Predictions for Tier List v4 (Includes overview of entire cast)

[OverLade]

imo it's more than chances of winning the set or even the game. It's a tool and scenario analysis, and how likely a character is going to get them in a favorable one. Otherwise making ratios past 65:35 is meaningless and might as well be dubbed 0:100. Actually, if we are talking "highest level of play", there are characters that are so badly shutdown in 40:60s that the chances should be labeled as unwinnable, which frankly doesn't sound right, does it?

The question is, what does unwinnable mean?

100:0 sounds more like it's impossible for one character to damage the other. But 65:35 should be "the amount of reward this character will gain in comparison to the other character should be insufficient for winning the match".

MK for example, could ensure winning by getting ahead and simply not approaching in many matchups. Of course, you can't factor this in matchup ratios, because it would skew people's assumptions about being able to win and wouldn't be representative of the metagame at all. Many MKs play aggressive because assuming you get good reads you will **** your opponent harder, at the risk of getting punished, rather than just play to make sure you stay ahead by a safe margin.

This is why you often see different styles/skill levels of MKs still doing well. The absurd amount of options + different ways to play that are still successful mean that you can't even put together everything good about him to make an even more **** character because his abilities stretch out in different directions. But assuming you played every matchup optimally, MK would have practically no matchups harder than 40:60 aside from Snake who would probably be at 45:55.

Anyway, just some logic to throw out there.

Matchups should be represenatitive of the current metagame anyway, but people shouldn't start saying a matchup is winnable just because some top MK lost to some top X.

 

[Kewkky]

I don't think so, firstly, that's only really an issue when Ganondorf is behind, if you get the timing right, you can dash attack them while they're trying to SH blizzard or SH IC block.


After he's behind, not sure, his standing grab IS faster then reaction time (unlike Zelda) so he can provoke a response to somebody simply hiding in shield, unless there's some sort of optimal response that covers all his options when he's trying to threaten you like this, he still has a dismally small chance.

Like I said, grab-happy shieldcamping ICs. Why would they wanna do anything but grab at mid-close ranges? They could ice block from afar to force him to get closer/eventually hit him and get him to approach, then just walk around with their fingers on the shield trigger, watching what Ganon does. A single missed attack means Ganon is now behind a stock. Just repeat this until Ice Climber wins the match, no matter how many times it takes (more than 3 probably, due to human error and stuff).

 

[Vermanubis]

Eh, maybe I can give some input on the Ganon vs IC match-up. I think it is indeed, if not 100:0, 99:1. Characters such as Sheik, Olimar and the Ice Climbers were arguably made specifically to have strengths to exploit Ganon's last few defenses.

The reason ICs **** Ganon is because they're easily one of the most defensive characters in the game. Ganon cannot deal with defense; he just can't. The opponent HAS to approach, otherwise Ganon will try his luck (lol) and get *****. Ganon can't deal with shields either. Theoretically, if any character had a chaingrab like ICs, Ganon would as well chop his ***** off and stick a soldering iron up his ***.

One wrong move and Ganon's dead. Ganon's the easiest character to make a wrong move with. He can't circumvent their shields. He can't deal with their blizzard camping. He can't use one of his most undoubtedly invaluable moves either and that's the warlock choke, thanks to Nana. You beat ICs by camping and waiting for the perfect opportunity to strike. Too bad Ganon is usually too far away to punish anything they do.

This match-up is so bad, it goes far beyond simply reading the ICs on a consistent basis. Most of the facets that comprise them as a character directly negate all of Ganon's positive (if they can even be called that) attribute. It's like breaking through a plastic door, then a wooden door, then solid wood, then finally steel. It's not beyond your limitations as a human to break the former three, but once you reach the steel door, it's over.

Ganon's limitations make it so even if you can read the ICs, you can't do anything about it.

 

[phi1ny3]

But see, the very definition of win isn't getting close, it's winning.
That being said if a said character only wins one game in a set and it's already a decisive advantage, a close loss still counts as a loss, and therefore at high levels of play depending on character, even 40:60 can be seen as futile. That's the problem with viewing it strictly as "X's chances/capability of winning".

 

[adumbrodeus]

Like I said, grab-happy shieldcamping ICs. Why would they wanna do anything but grab at mid-close ranges? They could ice block from afar to force him to get closer/eventually hit him and get him to approach, then just walk around with their fingers on the shield trigger, watching what Ganon does. A single missed attack means Ganon is now behind a stock. Just repeat this until Ice Climber wins the match, no matter how many times it takes (more than 3 probably, due to human error and stuff).

Why would Ganondorf approach or even attack from there? The idea of alternating blizzards is to force approach, and against a player that doesn't perfectly predict every move, they work for that.


