Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
For Peach, you are off. She does not lose bad to DDD, Falco, Lucario nor ZSS. Nor she has problems with Olimar/diddy. Ha ha ha at olimar...........
Peach beats IC's.
I never said anything even slightly resembling that. <__< SoulPech said herself that she argued to make the MU -4 for Jiggs (which is what it became). Alphicans then came in, stating that he also feels the MU is a -4. Most regulars here should remember that I made a huge argument on how Jiggs:G&W shouldn't be -4 (and neither should DK:DDD), especially not if more ridiculous MUs, like PK Kid:Marth, are only -3. If G&W and Jiggs mains now agree that the MU is only a -3, then my points may have come across somehow. I don't see where "that's wrong because Bubba thinks otherwise" comes in.
Its usually better to ask beforehand.
I spent quite awhile waiting for anyone to present an argument (here and other places) on what snakes doing wrong at top level. I was genuinely looking for (legitimate) reasons to see why snake should be doing better in the MU. Theres basically nothing to work with.Snake vs Pikachu isn't +2....
done with you guys
You said that for the sake of saying it, didn't you?-3 = bad but not hideously bad?
That's a pretty bad interpretation of the MU chart ratios, but not hideously bad
My bad then, I got the impression that, while you did expect the change, you didn't agree with it because of how you worded it. "Only a +3"I never said anything even slightly resembling that. <__< SoulPech said herself that she argued to make the MU -4 for Jiggs (which is what it became). Alphicans then came in, stating that he also feels the MU is a -4. Most regulars here should remember that I made a huge argument on how Jiggs:G&W shouldn't be -4 (and neither should DK:DDD), especially not if more ridiculous MUs, like PK Kid:Marth, are only -3. If G&W and Jiggs mains now agree that the MU is only a -3, then my points may have come across somehow. I don't see where "that's wrong because Bubba thinks otherwise" comes in.
DK:DDD is as good as or better than Ness:Marth. DK isn't out-prioritized by DDD during all of his waking hours. Heck, one could even argue that his spacing (primarily his bair) is way better than DDD's. In the end, the concept is the same. DK is hard to grab. He's extremely mobile for such a large character and his AD and bair make him even slippier. DK also gets to kill DDD pretty early for messing up at any point of the MU.
I know he's a male, but again, I got subconsciously sidetracked by his avatar. If you see something continuously whenever you refer to a person, your brain will want to associate that thing with that person. It's all part of facial recognition in the brain.
If -3 "isn't hideously bad" then what is?
Easily my favorite post in this thread.
You guys know that a +4 means that DK should pretty much never win, even with a skill disparity, right? In other words, even 1PokeMastr's win is relevant. You guys also forget that the infinite is somewhat difficult (for relevant DDDs, apparently), and it's actually NOT GUARANTEED because DDD has to pummel, which allows DK to break out at low-mid %'s. I know it's actually NOT difficult, but I've seen plenty of DDDs drop it, so it might as well be. His smashes are also really punishing. DK's the one char who can consistently kill DDD around 100%. Also, from the times I've played Will, I can definitely tell you that DK is very capable of some nifty edgeguarding. He can go out really far, harrying you with bairs, and still make it back. In the fight for the ledge, DK will probably win out with upB. Meanwhile, it's hard for DDD to bair through DK's upB.Expanding on this, don't forget that footstools can actually be FHs or SHs. As Jebus said, DK could just Footstool SH off of DK's shield, giving him plenty of time to land if DDD tried to grab or something. Also, if there are platforms around, he could go for those.
Now please tell me what "decent vertical OoS option" DDD is in possession of? Uair is kind of a joke. I mean, it's damaging, but it doesn't mean much unless DDD gets that last hit (which can kill), but the move can be SDI'd so that doesn't happen.
I don't think Atomsk does the running CG. What he does is the 'small-step CG' (really easy). At worst, it's likely a walking CG (even easier). It's pretty much the easiest CG to do in the world. If you run, it's actually easier to mess up AND you get waaay less grabs out of the CG. The walking/small-step CG + the ledge infinite is why DDD:Bowser is +4 (DDD can't standing infinite Bowser), and THAT'S a +4 I will stand behind. Even in the DK MU, it's bad enough to equate to extremely stupid damage. Pretty much a stock's worth (30+ grabs, I believe, on large stages). The infinite is actually harder than the small-step CG, so unless you're 150% confident in your buffering skills, I personally think it's better to just do the small-step. Also, a dtilt or bair is guaranteed out of the dthrow on DK anywhere on the stage (no ledge required for either), so that's a free kill option at high %'s.
). I remember, though, that this same discussion came up before and I cited how Will has beaten top DDDs. Then Coney came in and corroborated my statement. Also, it was a while back, but I think I actually watched the set on YT.You think DDD is harder for Ness than Marth? Dude, you 'cray'.
As a personal anecdote, I 'co-secondary' Marth and one of the players in my and John12346's crew mains Ness and I have a WAY easier time in that MU with Marth, despite the fact that I main DDD. If you think DDD is a +3, then Marth is definitely 'hard +3' material. Ness can actually somewhat fight back against DDD, getting inside his personal space with safe pokes as long as he avoids bair, ftilt, and dtilt. Ness can also camp against DDD a LOT easier than against Marth.That's somewhat conflicting with this post by DeLux that I thought was pretty darn accurate:
DeLux said:
This is all true, but it's easier to get in on DDD without being punished, and if getting in isn't your thing, it's a lot easier to camp him as well. Ness can also harass DDD's recovery with PKT. If DDD's forced to upB, he eats a PKT2. How is a CG across the stage worse than a pummel release across the stage that ends in a f/dsmash? Even from a non-damaging or killing perspective, this wastes a lot of Ness' time and could put him at risk of being timed out. The infinite rule applies up to 300%. Do you know how long it will take Marth to reach that (if he's pummel releasing Ness against a wall)?
That was a long time ago (at least when I last saw him post on the issue). As I understand it, he now just goes MK against both of them. In any case, I support a +3 for both MUs.
Even though it hurts my cause, I have to correct this. DK can be ledge infinited as well.
Pit is not low tier, he's just a weird character to play in general, and his game is not streamlined and takes a lot of skill to play as at a high level. I still believe he is low-high tier, but there are not many Pit players to showcase his abilities.
There are actually plenty of results suggesting a rise for the ICs to at least above Diddy.
Marth's APEX placements don't prove that he should move up. Rather, they prove that his current placement is fine as it is. Before, it seemed like he should actually be moved down because of his lack of consistency.
Oli's results suggest a drop down as well.
Luigi is way too strong for Low Tier. I think Lucas should be raised into Mid Tier, but Luigi should remain above him until it is proven otherwise. What really hurts Luigi's metagame is that there hasn't been another Boss-level Luigi main since, well, Boss stopped playing this game as often. The same can be said of Mario's metagame. Still, there's no way Luigi should drop back down into LT.
