Match-Up Chart (Outdated); please refer to the new chart.

[ranmaru]

Well... I liking falcon better than shiek or peach beacuse all he has is his knee and has super speed and super height (as compared to my own) and I like gimping him.

< all this while maining Doc

 

[Scar]

This thread works in a semi-reasonable manner. Input of top professionals is highly sought after and considered, and only group consensus' are approved.

lol this is like how politics and **** work too

the people in charge only got there bc more people agreed with them

and the majority of people are morons (or otherwise uneducated)

so it's pretty much to be expected

even the MBR is full of ****ing *******

who are you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiXCy0jR-YQ

 

[Divinokage]

Rofl for free, I love it. =P

 

[Kira-]

*facepalm*

This thread works in a semi-reasonable manner. Input of top professionals is highly sought after and considered, and only group consensus' are approved.

that's good

I was mainly talking to the noobs who post in here. But they don't know who they are so I guess this was pointless ><

 

[TheLake]

Noobs dont cost a thang

Zeldas alright against falcon when the falcon has no brain cells

 

[Dark Sonic]

So I should listen to MarthSlayeR_99 because he might be a really good critic? Let's not take that chance.

But what if he presents a perfectly reasonable argument for why a certain aspect of the matchup clearly favors one character?

Even a blind man CAN hit a bullseye. Pro player's arguments obviously hold more weight, and in the case of a discrepancy you'd side with them, but you can't completely discredit an argument based on the person who is making it.

Genetic fallacy.

 

[Kira-]

But what if he presents a perfectly reasonable argument for why a certain aspect of the matchup clearly favors one character?

When is the last time that ever happened?

 

[unknown522]

Falcon > Ganondorf
Marth > Falcon
Fox >> Falcon
Falco >> Falcon

Falcon > Doc?
Falcon >> Link?
Falcon >> Pichu?
Jigglypuff > Marth?

Any Falcon players with match-up experience against a good Pichu or vice versa? Link as well. Here's Skler's opinion from awhile back:

pichu v falcon is impossible. Once you get DD camped, you're screwed completely. Also being easily combo'd into knee and dieing at 70% from mid-stage is really bad. He can just kill with u-air anyway.

Also, I agree with:

fox >> falcon
falco >> falcon
jiggs > falcon

 

[Dark Sonic]

When is the last time that ever happened?

I believe Marth vs Pichu, Kirby, and G&W were all concluded with fairly little input from any pro Marth players. They were only explained by average placing players using theorycraft to support their arguments.


Do you believe they're wrong?


You're committing a Genetic Fallacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

You are assuming that because the people making the argument are not experts, their argument MUST be false, ignoring what the argument itself is stating. Each argument should be looked at individually (yes, most of them will be bad, but go back to my blind man example <_<)


If they're wrong, simply explain to them that they're wrong. But don't tell players not to post, because...they COULD be right.

 

[Kira-]

I believe Marth vs Pichu, Kirby, and G&W were all concluded with fairly little input from any pro Marth players. They were only explained by average placing players using theorycraft to support their arguments.


Do you believe they're wrong?


You're committing a Genetic Fallacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

You are assuming that because the people making the argument are not experts, their argument MUST be false, ignoring what the argument itself is stating. Each argument should be looked at individually (yes, most of them will be bad, but go back to my blind man example <_<)


If they're wrong, simply explain to them that they're wrong. But don't tell players not to post, because...they COULD be right.

In my experience, theory has not really lead to practice very often in this game. Marth IN THEORY could never let Peach or Puff inside of his range, but in practice this rarely holds true (for people of equal skill). So those people could in theory come up with an accurate assessment of the matchup, but I would guess that it's nothing more than just that- theory. Since few people have actually played those match-ups at a high level the only thing we can go off of is theory. That doesn't make it better or more true or more accurate.

I'm very against incorrect info being thrown around leading people in the wrong direction. I'm sure a lot of people are tired of those who talk like they know something when they really don't. Hax's post could override 20 amateur posts, and rightfully so. I agree, he won't always be right and sometimes a noob may have a correct argument. But I don't believe this is because the noob has understood this through practice. Going off of your example, he would simply be one of 200 noobs who happened to guess the correct way to play the matchup, not a trained professional who can hit his target with relative consistency.