If they grab without him being in lag, he can spot-dodge to punish, instant dash attack will work for this since it crosses them up as well.



Again, everything MUST be perfectly predicted, but it is not truly impossible.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

No, even with seeing into the future a full 2 seconds "prediction" through crazy magic (AKA, through something humanly impossible), it's STILL 0:100.

Ganondorf doesn't have the grab range. Or attack speed. Or disjointness. He can do nothing against ICs.

Ganondorf.Can.Never.Ever.Win.In.A.Top.Level.Even.Skill.Level.Match.

100% impossible. Will never happen, can never happen mathematically, because there is nothing he can do. If Ganondorf can predict that far into the future, the ICs have to be able to as well. Otherwise, it's not even skill wise.

 

[Kewkky]

Why would Ganondorf approach or even attack from there? The idea of alternating blizzards is to force approach, and against a player that doesn't perfectly predict every move, they work for that.


If they grab without him being in lag, he can spot-dodge to punish, instant dash attack will work for this since it crosses them up as well.



Again, everything MUST be perfectly predicted, but it is not truly impossible.

Well, let's see... Ganondorf is far off in the distance, avoiding everything an IC is capable of doing. The IC starts Ice Block spamming, forcing Ganondorf to shield for 8 whole minutes/jump over them/run to the ledge/ get on a platform. From there, the IC can find one of the multiple ways of getting a hit off of Ganon, making it now an unwinnable matchup for Ganon, since he has to approach and hit the Ice Climber in order to regain the advantage, and that's pretty much impossible.

Ganon HAS to approach. There is no other way to his matchups. He HAS to get an advantage somehow, and if one opponent has a projectile and lots of defenses they could alternate between, Ganon just got ****ed. What can he do against what Vermanubis said, IC's multiple walls? He can get through the easy ones, but the closer he gets to ICs, the more danger he's in.

 

[Zankoku]

Again, everything MUST be perfectly predicted, but it is not truly impossible.

If the Ganondorf player were actually able to predict every last thing the IC's player would do, it would only be fair to the matchup to assume that the IC's player has the same capability.

 

[noradseven]

I think it's not so much that we're afraid as our match-up system tends to center things around the middle more then others do.


But we already know over 1/2 the cast isn't viable.

I think it does center around the middle way to much I think of smash matchups by taking the agreeded upon one by this forumla.

5:5 is 5:5 lol
5.5:4.5 is 5.5:4.5-6:4
6:4 is 6.5:3.5-7:3
6.5 is 7:3-7.5:2.5
7:3 is 7.5:2.5-8.5:1.5
Anything worse than that is 9:1 or worse p. much.

I have seen different tendancys among some boards some like to overrate their character in every match some like to underrate and yatta yatta, but for the most part this is how I think of matchups in brawl, as far as converting into odds of winning and losing.

 

[Kewkky]

I think it does center around the middle way to much I think of smash matchups by taking the agreeded upon one by this forumla.

5:5 is 5:5 lol
5.5:4.5 is 5.5:4.5-6:4
6:4 is 6.5:3.5-7:3
6.5 is 7:3-7.5:2.5
7:3 is 7.5:2.5-8.5:1.5
Anything worse than that is 9:1 or worse p. much.

I have seen different tendancys among some boards some like to overrate their character in every match some like to underrate and yatta yatta, but for the most part this is how I think of matchups in brawl, as far as converting into odds of winning and losing.

Yeah, I've thought of arguing about the same thing as you from time to time... Until I realize that Brawl is actually more balanced that what I thought and that 70:30 is still winnable. True that we never use 80:20, 90:10 nor 100:0 (total victory:loss), but it's not like fixing the numbers up will make much difference, either... Just call em advantage, even or disadvantage.

 

[adumbrodeus]

No, even with seeing into the future a full 2 seconds "prediction" through crazy magic (AKA, through something humanly impossible), it's STILL 0:100.

Ganondorf doesn't have the grab range. Or attack speed. Or disjointness. He can do nothing against ICs.

Ganondorf.Can.Never.Ever.Win.In.A.Top.Level.Even.Skill.Level.Match.

100% impossible. Will never happen, can never happen mathematically, because there is nothing he can do. If Ganondorf can predict that far into the future, the ICs have to be able to as well. Otherwise, it's not even skill wise.

*sigh*


Thanks for completely missing the point, again look at how I defined match-up numbers.


Indicative of required difference in skill for a 50% win ratio.


To say that, "in order to win this, there needs to be such a great skill divide that the Ganondorf player perfectly predicts every move the IC player makes at the top of the metagame" means that it is something less 100:0 but worse then 99:1.


On the other hand, to say that, "even if Ganondorf perfectly predicted every move the IC player made, he skill could not win at the top of the metagame" is what defines a true 100:0 match-up.


