Official SWF Matchup Chart v3.0

[Delta-cod]

It's something I still disagree with, but I really didn't want to keep arguing against Delux's statistics essays, considering those things are way out of my scope of proper understanding.

I'll just have to keep beating all the ICs I play.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I wanted nothing to do with the project because bad people are allowed to input their opinion, thus, defeating the purpose of an 'official matchup chart'

Skill doesn't matter as much as an ability to see an understand the game objectively

Granted, a lot of the people on the project probably couldn't do that either

But come on Vinnie, you aren't that dumb. You don't have to be a pro to understand a match-up. Skill doesn't automatically grant reasoning ability. Period. This is by far the most ignorant statement you could have made.

 

[Vinnie]

Skill doesn't matter as much as an ability to see an understand the game objectively.

I disagree with you here.

 

[Alphicans]

That's silly. How you develop a mastery in something is a biological phenomena, that happens over time, much apart from your actual understanding from the game. This is fact.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I disagree with you here.

That's silly. How you develop a mastery in something is a biological phenomena, that happens over time, much apart from your actual understanding from the game. This is fact.

This, basically. You are disagreeing with a blue sky or green grass, Vinnie.

 

[Vinnie]

Hmm let's see

Player A gets top 3 with Diddy at a NY/NJ regional
Player B gets top 8 with Diddy at a Midwest local

Player A (among other top Diddies) thinks Diddy vs Snake is even.
Player B, not being nearly as experienced, seasoned, or skilled, ADAMANTLY thinks Diddy loses -1, because he can't beat Snakemaster18.

Player B is relentless and bores Player A to death with paragraphs of nothing but worthless ****, not backing down or valuing Player A's superior opinion at all. Meanwhile, Player A has a WAY better understanding of the matchup, and the game in general, having played Ally, Fatal, and Razer.

Player A gets bored and gives the -1 to the bad Diddy player. The MU chart is now inaccurate. Anybody see where I'm coming from with this?

 

[DeLux]

Replace Diddy with ICs and I can now see why you feel our opinions differ on the IC MU spread

 

[da K.I.D.]

Stuff like that happens, I agree.

But at the same time, no process would ever be perfect.

Its really easy to make a case for the current system being bad. But its honestly a lot harder to make a case for any alternate system not ALSO being bad.

It might be less bad, but it will still find a way to be inaccurate.

 

[Delta-cod]

Hmm let's see

Player A gets top 3 with Diddy at a NY/NJ regional
Player B gets top 8 with Diddy at a Midwest local

Player A (among other top Diddies) thinks Diddy vs Snake is even.
Player B, not being nearly as experienced, seasoned, or skilled, ADAMANTLY thinks Diddy loses -1, because he can't beat Snakemaster18.

Player B is relentless and bores Player A to death with paragraphs of nothing but worthless ****, not backing down or valuing Player A's superior opinion at all. Meanwhile, Player A has a WAY better understanding of the matchup, and the game in general, having played Ally, Fatal, and Razer.

Player A gets bored and gives the -1 to the bad Diddy player. The MU chart is now inaccurate. Anybody see where I'm coming from with this?

So what you're saying is, Player B doesn't understand the game, since he can't tell that his losses are due to his lack of skill.

 

[| Big D |]

I'd say the fault lies with player A in that scenario. If he had a better understanding of the MU, then he should have been able to point out the flaws in Player B's reasoning and then provide his own reasoning. Ideally even if Player A couldn't change Player B's mind, he can still convince the rest of Player B's panel, or even the 3rd panel if thing's don't get resolved.

Player A giving up on the project is why things would be inaccurate, not because player B decided to argue against Player A.

 

[Vinnie]

Replace Diddy with ICs and I can now see why you feel our opinions differ on the IC MU spread

I believe that your opinion should definitely be valued, if that's what you're trying to get at. I consider you at least 4th best ICs in the USA. You clearly know what you're talking about and you're also a smart person so you can go into detail and see the matchup from a current-metagame-perspective.

Stuff like that happens, I agree.

But at the same time, no process would ever be perfect.

Its really easy to make a case for the current system being bad. But its honestly a lot harder to make a case for any alternate system not ALSO being bad.

It might be less bad, but it will still find a way to be inaccurate.

Only allow the best players of the character. It's not that hard to figure out who the best player of each character is. I remember when I was back there, I saw Krystedez being panel leader of like 4 different characters including Mario (no disrespect to Krystedez, he's a great player, but I don't feel like Mario should be represented by somebody that mains Wario/Pit), etc. Also I remember seeing A LOT of people back there that had NO BUSINESS being there, and they had the same priority as a top player of the character. It was really depressing to see, and definitely took away a lot of motivation to make the MU chart accurate, considering all of the ignorance that was constantly flowing around in the threads.