 

[Dark Sonic]

In my experience, theory has not really lead to practice very often in this game. Marth IN THEORY could never let Peach or Puff inside of his range, but in practice this rarely holds true (for people of equal skill).

Actually, I had a long debate in the "final tier list thread" about why that theory is wrong. Guess what I used?....more theory (backed with experience).

If the theory doesn't hold true in practice, then the theory is simply wrong. There is simply a correct theory that we have not discovered yet that perfectly fits the model for the results.

Theorycraft is not inherently bad. It's just that many people ignore the discrepancies between their hypothesis and actual results, which is a problem (since they're proposed formula is supposed to accurately predict results, or else it doesn't have meaning).

So those people could in theory come up with an accurate assessment of the matchup, but I would guess that it's nothing more than just that- theory.

Many people seem to have this mindset unfortunately. Theory can tell us a lot of things. Matchups CAN be explained through theory alone, but only if there is enough information available to create a reasonable hypothesis.

The "Marth walls out Jiggs forever" theory is wrong because it does not take into account Jigg's aerial mobility, the probability of a predicted fair/jab being baited and countered, or the overall effect of repeated exchanges in this manner. These things are extremely hard to quantify (even I can't give anything other than general assumptions), so they're wrongfully left out.

Basically, I'm saying that most people base their theories off of incomplete knowledge, meaning most people give unsound arguments. But this doesn't mean that theorycraft cannot EVER be correct, which is what you're asserting when you say that only experienced players should have input on this chart.

Since few people have actually played those match-ups at a high level the only thing we can go off of is theory. That doesn't make it better or more true or more accurate.

An accurate theory will be accurate (lol circular reasoning).

If you had asked anyone 5 years ago what the Marth vs Jiggs matchup was like, what do you think people would say (even the pro players)? They would say (based on experience) that it is heavily in Marth's favor.

Why? "Marth can kill Jiggs at 70% with f-throw->wavedash->f-smash." "Marth can mix up f-throw with d-throw to screw up Jigg's DI." "Marth can wall Jiggs with fair, nair, and jab indefinitely" These were very common misconceptions of players at the time (the last one is STILL a misconception). But strangely enough, all the information needed to make an accurate assessment of the matchup was already there.

We knew the lag times on Marth's fair, nair, and jab, we knew that Jiggs can duck under Marth's standing grab, we knew about Jigg's aerial mobility, ect. Heck, many even knew that Jiggs can DI out both "throw to smash" combos by simply DIing down (there is no mixup) We knew how far Marth gets knocked from a bair at various percents, we knew that Jiggs can ledgehop bair and regrab the ledge again, we knew about the lag on Marth's up B...ect.


Personal experience can be just as deceiving (if not moreso) as theorycraft. It's even harder to argue against experience. The theory would not match the results, but in this case there would be a logical reason for why these results are occurring ("playing the matchup wrong")

But I'm starting to ramble so I'll end this here <_<

Going off of your example, he would simply be one of 200 noobs who happened to guess the correct way to play the matchup, not a trained professional who can hit his target with relative consistency.

And? This is perfectly acceptable. All we want is an accurate explanation of how each matchup works in practice, and it is not necessary to have pro player input to do so (it just helps tremendously). Newer players should be allowed to voice their thoughts on the matchup. If they're wrong, they'll be told they're wrong (and told why most of the time), and they'll learn something from it. On the extremely slim chance that they actually are right then we get valuable matchup data. Although realistically, since the right answer will have a clearly logical basis in the first place, it's not likely that experienced players will learn anything new from it. But people who had no knowledge of the matchup whatsoever will be illuminated without the pro players having to even post, which helps them out considering how many matchups there are in the game.



....
You know what would be absolutely hilarious? What if Mango made some random new account and came in here explaining matchups? I think everyone would jump on his 2010 join date and gamertag (idk. GreenLantern77 or something) and completely ignore what he said <_<.