And yes it is possible to perfectly predict your opponent, but it requires an immense skill gap. That's how JV 4 stocks happen (JV 5 stocks in melee).



Of course, it can happen by raw chance, a completely random occurance. It's just the possiblility of being successful is a statistical (but not mathmatical) impossibility presumably.

Well, let's see... Ganondorf is far off in the distance, avoiding everything an IC is capable of doing. The IC starts Ice Block spamming, forcing Ganondorf to shield for 8 whole minutes/jump over them/run to the ledge/ get on a platform. From there, the IC can find one of the multiple ways of getting a hit off of Ganon, making it now an unwinnable matchup for Ganon, since he has to approach and hit the Ice Climber in order to regain the advantage, and that's pretty much impossible.

He can powershield ice blocks for 8 minutes.

Every option of getting a hit has it's own vulnerabilities if perfectly predicted.


And you have yet to prove that there's any pattern ICs have that will uniformly defeat Ganondorf on prediction because he can threaten with his faster then reaction grab.

Ganon HAS to approach. There is no other way to his matchups. He HAS to get an advantage somehow, and if one opponent has a projectile and lots of defenses they could alternate between, Ganon just got ****ed. What can he do against what Vermanubis said, IC's multiple walls? He can get through the easy ones, but the closer he gets to ICs, the more danger he's in.

But here's the point, every single option leaves it's own openings when predicted. This is true of every character. Some require more precise prediction, some require less, this match-up requires nothing less then perfection.


We can go through billions of match-ups at even skill at the top of the metagame and probably never encounter one that Ganondorf wins, but after enough tests, one should happen.

If the Ganondorf player were actually able to predict every last thing the IC's player would do, it would only be fair to the matchup to assume that the IC's player has the same capability.

Why?

If we're discussing required differences in skill in order to produce a 50-50 match-up that's a fair extreme case to prove that it's possible.


Again, I'm flatly rejecting the "odds" model, though raw chance should have the same effect after enough tests.



This is what I'm suggesting as the 100:0 test, if clarvioence cannot win or draw the match, then it is 100-0, otherwise it's something less (in this case, worse then 99:1 but not as bad as 100:0, so I like calling it "total:****").

 

[CRASHiC]

I don't think you can simplify it as that. the 5.5. matchups can swing either way. Some 5.5 matchups are indeed 6-4 but some are truly even.

 

[Kewkky]

Adumbrodeus, you gotta remember that match-up ratios are also based on HUMAN factors. Giving a human an inhuman amount of perks will then destroy the MU ratios. If the same Ganondorf could have the same prediction for all other MUs, some of them would be 100:0, when right now they're 30:70 for example (the CF vs Ganon MU would be 100:0 in Ganon's favor). You can't do this without changing the ratio's definitions.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Adumbrodeus, you gotta remember that match-up ratios are also based on HUMAN factors. Giving a human an inhuman amount of perks will then destroy the MU ratios. If the same Ganondorf could have the same prediction for all other MUs, some of them would be 100:0, when right now they're 30:70 for example (the CF vs Ganon MU would be 100:0 in Ganon's favor). You can't do this without changing the ratio's definitions.

You're completely missing the point.


What I'm saying is the number of "perks" you need to give to the player in order for them to produce a situation equivalent to a 50-50 match-up is what defines how bad a match-up is.


Why? Because those perks are the skill difference given form.


How superior must a player be at predicting his opponent's moves for this to be the situation? If Ganondorf needs almost 100% accuracy for this to occur, then it is a truly abysmal match-up, but if even with 100% accuracy he cannot, then and ONLY then is a true 100:0 achieved.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Even with 100% accuracy, Ganondorf can not win.

BESIDES the fact in having difference in skills levels, you've completely and utterly destroyed the point of MU ratios. You can't just change the rules, ignore some aspect, and then try to change the number for the original rules.

Ganondorf vs ICs is 0:100. End of discussion.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Even with 100% accuracy, Ganondorf can not win.

Why? What error is there in my scenario?

BESIDES the fact in having difference in skills levels, you've completely and utterly destroyed the point of MU ratios. You can't just change the rules, ignore some aspect, and then try to change the number for the original rules.

Ganondorf vs ICs is 0:100. End of discussion.

Then what is the point in MU ratios, if not an attempt to quantify the required difference in skill levels in order to make a match-up winnable?




I'm merely extending this logic to it's natural conclusion, in other words, a whether a match-up is impossible in the mathematical sense using the underlying mechanics.

Sure, my methods are unusual, but the mechanics and the logic behind it is the same.

 

[Kewkky]

We're probably missing the point because our definition of MU ratios is different than yours. My definition of an MU ratio, for example, is the chances a character in question has in order to beat the other character when both players are of equal skill, all under humanly-possible factors.