Sorry if I seemed harsh before, I just got back from namesearching into the Link thread, where apparently "the best Link LordXav1er" (aka not Kirinblaze) thinks KNOWS that ICs vs Link is even, or close to it.

So what you're saying is, Player B doesn't understand the game, since he can't tell that his losses are due to his lack of skill.

I'm saying there are people back there that don't have the proper credentials to make an accurate MU chart of the current metagame.

 

[Delta-cod]

Including those who decided to abandon the project. Whether through lack of credentials or lack of will to stick with a project through the end, several people, including top players, are not qualified to take on projects of this magnitude (such as Player A).

 

[Dekillsage]

Chill vinnie don't you ever diss snakemaster18 he's the best

 

[ccst]

Go home, BBR. You're drunk.

(Pathetic and stupid MU chart on so many levels. Brawl is a dying game so I really don't care anymore).

 

[xDD-Master]

I kinda have to agree with Vinnie on this.
I would prefer a MU Chart (And Tier List) by only Top players.
Maybe they have difficulities in explaining the ratios they choose, but I would still give these ratios more credit than the theory-based ratios of worse players.

No offense intented. Its just a personal preference.

 

[Famous]

This MU Chart is butt...Will I explain on what I don't like about it? Nah, because the flaws are obvious to everyone

 

[DeLux]

When people say "top players", do they mean "top players of the character" or do they mean "top players" in general aka able to win tournaments.

Once you get past top tier, having more than two "top players" for a character is rare
Once you get past like upper mid tier, having a "top player" at all isn't real

 

[RaptorTEC]

I think people mean the top player of the character

 

[8Bitman]

Go home, BBR. You're drunk.

(Pathetic and stupid MU chart on so many levels. Brawl is a dying game so I really don't care anymore).

Well this escalated quickly...

 

[BlueXenon]

When people say "top players", do they mean "top players of the character" or do they mean "top players" in general aka able to win tournaments.

Once you get past top tier, having more than two "top players" for a character is rare
Once you get past like upper mid tier, having a "top player" at all isn't real

I think Kie and Shaky are top players and they main characters on the bottom of mid tier.

 

[Death Arcana]

Top players of lower tier characters
Does not always mean top players in general

 

[DeLux]

I think Kie and Shaky are top players and they main characters on the bottom of mid tier.

Let's say for the sake of the argument that you're right. It still doesn't change the fact that a chunk about the size of a quadrant (or larger) is going to be blank.

 

[Player-1]

Hmm let's see

Player A gets top 3 with Diddy at a NY/NJ regional
Player B gets top 8 with Diddy at a Midwest local

Player A (among other top Diddies) thinks Diddy vs Snake is even.
Player B, not being nearly as experienced, seasoned, or skilled, ADAMANTLY thinks Diddy loses -1, because he can't beat Snakemaster18.

Player B is relentless and bores Player A to death with paragraphs of nothing but worthless ****, not backing down or valuing Player A's superior opinion at all. Meanwhile, Player A has a WAY better understanding of the matchup, and the game in general, having played Ally, Fatal, and Razer.

Player A gets bored and gives the -1 to the bad Diddy player. The MU chart is now inaccurate. Anybody see where I'm coming from with this?

I don't mind lower level players being allowed to discuss MUs, they just have to accept the fact that they're not going to have as much credibility as top level players. That's not to say that their opinion can't be valued, even as much or more so than the top level player's opinion. They just have to have that much more of a solid argument when trying to discuss the MUs.

Now a "much more solid argument" isn't necessarily walls of text with fancy words that are just there to make that person seem more scholarly either, those can be full of worthless **** too, especially if they're not valuing others' opinion which I have seen happen in MU chart discussions. But I don't really think that calls for just backing down, calling everyone bad and/or stupid and then refusing to partake in it. You can explain why there argument is bad and if they're still saying worthless **** then you can leave it to the 3rd party panel to see how bad they're argument is and let them make the call.








Except in this case where the 3rd party panel was stupid.

 

[Espy Rose]

I'm glad Vinnie wasn't on the project. That ICs list he posted made me ill.

 

[Luco]

Hmm let's see

Player A gets top 3 with Diddy at a NY/NJ regional
Player B gets top 8 with Diddy at a Midwest local

Player A (among other top Diddies) thinks Diddy vs Snake is even.
Player B, not being nearly as experienced, seasoned, or skilled, ADAMANTLY thinks Diddy loses -1, because he can't beat Snakemaster18.

Player B is relentless and bores Player A to death with paragraphs of nothing but worthless ****, not backing down or valuing Player A's superior opinion at all. Meanwhile, Player A has a WAY better understanding of the matchup, and the game in general, having played Ally, Fatal, and Razer.