I guess I should stop derailing this thread though.

 

[ranmaru]

Sometimes I say things (not here) but I say it the way I believe it. I do try to play as much tournaments as I can, but I'd rather be told I'm wrong and why, then to be ignored. I have ears, I'll listen.

 

[Kira-]

Alright I see. There really is no reason for noobs to not post at all, even if most of the time they will be wrong. In that case I will have to learn to put up with the ignorant and stubborn ones -_- lol

edit - Ranmaru if you listen you're one of the good ones =)

 

[xbombr]

I do think it's possible to know a lot about the game and the match ups by spectating and research.

Just because someone's not known for being amazing at the game, that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't know what they're talking about. Knowledge isn't the only barrier that one has to overcome to be a great smasher. Technical ability, self-confidence and the correct mindset, and good decision making (read mindgames and defense against mindgames) all come into play when you're improving. It's not just "use move X, it beats move Y" the whole time or every match up would be 100-0 and the same players would win every time.

It doesn't matter how much I know about the match ups, if I can't play technically sound enough and make poor decisions constantly due to nerves or the pace of the game vs. better people, then I'll never be accepted as pro even though I might be knowledgeable of the game.

Idk, just my two cents. This is a community project so everyone really deserves to be heard and if they're wrong then told why. I'm always open to being told where I'm wrong by someone, because that information might be something I can apply to my game.

 

[ranmaru]

Yep. I'm also open to improving my game. I don't overlook anything. But this:

It doesn't matter how much I know about the match ups, if I can't play technically sound enough and make poor decisions constantly due to nerves or the pace of the game vs. better people, then I'll never be accepted as pro even though I might be knowledgeable of the game.

Is me right now. I overspace random moves around, and I'm not as technical as I think.. I just don't know.

 

[Pi]

It's open to the public, they(we) are free to post, it's just some times difficult to accept new information when it's presented in an assumed-to-be arrogant voice.

If someone waltzed in here and stated
"Yoshi vs. fox is not that bad because you can do this and this and this"
It's a little off putting
but if they were to re-phrase
"While I do believe Yoshi does lose to fox, he does have this and this and this which give him some wiggle room, which is why I believe the match is not quite as bad as it is currently labeled"
It's a lot easier to read and process.

 

[KAOSTAR]

Kira somehow just got everybody on a single topic.

good****.

 

[Ryzol_]

I think CF >> DK. DK is very easy to combo and easy to shield stab. All DK has on CF is his grab game and uair spam. CF beats DK harder than CF beats Ganon so it should be >> and not >. It is arguable however, that DK has a better taunt.

 

[NJzFinest]

Eh, I'm fine with anyone saying CF>>DK.

But.. this gives me hope:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARbd5uF-_Aw

lol

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Why are you guys ignoring hax, scar and me (and probably others, i dont read this whole thread anymore...) when we say that falcon > marth... whoever says marth > falcon doesn't have a clue.

 

[DTR]

^ dont forget m2k

 

[Winston]

Why are you guys ignoring hax, scar and me

one of these things is not quite the same as the others

Also, Scar said Marth >= Falcon...

 

[TheManaLord]

It's actually Marth = Falcon lol.

 

[Roneblaster]

raise your hand if you didnt know what match that was that scar linked to hax, before you actually clicked the link.

then if you raised your hand, GTFO.

 

[Merkuri]

Why are you guys ignoring hax, scar and me (and probably others, i dont read this whole thread anymore...) when we say that falcon > marth... whoever says marth > falcon doesn't have a clue.

Actually Scar said that Math > Falcon and he made a good argument. Don't just declare that Falcon > Marth and anyone who says otherwise is stupid. Make a logical argument as to why Falcon > Marth.

 

[TheManaLord]

Wow. People are blowing up the 55-45 declarations as full advantages in this chart. For all intents and purposes, everything said in this topic conglomerates into the ideal that Falcon = Marth. I don't think people really read what anybody says...