 

[Zankoku]

Why?

If we're discussing required differences in skill in order to produce a 50-50 match-up that's a fair extreme case to prove that it's possible.

Because matchup ratios are designed based on the theoretical "two players equal in skill," so giving one player an unfair advantage to disprove a ratio is like disproving that 1+1=2 if you change one of those 1's to a 5.

In Street Fighter (and most traditional fighters), a matchup ratio defined the average number of games each player would win, out of ten. It's much more arbitrarily defined in Smash, but the basis still remains that matchup ratios are designed based only on the factor of difference in character "power," with no other factors that could produce differing results present (except in some cases also averaging matchups on all valid stages, rather than just starters).

A 100-0 does not define "impossible to win ever," but rather "one player will likely never win against an 'evenly matched' player given this character matchup." After all, if 100-0 followed your definition of "can't ever be won," then the winner is literally decided on the character select screen.

 

[Vermanubis]

I think the best way to bring closure to this discussion is to say that when the odds are in the IC's favor as they are, there comes a threshold of futility that's breached to where considering impossibilities becomes futile and semantic.

Calculating every movement of every electron in an electron cloud is not impossible, but it's so near it, that why the **** does it matter? lol get it

Top Ganon beating top ICs is not impossible but it is so improbable that it should be beyond consideration.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Because matchup ratios are designed based on the theoretical "two players equal in skill," so giving one player an unfair advantage to disprove a ratio is like disproving that 1+1=2 if you change one of those 1's to a 5.

In Street Fighter (and most traditional fighters), a matchup ratio defined the average number of games each player would win, out of ten. It's much more arbitrarily defined in Smash, but the basis still remains that matchup ratios are designed based only on the factor of difference in character "power," with no other factors that could produce differing results present (except in some cases also averaging matchups on all valid stages, rather than just starters).

A 100-0 does not define "impossible to win ever," but rather "one player will likely never win against an 'evenly matched' player given this character matchup." After all, if 100-0 followed your definition of "can't ever be won," then the winner is literally decided on the character select screen.

We're probably missing the point because our definition of MU ratios is different than yours. My definition of an MU ratio, for example, is the chances a character in question has in order to beat the other character when both players are of equal skill, all under humanly-possible factors.

Let me answer both of your objections in this, simply put, our match-ups become too bad too fast for that to be useful.

60-40s we can make an argument for, but once you pass 65-35 you should be hitting well over 80% ratio, and 70-30 and beyond you're talking statistically negligible win ratios.


However, given that we have a great deal more freedom in smash, small differences in skill seem to have a greater effect on outcome percentages then in other fighting games.


So, it's matter of what system is more useful, I've never taken a poll but it seems that match-ups defining required skill differences holds sway, if barely.

Top Ganon beating top ICs is not impossible but it is so improbable that it should be beyond consideration.

And that is the main point.

 

[DMG]

Well... I sleep for a day or two and look at what happens.

1. Powershielding lots of Lasers in a row from Fox is easy if, say he is only doing 1 laser pattern over and over, or if he is sitting on the ground shooting at you. If your goal is to Powershield his laser after laser, you can alternate between the two (or more if you have it configured differently) shield buttons usually much faster than you can with just 1. That makes PSing a lot of lasers being thrown at you easier. This generally won't help much for spaced out/differently timed lasers.

2. It is too hard to PS every laser from Fox, in every spot imaginable, from any distance imaginable.

3. Powershielding Fox's lasers doesn't really matter than much in the long run. Being able to approach him and force him to react with something other than Lasering, that's more important to focus on than being an impenetrable wall from lasers (which is too hard realistically to do without taking damage here and there even if it is your own fault.)

 

[Clai]

All this conversation has accomplished is making me want to fight IC's with Ganon because fighting impossibilities is fun.

In all seriousness, though, there's really no point in differentiating between :totalrape: and 0-100, because in the end, it's telling the Ganon player to not use Ganon against IC's because it is a rough and ardous matchup that you will lose.

@Vermanubis: I'm not sure if Pierce meant to place anyone in the F tier in any actual order, it was more like "yeah these characters are F-tier." Also, Ganondorf does have a grab game and he is capable of using his kill moves relatively fresh. It's a matter of playing smart and only using certain moves when it matters.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Ganondorf should be in a tier of his own at the bottom of the list. He is so bad that he's not even viable in low tier tournaments.

 

[phi1ny3]

To all those 0:100's, I have one word to say:

KenniSPAM

 

[Clai]

Ganondorf should be in a tier of his own at the bottom of the list. He is so bad that he's not even viable in low tier tournaments.

You've already said this multiple times now, and frankly, it's just annoying.

