ad hominem.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

I see that my suspicions are confirmed then. The fact that you brought up the customs debate we had randomly is quite telling. You're still angry at me for the past few recent debates we've had and now you're itching for an argument. Well I'm not interested. This isn't even about the Jab 2 any more and I don't think it ever really was. I'd prefer it if we could go back to the relationship we used to have back in the Brawl days.
Needless to say, if you want to try to use Jab 2 to convert into kill moves, be my guest. Why should I care? Technically it doesn't work period; technically it is a bad idea. Realistically I don't think it should work at high level, but that doesn't mean it won't ever. The example you gave of someone not having a DJ at higher percents is actually worth a try due to airdodges being punishable. However I cannot condone it any further than this. To shed too much positive light on it would be misinformation and would give people the wrong idea.

 

[Rizen]

I see that my suspicions are confirmed then. The fact that you brought up the customs debate we had randomly is quite telling. You're still angry at me for the past few recent debates we've had and now you're itching for an argument. Well I'm not interested. This isn't even about the Jab 2 any more and I don't think it ever really was. I'd prefer it if we could go back to the relationship we used to have back in the Brawl days.
Needless to say, if you want to try to use Jab 2 to convert into kill moves, be my guest. Why should I care? Technically it doesn't work period; technically it is a bad idea. Realistically I don't think it should work at high level, but that doesn't mean it won't ever. The example you gave of someone not having a DJ at higher percents is actually worth a try due to airdodges being punishable. However I cannot condone it any further than this. To shed too much positive light on it would be misinformation and would give people the wrong idea.

I dropped it until then but you keep doing the same thing. Now you're doing it again: ignore all relevant information and go for a personal attack when you have no points. I tried to be nice in my last post but you keep denying the evidence and really have no case. Continuing this discussion is pointless.

 

[Fox Is Openly Deceptive]

I genuinely don't understand what the problem is here. I have points, they have been made. If you want I can make them again. I deliberately didn't make an in depth reply in my last post because I didn't want to argue, not because I didn't have points or because I was ignoring your points. If you want I can make a full reply. What evidence did I deny? I don't know why you're so angry at me, and I don't know how to phrase that in a way that won't be construed as a personal attack so you'll just have to try to read it sincerely. This isn't the place. Clearly we need to talk. I'll PM you.

 

[Lawz.]

This just got REAL, I love the Link boards

*grabs popcorn*

Anyone else?

 

[Rizen]

This just got REAL, I love the Link boards

*grabs popcorn*

Anyone else?

Sorry to disappoint
I do like quickdraw arrows. At first I thought the wouldn't compliment Link's other projectiles but they work well.

 

[Lawz.]

Sorry to disappoint
I do like quickdraw arrows. At first I thought the wouldn't compliment Link's other projectiles but they work well.

Hmmm interesting, I haven't used them. Tbh the only custom I've used for Link was the boomerang (which I love) and his custom upb (the one where he goes dumb high and does no damage, which is shiiiiiit). Not a big fan of customs to begin with but the boomerang was nice.

 

[Rizen]

Hmmm interesting, I haven't used them. Tbh the only custom I've used for Link was the boomerang (which I love) and his custom upb (the one where he goes dumb high and does no damage, which is shiiiiiit). Not a big fan of customs to begin with but the boomerang was nice.

It should have been his standard boomerang

 

[GaboRJ]

Jab 2 is all we've got to work with. What bothers me the most is my mental chatter when playing and going for the jab 1 cancel setup: "Ok, gotcha, battle over. Jab 1 cancel into side smash and... oh yeah it's gone now, ****." At least up special is a kill move at higher percentages now, but damn jab 1 cancel was Link's essence. I was wondering if anybody could point me to the right direction, looking for info on what percentages are required for each character to make up-grab a kill move.

 

[AtlusKnight]

That'll be taking them to a very high percent 170sh is the general amount not going to lie and it isn't really that good of an idea to go for, but if you are really good at racking up damage then by all means go ahead. Also from what I realize that it isn't as bad as I started to readjust because I came from PM originally when I started to play so I just re adjusted myself for timing in PM. What I recommend now with jab jab set ups is just to leave it all to down tilt on heavier characters and for lighter characters up tilt and around 120 percent you might be able to get a fsmash off, or at around 100 percent up be right after the second jab.

 

[Dumbfire]

It depends on rage and the height of the ceiling, that's why we haven't calculated. If you're in the 100s you may get a character already near 130 percent, if light like Palutena.

 

[Himura Kenshin]

The only thing that jab 2 is sort of useful for is rolling to the opposite side of your opponent. It works with head games and mix-ups.

 

[Lawz.]

The only thing that jab 2 is sort of useful for is rolling to the opposite side of your opponent. It works with head games and mix-ups.

That gets punished real quick. I'd love for someone to roll past me when they're at a frame disadvantage.

 

[FSK]

Just something random and completely situational if you are holding a bomb and standing infront of the opponent both of you are faceing eachother. If you jump over the opponent often they will assume you are gonna throw the bomb down on them and they might shield. If you instead land behind them and if they drop shield you can throw the bomb at their back and they will be sent towards you. If they are at high percents, lets say 110%+ you can combo this into uair which will usually KO around these percents.

Just a mixup thats highly situational. You can condition them through the match to shield whenever you jump over them with bomb. If they are still shielding when you land behind them you can still throw the bomb and grab them. The risky part is that they could jump Oos and punish you with an aerial for instance diddy's bair or something while you are going over them. Although you can airdodge right before you get to the peak of your jump which will last until you land and without landing lag and you can then throw the bomb upwards to punish or force an airdodge to a bigger punish. Lots of ifs and stuff now <.< the point is, it seems to put Link at an advantage :\

also keep in mind that this is kinda character dependent, since for shorter characters the bomb might hit the on their front instead of their back and send them away from you. It depends on your distance from the opponent. In general try and be a bit further away from small opponents.