 

[Roneblaster]

like i said before, and what TML has said before

for the purposes of this chart:
Falcon = Marth

actual matchup (my opinion only, not TML's. 55-45 Marths Favor)

 

[victra♥]

manalord is right.

falcon has a slight advantage over marth, i think that's something we can all agree on. But in terms of this chart, that doesn't translate to a full advantage.

but who cares cause falcon sucks

 

[Merkuri]

manalord is right.

falcon has a slight advantage over marth, i think that's something we can all agree on. But in terms of this chart, that doesn't translate to a full advantage.

but who cares cause falcon sucks

I don't think it's something we can all agree on and I wish a few select people would stop declaring it as fact. I'm leaning towards it being and even match being as Falcon's punish game and post grab options are pretty terrible on Marth. On the other hand Marth has great combos on Falcon(see the most recent Falcomist vs Silent Spectre) and he is able to keep him out side of his space with his fairs and other quick attacks pretty well. I think what may give Marth the edge in that match up is edge guarding. Falcon is so easy to edge guard as Marth, you can just stand and the ledge and charge neutral B or dtilt and Falcon is ****ed. Once you know how to sweet spot the ledge(all pro Marths do) Falcon ha no reliable method of edge guarding Marth.

 

[Divinokage]

Well, whenever I can, I play against Vwins Marth a lot with Falcon. Now I can't say my Falcon is up to par with his Marth or my Falcon is as good as the pro Falcon mains but I think I'm not too far off imo. I think I know the matchup very very well with both my Ganon and Falcon. I feel like this matchup is relatively even.

It feels like whenever Falcon lands a grab it can be very devastating against Marth since he is easy to chase with Falcon and also due to Marth's weight Falcon can juggle him really easily as well with combos, Upairs or nairs. (My comboing is not super but it feels like you can punish Marth really well as soon as he is in the air and stunned.) With Falcon's speed also, you can take much more opportunities in order to land a hit or grab. I mean to me Marth is just not as fast as Falcon in order to bait moves.

The other way around, however Marth can also techchase Falcon really easily if he lands grab and I mean his grab range is awesome and to me it can be deceiving at times. Not sure about Marth's combo ability on Falcon but I think it's pretty good as well since Falcon is a fast faller.

The off stage game for both character I think is even too, when both chars are off stage, they should die almost all the time, since the recovery is predictable. Though, I would put the advantage to Marth that way since I think his recovery is slightly better than Falcon's. I mean that Marth has more chance to recover and can be a bit more unpredictable than Falcon. Obviously, Falcon's recovery is **** and he will always die if Marth knows what he's doing and that's also obviously what we are talking about here (High level play).

Well I think Marth's priority and range can also be used against Falcon, I mean if the Marth plays really defensively, it's hard for Falcon to get inside.. though to me that's way more stage dependant.

So, on larger stages I think Falcon has the advantage since he has way more mobility but on small stage Marth has the advantage. So in general, I think it's even.

Hopefully all that helps, if any Marth mains or Falcon mains have any say or disagrees, go for it.. or if I'm missing anything to the matchup.

Edit: Also, it feels like I'm doing this like Deadliest Warrior show, rofl.

 

[otg]

@meruki

Falcon can just flat out jump out and hit Marth with anything while he is recovering because his speed + his massive jump let's him cover sooo much room. Let's not forget about Light shield edgeguarding either. Now granted, that isn't Falcon specific, but he definitely has the 2nd best punish in the game from it, so don't say that Falcon can't edgeguard Marth back, it's simply not true.

 

[Niko45]

So, on larger stages I think Falcon has the advantage since he has way more mobility but on small stage Marth has the advantage. So in general, I think it's even.

That's just the best way to put it, in a nutshell.

On edgeguarding, in my opinion if CF flies out at Marth and hits him its 100% Marth's fault every time. CF shouldn't be able to remotely edgeguard until Marth starts needing up B, which, unless the marth botches a DI or jumps into hits or something, should be at high %. Meanwhile, Marth starts edgeguarding CF potentially at 0.

 

[TheManaLord]

Falcons short hop double jump uair is an effective edgeguard tool against a lot of characters. As is run off double jump uair. Weak knee is also good.

falcons edeguarding game is underrated to a degree, he can go very very far out because his jump can launch him so ****ing far.