Low. Tier. Tournaments. Have. Nothing. To. Do. With. Placements. On. Tier. Lists.

We can also just ignore the fact that Ray Kalm got 5th place in the Low Tier Tournament on Smashboards, where the most adamant low-tier mains attended, right? I know it's Wifi, but Ganon is even more punishable on Wifi than he is offline.

Prove to me that Falcon deserves to be a tier better than Ganon and I'll start listening.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

To all those 0:100's, I have one word to say:

KenniSPAM

KenniSPAM doesn't know how to gay Ganondorf with Sheik well enough, I even gave him advice on how to do it and DLA chastised me for it. :3

Kenni even switched to MK in the set because he got two stocked at that MAS.

That and DLA isn't stupid with Ganondorf.

 

[Turbo Ether]

You've already said this multiple times now, and frankly, it's just annoying.

In different threads. Maybe here too, but regardless, I want people's thoughts on the subject.

Low. Tier. Tournaments. Have. Nothing. To. Do. With. Placements. On. Tier. Lists.

Not the point. The fact that Ganondorf is not even viable in low tiers is disturbing. Nonviable in low tiers, nonexistent in Brawls standard metagame.

We can also just ignore the fact that Ray Kalm got 5th place in the Low Tier Tournament on Smashboards, where the most adamant low-tier mains attended, right? I know it's Wifi, but Ganon is even more punishable on Wifi than he is offline.

Yes, it's Wifi, so I indeed will ignore this fact.

Prove to me that Falcon deserves to be a tier better than Ganon and I'll start listening.

Falcon's matchups against the rest of the cast aren't quite as atrocious as Ganons. Ganon gets hard countered by bad characters, like Yoshi and Sheik, for instance. Falcon does not. Falcon is actually capable of fighting low and mid tier characters. Falcon being able to win/place well in low tier tournaments in Atlantic North, while Ganon does not/cannot, means absolutely nothing?

In all seriousness, I could quite easily be dead wrong. I just think it would be funny and awesome for Ganon to be in a tier of his own. G tier, appropriately.

 

[Vermanubis]

You've already said this multiple times now, and frankly, it's just annoying.

Low. Tier. Tournaments. Have. Nothing. To. Do. With. Placements. On. Tier. Lists.

We can also just ignore the fact that Ray Kalm got 5th place in the Low Tier Tournament on Smashboards, where the most adamant low-tier mains attended, right? I know it's Wifi, but Ganon is even more punishable on Wifi than he is offline.

Prove to me that Falcon deserves to be a tier better than Ganon and I'll start listening.

A tier better? Or just better placed? Because Ganon can place fairly well in tournaments if the people don't know the match-up very well. Most people don't, surprisingly. They just assume since Ganon's hopeless that the player behind him is as well, so they walk into death traps. Can't tell you how many MKs, Snakes, Diddys, Sheiks and Olis I've beaten before because they didn't know the match-up. I think the best analogy for Ganon is that his efficacy is comparable to that of the plague. They can both give you hell unless you take RIDICULOUSLY easy and simple steps to protect yourself.

But, if you meant better placed, I can name a bunch of reasons.

-Falcon has an approach. (Remember this is comparatively speaking to Ganondorf)

-Falcon has a good grab game.

-Falcon is the second fastest character in the game.

-Falcon has a decent recovery.

-Falcon can deal with shields to a degree.

-Isn't CGed nearly as easily.

The only thing Ganon has that Falcon doesn't is raw power.

So, my stance is that he doesn't necessarily belong a tier higher, but definitely a few spots.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Captain Falcon definitely does not belong a few spots higher than Ganondorf because, even if we were to assume he's better (which I intend to argue against shortly), he's definitely not better than anyone else. Link's zair alone is pretty much better than Captain Falcon, and he also has things like great disjoints and a solid projectile game. Mario is very mediocre sure, but his moveset is way faster than Captain Falcon's while not being much less rewarding, he has way better options in the "not horrible priority" category, he has a frame 1 invincible OoS move, and he has a semi-decent projectile. Characters like Jigglypuff, Yoshi, Bowser, Samus, and Lucas are just obviously better than Captain Falcon too; I can't see anyone he's beating other than maybe Ganondorf.

Really, let's look at what Captain Falcon has that's actually good...

-A semi-decent jab that lets him compete in extremely close quarters combat.
-Generally high power, most practically realized on that actually decent up tilt.
-Very mobile on the ground.

Now let's look at the reasons Captain Falcon is a terrible character...