Player A gets bored and gives the -1 to the bad Diddy player. The MU chart is now inaccurate. Anybody see where I'm coming from with this?

Please don't get me wrong here because I respect you a lot. But I have to disagree with this.

What SFP's trying to say and this scenario aren't the same. What SFP's trying to say is that you can be low level and understand the game's mechanics due to a lot of time spent viewing frame data, current results and some of your own experience. Of course since MUs are meant to reflect a high level of play, top player's input is meant to be taken into consideration more strongly than that of lower level players. However, this doesn't mean a lower level player automatically doesn't know the MU. A low level DK player might have studied DDD's frame data, looked at relevant matches and had some experience himself to be able to say 'no I don't think this is unwinnable, just really tough'. And if matches are actually being played out that way, what's to stop him being right over a top player complaining because they couldn't beat Atomsk? (hold on let me explain! ) Top players have their own weaknesses - this particular top player may not use a playstyle fitting to make this MU a -3 rather than a -4, you know?

I don't think that being top level or low level should stop/gain you access to that character's perception by others or what else have you. I think it's how you understand the game and how you interpret wins and losses that we record. Community projects are deliberately done because top players make mistakes too and can take advice from slightly lower level players to realise something they might not have before ("why did you keep using Bair in x situation? X char kept punishing your landings whenever you went for these approaches..." etc.). I mean, I know i've taken advice, good advice, from lower level players.

tl;dr

Top players can make mistakes too, in certain MUs. Their playstyle that may work in most other situations might not work in this one, whereas only a high level player might be able to beat top players in this MU because he has a different playstyle that happens to work. Why then, can't the high level player have input into this MU over the top player who's playstyle doesn't really allow him to win this MU at this stage?

I think other players should be given a chance too.

Now I feel small and weak. Please don't kill me vinnie! D=

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Fox should be even with MK

 

[8Bitman]

I don't see why lower level players such as yourself care. The MUC was made to help everyone no matter how accurate. Especially those less intelligent in the subject of smash. Why are you arguing when you never spent a SECOND to take the time out of your day to help the progression of the MUC, it's beyond pointless. Anyone who disagrees with this gtfo.

 

[Shaya]

A human being not able to conceptualise or understand something has always resulted in hatred, violence, anger, persecution, wars, confusion, misunderstandings, etc etc
This in itself is pretty much the crutch of any form of discussion in this game (or anything really) whatsoever.

Everything about this game at top levels, IMO, are really really simple notions that most people can understand, but don't have an ability to implement themselves. The problem is that there are like 50,000 different really simple notions and you need to also have to be able to apply them to a lot of characters too. I laugh about this because I recently dabbled in reading Marth things back from 08 and how we weren't "there" at the time, but we weren't actually that far away either (in terms of styles of play / how to use your moves / etc)

I think what really happens in this Person A/B scenario is more so that if you have two parties of different levels of articulation, communication is lossy. If that isn't a problem then one or the other are lacking conceptualisation (likely player B here). If that isn't the problem than it's likely the very very simple common scenario of arguments where both sides are agreeing with each other's points, but disagreeing on the opinions inferred from them (i.e. I'm pretty sure there's nothing ESAM or I disagreed about in the Marth/Pika MU at all, but we're both pretty adamant about +1/0 respectively lol). In the latter situation, one or the other will pull out the fallacy buster to win.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Out of curiosity, were the panels and collective intelligence for this project listed at all?

Vinnie bring's up a fair point about representation. The only flaw I see with Vinnie's idea is that not all top players are going to have the same experience. I wouldn't really go and call upon M2K to talk about the match-ups against ZSS simply because he had chance to play with Salem. In that situation, I'd rather trust the opinion of someone who plays against Salem and other top level ZSS players far more often than M2K despite him being the better player than most people.

 

[Shaya]

We did release the list of panellists. I think its in the BBR news thread or something?

 

[Player-1]

http://smashboards.com/threads/brawl-back-room-updates.306133/page-13#post-15036032

this isn't fully updated though

 

[Alphicans]

I've seen top players say some really stupid ****. Sometimes people just have a hard time vocalizing how they play/that type of information isn't easily accessible to the brain when trying to explain it. Both are common things for people who are professionals at the things they do. Playing the game well =/= knowing the game well, although the two are very often correlated.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Mew2King has said before that Diddy beats MK, I'm pretty sure.

Top players are idiots and creating a MU chat shouldn't fall squarely on their shoulders.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

Mew2King has said before that Diddy beats MK, I'm pretty sure.

Top players are idiots and creating a MU chat shouldn't fall squarely on their shoulders.

To be fair, it's not just the top players that are idiots.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Yeah, everyone is stupid.
Which is why we draw from lots of different resources to find as much common ground as we can, and weed out isolated examples of stupidity.