 

[Niko45]

Falcons short hop double jump uair is an effective edgeguard tool against a lot of characters. As is run off double jump uair. Weak knee is also good.

falcons edeguarding game is underrated to a degree, he can go very very far out because his jump can launch him so ****ing far.

It's really telegraphed if he's going to come WAY out and Marth particularly can just fair him or FF underneath and recover and then edgeguard CF. Run off DJ up air is a decent option tho, but again if Marth takes a good angle that shouldn't work.

CF can catch Marth off guard I guess since he has some options, but I'd maintain that its Marth's fault if he gets edgeguarded early like that. As long as Marth takes a good angle, isn't predictable and wasteful with his side Bs, and is alert and watching what CF does he should get back.

 

[Divinokage]

Niko, that would depend if he has his jump or not. If Marth does not have his jump off stage then it's really easy for Falcon to chase him.. Falcon can just aerial off stage to finish him off.. either drop zone, or jump off.. or wtv works. Marth can't do anything without his jump. What's he gonna do? Up B and die anyway? lol. If Marth tries to sweetspot somehow, Falcon can also downair. If Marth has his jump though, then Falcon has to guess when Marth will jump or not which is a bit hard.

This is why I said the off stage game favors Marth in general when recovering or edgeguarding Falcon.

 

[Animal]

i feel since people are getting better at DI and surviving, the matchup has got closer over the years.

 

[Niko45]

Niko, that would depend if he has his jump or not. If Marth does not have his jump off stage then it's really easy for Falcon to chase him.. Falcon can just aerial off stage to finish him off.. either drop zone, or jump off.. or wtv works. Marth can't do anything without his jump. What's he gonna do? Up B and die anyway? lol. If Marth tries to sweetspot somehow, Falcon can also downair. If Marth has his jump though, then Falcon has to guess when Marth will jump or not which is a bit hard.

This is why I said the off stage game favors Marth in general when recovering or edgeguarding Falcon.

100% on board with you, my whole schpeel is assuming Marth still has his jump and doesn't need to up B. Marth is always in big trouble with no jump and needing up B. But like I said that should be at a high% unless marth already botched his DI/recovery.

Edit: I should emphasize that I think its quite hard/uncommon for CF to steal Marth's jump, just in my experience.

 

[Merkuri]

@otg:

You are simply wrong. Again go watch Silent Spectre vs Falcomist, despite numerous tries not once was SS able to edge guard him by jumping off the stage. SS would either miss the hit(it's hard to aim in the first place, even worst aiming where is going to be and not where he is), or Falcomist would simply to stop him by fairing, nairing or f-Bing, and once or twice this even resulted in SS being killed.
Light Shield edge guarding is probably the best method Falcon has for edge guarding, but this doesn't work if Marth spaces himself correctly, he can recover without actually hitting your shield(Go watch some of the less old PC Chris vs Ken matches)

 

[Divinokage]

That just means SS guessed wrong a lot.. or Falcomist is better at the Falcon matchup than SS is at the Marth matchup. Like I said earlier if Marth has his jump, then Falcon tries to Lightshield edgeguard, Marth can hit him to make Falcon go on the ledge or not and then Marth can have 2-3 ways to recover after that. (I'm wondering if it's possible to hit Falcon twice before he gets on the ledge after lightshielding) And pretty much Marth can guard himself on reaction if he has a jump... I mean if he sees Falcon going off stage then he can throw out a long range move to interrupt Falcon easily.

There are ways to bait Marth's jump, like for example, faking going off stage then going on stage immediately, then aerial or light shielding... it really depends how the Marth is recovering. It's tough sometimes.

 

[TheManaLord]

Yes, regardless, Falcons option against marth when he's recovering aren't bad, they aren't great, I'd say their good. Some characters have no options against others when they're recovering... falcon is one of the best punishers to laggy up b's.

Still, this is an extreme tangent and it doesn't change the fact the matchup is negligibly even

Any other controversial Falcon matchups to discuss? IS there any kind of consensus on the top tiers? Even the best pro's seem to have differing opinion =/