-Horrible, horrible range/priority, we're talking Sonic level here. Most of his moves are barely disjointed from his hurtboxes, and generally it's very easy for any good character to beat out almost everything he can do. For instance, there's an underground joke about Snake being able to insta-win against Captain Falcon by just holding A to jab over and over again; it's not quite true, but Captain Falcon has to honestly put some thought into beating that since most of his moveset really can't beat that when every other character (including Ganondorf) just laughs at such a "horrible" tactic.
-His amazing grounded mobility doesn't translate into the air at all.
-His moves have very lengthy start-up. It's not quite as bad as it is for Ganondorf, but I think attack wise I prefer Bowser's frame data to Captain Falcon's...
-Despite being a "speed character", he has very little that follows up effectively.
-High fall acceleration causes things like Sheik's ftilt to be more scary for him than for most.

Is that really better than Ganondorf? The way I see it is that both characters are really horrible. Neither is going to win any serious tournaments by themselves. However, if I use say 3-4 characters, I'd rather have one of them be Ganondorf than one of them be Captain Falcon. Ganon has more hopeless matchups and more horrible situations sure, but Captain Falcon has more than enough to totally sink him as an independent character anyway so to me the main thing that matters here is the positives. Ganondorf's moves not only do more damage than Captain Falcon's but "combo" better (look at what he gets out of dair!). Ganondorf has a good, rushing command grab in Flame Choke that has suicide gimmicks that end up making it really good on Brinstar and Norfair (note: possible uses for Ganondorf in counterpicking). Ganondorf's range and priority are hardly stellar, but they're worlds ahead of what Captain Falcon has so he can actually punish opponents for doing stupid stuff.

In terms of recovery, both are near the bottom of the heap. I'm not sure that Captain Falcon is much above Ganondorf; Ganondorf has suicide gimmicks off-stage that at least give him some slight ability to assert a threat even if his recovery distance is a bit worse (both recover in super gimpable ways; Ganon's way is hardly worse than Captain Falcon's).

In terms of "countering shields", please remind me of the plethora of safe moves Captain Falcon has. I seem to have forgotten them; does he actually do anything other than run up grab against overly defensive opponents? I know Ganon's up smash is actually safe on block, he has Flame Choke which is obviously unblockable, and there's always the option of just standing there and not attacking when they shield your "nothing" and punishing anything they do OoS (including drop shield) which Ganon does better than Captain Falcon due to how powerful he is. I'm pretty sure as a whole Ganon's attacks inflict more shield pushback than Captain Falcon's too so he can attack shields near ledges pretty safely like that.

The real point is that if you enter a tournament of any scale at all (like even just 50 people) with Captain Falcon as your only character, you will not win even if you are the best player there. If you do the same with Ganondorf, you also will not win. Even just making top8 is going to be really hard for you in either case; I'm pretty sure both all but auto-lose to Olimar and Ice Climbers and have tons of really terrible matchups on top of that (including Meta Knight and Snake for both of them). It's largely dumb luck that you avoid all the "I really can't win this" matchups in bracket... Both absolutely have to be willing to CP better characters routinely if they want to accomplish anything; even in my super character diverse region, we have zero CFs (at least zero people who would use their decent CFs in tournament instead of facing their low tier mains' worst matchups...) and only one Ganon, and that Ganon goes R.O.B. in 10 matchups (maybe I got the number slightly wrong, but you get the idea). This sort of hopelessness doesn't come along with any other low tier characters; even Link has enough tools to make himself a threat in every matchup even if his weaknesses make it really uphill sometimes. If the Link player really is the best player at the tournament, he has a really legitimate chance of winning. I don't see how it's not a case of "Ganondorf and Captain Falcon are just horrible in a way no one else in this game is; they belong together and otherwise alone on the lowest tier".

 

[TP]

\even in my super character diverse region, we have zero CFs (at least zero people who would use their decent CFs in tournament instead of facing their low tier mains' worst matchups...) and only one Ganon, and that Ganon goes R.O.B. in 10 matchups (maybe I got the number slightly wrong, but you get the idea).

Actually, I went straight ROB in my last tournament, and got 9th anyway. I suck. Going ALL Ganon next time though.

Falcon is better than Ganon in my opinion. Watching Ally nearly beat M2K's MK in a match with Falcon was all the evidence I needed.

 

[Vermanubis]

I apologize for being unable to reply in equal length, but I have to hurry. I'll just try to summarize a response to everything you stated.

Yes, Ganondorf has a few positives over Captain Falcon, but what you have to remember is that Ganondorf is a circumstantial character. He only has strengths if the opponent allows him to. Captain Falcon has strengths regardless. Probably one of my biggest arguments for Falcon trumping Ganondorf is the fact that, as I said before, Ganondorf is the only character in the game who has to rely solely on the opponent's approach. His abysmal speed and mobility make approaching even Falcon himself a nightmare. We can spend hours conjecturing over their respective positives and negatives, but at the end of the day, Ganon's prospects are a lot more tantalizing than Falcon's, but pragmatically impossible to implement.