Vinnie wouldn't even be happy with the system he suggested. I'm the best Jigglypuff, so I would be in charge of her match-ups, and he disagrees quite heavily with me about the ICs/Puff match-up. Even if we had the top player for each character, we still wouldn't have only top players.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Can the Brawl Back Room take some serious consideration into reevaluating the goals of the Official Match-up Chart?

As I see it, the Brawl Back Room has put lots of effort into gathering some of the best players and experiences with all characters into a panels and have them discuss various match-ups given a particular character. There is probably some good and bad discussion going on, but nonetheless good players are getting
together to crack down on their information about a match-up. It is honestly rare to see that sort of thing happen.

However, what is the end result for normal smashers like myself? We get a number or a label for a match-up which honestly does absolutely nothing for us. The BBR putting together this effort has very little redeeming value for us other than simply entertainment value. Does me looking at a match-up chart help me become a better player at all? No it does not and really I see no reason to consult it for any decision making either. This to me does not seem like a good project for the BBR to consider spending time so much time on. The BBR is a good collective intelligence on lots of things in smash and it seems a waste to never allow that information they might bring up to never reach the common player.

For the purposes of that Match-up Chart project wouldn't' it be far better to scrap any sort of mention of trying to summarize match-ups with a label like "advantage", "large disadvantage", or "50-50"? In place of this it would be far more beneficial to the average player to have access to summaries of match-ups instead and better yet the finer details that go into a match-up that someone like me might not know about or consider due to my inexperience.

The thing I liked about the v2.0 release was the explanations that went with match-ups at the end of the thread's opening. In fact, it was the most useful thing to me as a player far more than simply looking at a chart for some numbers. For example, suppose I have issues with a particular match-up for myself and I would like to find a suitable counter pick to the character. In reality, I have problems with Ice Climbers. Which sort of character would work best for myself to counter Ice Climber. Coming to this chart, I see numbers and it seems like ICs have problems with ZSS, TL, MK, and Peach. The only question is why and for what reasons are these suitable counter pick characters? The very core of a match-up is completely lost to me because there is no suitable explanation at all. However, I wouldn't like the BBR to stop at simply an overview of match-up in a couple paragraphs like was posted in the v2.0 chart, but having access to the complete discuss and finer points would be far more helpful I imagine.

In general, it would be very cool if the BBR did more projects designed to help out regular smashers at getting better rather than more entertainment like stuff such as the tier list. But, I'm just ranting now and I'll probably find out that the discussions from the panels were actually released somewhere I didn't know about lol And this probably is not the place to even say anything about this either. Oh, well.

 

[DeLux]

that's what this thread is for no?

If you have a question on why a specific MU is listed a certain way, you post and ask.

Then people give an answer. It's also a quick reference for players where in a flow chart:

1. New Player has problems with X character because they main Y character
2. New Player sees that Z character counters character X
3. New Player goes to Character X and Character Z's specific character subforum and asks about details that might be helpful

Replace character specific subforum with high/top level player of character if applicable via networking. Like I personally do my best so answer every skype / PM questions I get, and I imagine other players do the same to varying degrees

 

[Z'zgashi]

^ This.

If you have any MU questions, this is the place to ask. Also, every single character forum has their own MU chart where players of those characters frequent, and they all have write ups on match ups and/or people who can help and explain the MU to you.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

that's what this thread is for no?
If you have a question on why a specific MU is listed a certain way, you post and ask.
Then people give an answer

True, but the problem is that I as a newbie player will not always know what are good questions to ask? Some things I learn are simply randomly found by reading the discussions of other rather than my own questions asked. Especially simple insights and smash philosophy about how I as a player might actually be approaching the game incorrectly.

Asking my professor about the Great Wall of China with some questions does not always give you the same information as simply reading an article about the Great Wall of China. Your questions are more direct and specialized compared to the article which gives you information about stuff you wouldn't have thought to ask about. If anything, I won't have good questions until after I read the article.

^ This.

If you have any MU questions, this is the place to ask. Also, every single character forum has their own MU chart where players of those characters frequent, and they all have write ups on match ups and/or people who can help and explain the MU to you.

True, but the efforts by the BBR are far more focused and seem to draw more attention for top players than our local character boards where their activity is infrequent and sparse. This leaves mid level players fending for themselves often times or unable to decide who is actually a creditable source of information.

 

[Z'zgashi]

True, but the efforts by the BBR are far more focused and seem to draw more attention for top players than our local character boards where their activity is infrequent and sparse. That just leaves typically more mid level players fending for themselves.[/COLOR]

Well thats more due to the fact that Brawl is starting to die. Back when this game was bigger, the character boards where hella active. Once Smash 4 comes out, itll be better.