Even that shortcoming alone, I believe, is enough to ground Ganon. Despite bad range and priority, people underestimate the importance of Falcon's speed versus Ganondorf's. If your opponent is stupid, yes, Ganondorf owns the **** out of Falcon. But we're assuming this is at the highest level of play, in which Ganondorf's egregious flaws floor him so hard, he might as well just be banned for being so bad.

Captain Falcon being able to even mildly contend with Snake should be more than enough evidential material that he is better. Snake encompasses a lot of positives about his character and Falcon being able to circumvent those positives in any way speaks volumes to his strengths.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I'm glad other people can see why Link is better than Falcon.

 

[Vermanubis]

I'm glad other people can see why Link is better than Falcon.

I agree Link is a bit better than Falcon. But anyone that tries to argue that Ganondorf is better than Falcon, I defy them to actually use him competitively and see that he's a lot more promising on paper than in practice. :U

 

[DanGR]

Really, let's look at what Captain Falcon has that's actually good...

-A semi-decent jab that lets him compete in extremely close quarters combat.
-Generally high power, most practically realized on that actually decent up tilt.
-Very mobile on the ground.

Now let's look at the reasons Captain Falcon is a terrible character...

Woah, man.

Semi-decent jab? His jab is more just semi-decent. It's good. In fact, it's more than likely his best move.

He's very mobile in the air too, don't forget, at 5th best horizontal air speed- tied with WOLF. That's awesome.

-Horrible, horrible range/priority, we're talking Sonic level here. Most of his moves are barely disjointed from his hurtboxes, and generally it's very easy for any good character to beat out almost everything he can do. For instance, there's an underground joke about Snake being able to insta-win against Captain Falcon by just holding A to jab over and over again; it's not quite true, but Captain Falcon has to honestly put some thought into beating that since most of his moveset really can't beat that when every other character (including Ganondorf) just laughs at such a "horrible" tactic.
-His amazing grounded mobility doesn't translate into the air at all.
-His moves have very lengthy start-up. It's not quite as bad as it is for Ganondorf, but I think attack wise I prefer Bowser's frame data to Captain Falcon's...
-Despite being a "speed character", he has very little that follows up effectively.
-High fall acceleration causes things like Sheik's ftilt to be more scary for him than for most.

Is that really better than Ganondorf?

Let's take a look at Ganon, then. All of that^ + this V, but without any good traits. (Except that he's relatively strong. I'll give him that. >_>)

Ganon has, by far, the worst mobility of any character in this game. While Falcon can't do much with his great mobility, Ganon can barely do anything... without his awful mobility.
3rd worst walking speed.
2nd slowest running speed
3rd shortest jump (tied).
Horizontal air speed comparable to Kirby. (quite bad)
None of his aerials are safe upon block...
Neither are any of his grounded attacks except dtilt, murder choke, and perhaps upsmash on a few characters.
All of this + the 7th fastest falling speed to tie him to the ground even more.

Most every attack of his is punishable upon shield block or by pure reaction... not to mention he has the worst grab range of any character (with atrocious running speed to compliment it). For this reason he can't even grab people if they shield, which no one has a need to do anyways because it's so difficult for Ganon to chase anyone.

Suddenly, air camping has become a viable option for a good portion of the cast on the stages with platforms because Ganon is too slow to chase anyone. They're all faster both on the ground, and in the air than Ganon is anywhere...

And Falcon is still worse? How is that possible?

 

[MK26]

Actually, I went straight ROB in my last tournament, and got 9th anyway. I suck. Going ALL Ganon next time though.

Falcon is better than Ganon in my opinion. Watching Ally nearly beat M2K's MK in a match with Falcon was all the evidence I needed.

lmao

vids?

 

[Clai]

I apologize for being unable to reply in equal length, but I have to hurry. I'll just try to summarize a response to everything you stated.

Yes, Ganondorf has a few positives over Captain Falcon, but what you have to remember is that Ganondorf is a circumstantial character. He only has strengths if the opponent allows him to. Captain Falcon has strengths regardless. Probably one of my biggest arguments for Falcon trumping Ganondorf is the fact that, as I said before, Ganondorf is the only character in the game who has to rely solely on the opponent's approach. His abysmal speed and mobility make approaching even Falcon himself a nightmare. We can spend hours conjecturing over their respective positives and negatives, but at the end of the day, Ganon's prospects are a lot more tantalizing than Falcon's, but pragmatically impossible to implement.

Being able to control the stage makes Ganondorf's job a lot easier, and Ganondorf is capable of controlling his personal space. Just don't attack the opponent's shield stupidly or predictably and there are no problems.

Even that shortcoming alone, I believe, is enough to ground Ganon. Despite bad range and priority, people underestimate the importance of Falcon's speed versus Ganondorf's. If your opponent is stupid, yes, Ganondorf owns the **** out of Falcon. But we're assuming this is at the highest level of play, in which Ganondorf's egregious flaws floor him so hard, he might as well just be banned for being so bad.

Speed is nothing if your moveset doesn't compliment it. Falcon's jab doesn't have the range to be a threat to other opponents at all, and the rest of Falcon's moveset is pitiful against defensive opponents. At least Ganon can force a reaction and then pull off a bait and punish game, what is Falcon going to do?

Captain Falcon being able to even mildly contend with Snake should be more than enough evidential material that he is better. Snake encompasses a lot of positives about his character and Falcon being able to circumvent those positives in any way speaks volumes to his strengths.

I don't see Falcon 'circumventing' Snakes tilts any time soon, because since Falcon's approaches are all committed due to his incapability to weave, Snake can just camp when Falcon's not approaching and tilt to beat out any approaches Falcon tries to do (I'd say Snake:Falcon and Snake:Ganon are the same amount of ****)

Is that really better than Ganondorf? The way I see it is that both characters are really horrible. Neither is going to win any serious tournaments by themselves. However, if I use say 3-4 characters, I'd rather have one of them be Ganondorf than one of them be Captain Falcon. Ganon has more hopeless matchups and more horrible situations sure, but Captain Falcon has more than enough to totally sink him as an independent character anyway so to me the main thing that matters here is the positives. Ganondorf's moves not only do more damage than Captain Falcon's but "combo" better (look at what he gets out of dair!). Ganondorf has a good, rushing command grab in Flame Choke that has suicide gimmicks that end up making it really good on Brinstar and Norfair (note: possible uses for Ganondorf in counterpicking). Ganondorf's range and priority are hardly stellar, but they're worlds ahead of what Captain Falcon has so he can actually punish opponents for doing stupid stuff.

The real point is that if you enter a tournament of any scale at all (like even just 50 people) with Captain Falcon as your only character, you will not win even if you are the best player there. If you do the same with Ganondorf, you also will not win. Even just making top8 is going to be really hard for you in either case; I'm pretty sure both all but auto-lose to Olimar and Ice Climbers and have tons of really terrible matchups on top of that (including Meta Knight and Snake for both of them). It's largely dumb luck that you avoid all the "I really can't win this" matchups in bracket... Both absolutely have to be willing to CP better characters routinely if they want to accomplish anything; even in my super character diverse region, we have zero CFs (at least zero people who would use their decent CFs in tournament instead of facing their low tier mains' worst matchups...) and only one Ganon, and that Ganon goes R.O.B. in 10 matchups (maybe I got the number slightly wrong, but you get the idea). This sort of hopelessness doesn't come along with any other low tier characters; even Link has enough tools to make himself a threat in every matchup even if his weaknesses make it really uphill sometimes. If the Link player really is the best player at the tournament, he has a really legitimate chance of winning. I don't see how it's not a case of "Ganondorf and Captain Falcon are just horrible in a way no one else in this game is; they belong together and otherwise alone on the lowest tier".

Basically the stuff I quoted is what I've been trying to say all along, especially the part about how all the other characters just outshine Falcon and Ganon in just about everything. Falcon may have the tools to be better than Ganondorf, but when it comes to comparing Falcon to characters like Jigglypuff, who runs even with high-tier characters, and Link or Samus, who have placed in large tournaments by themselves (Legan/Xyro, respectively), there's just no argument. Falcon and Ganon are sharing the lowest tier together.

@Turbo Ether- No, low tier tournaments mean absolutely nothing because no matter how admirably Falcon does in low-tiers, when the actual tournament starts, Falcon's getting massacred by Metaknight, even more so than Ganon does. At least Ganon has the miniscule semblance of a chance, Falcon just gets outright slaughtered.

 

[Kewkky]

The tier list position reflects the SBR Ruleset. Changing the tier list due to an unofficial set of rules (low tier tourneys) would mean the tier list will be flawed due to having been skewed by something other than the SBR's own influence.

 

[Turbo Ether]

At least Ganon has the miniscule semblance of a chance, Falcon just gets outright slaughtered.

Prove this, please.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Low tier tournaments are useful to show who is better among the low tier, but it's only a minor thing to even consider for the tier list.

 

[phi1ny3]

I think when people are talking about how Ganon's inviable even in a place for better chances, they're not counting low tier tourneys as part of the criteria, just to bolster the idea that Ganon's God-given garbage material.

It's like saying he needs water wings in both the adult pool and the kiddie puddle that's like an inch deep. He really needs that last touch of making his fair autocancel (an idea that I heard was supposed to happen but got cut short), among other numerous changes lol.