Rise of Strategic Fighters

[NintendoKnight]

I've noticed something.

Ever since Smash 64, there has been a steady increase of "Strategic Thinking/High level play" characters. Yes, there has always been strategies and techniques in the Smash series. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the characters themselves being strategic and technical in their design. They tend to have one huge gimmick as part of their design, and tend to have a huge weakness to counterbalance it.

In Smash 64, I would say Link was the strategic character. He couldn't let other characters get into his face, or he would get annihilated. So he had to manage all the space around his foes. Bombs and boomerangs up the wazoo was probably called "spamming" by the noobs who couldn't beat it, but in reality it was all spacial manipulation.

Enter Melee, and Link loses the strategy he once had. The character that takes his place with this type of play? Ice Climbers. These parka-packing hammerheads required a playstyle unlike any other. Operating a duo character? Unheard of. It required a different line of thinking, of calculating. People had to train themselves to use this character specifically. They had to forgo their tendencies that they needed for the regular characters. However, just like Link in 64, the climbers also had a major weakness: Separation. Split the two apart and suddenly the lone player-controlled climber is at half the strength.

Brawl begins, and even more characters step into this strategic spotlight. Olimar, and Snake to a degree. Olimar had a small horde of vicious, color-coded, plant aliens that obeyed his every command. Snake had traps and incredible stage control, not to mention he was fearsome in close-quarters-combat. Olimar had powerful throws, and if you ever, EVER underestimated his Pikmin, you'd meet a horrific fate. Olimar's major weakness, on the other hand, was that he was easy crippled offstage as he required a tether to come back; something that was easily prevented.

Snake was different though. No major flaws, no weaknesses, and no cons for his pros. He could chain you into an infinite loop of down throws, his smash attacks were pretty nasty, and he had a disjointed forward tilt and up tilt. Not only that, but all his special attacks were nasty little doomsday devices wrapped in tiny little packages. But where Snake truly shined is when the player who used him was a step ahead of the others. A Snake that knows what you're going to do before you do is frightening, indeed.

And now, Smash 4. We have seen a huge influx of strategic characters: Mega Man, Rosalina, Little Mac, Palutena, and Robin.

Mega Man has to zone out his enemies. Rosalina can control a Luma from a distance as a puppet master. Little Mac dominates the ground, but is vulnerable in the air. Palutena has an option for nearly every possible scenario in a single match. And Robin has to keep a watchful eye on the amount of times he uses specific attacks, lest he lose all his power, options, and capabilities.

Can't you see what's happening? This game is beginning to focus less on how fast your fingers can move, and more on how fast your mind can move.

What do you guys think of this new shift in playstyle? Do you like the fact that many newcomers have been designed for intense strategic play? Do you agree with this strategic fighting being encouraged by the development team and Sakurai?

What are your thoughts?

 

[Canuckduck]

I thought of Brawl as being more "strategic" than Melee, in that you have to consider the consequences of certain decisions and moves rather than charging into the fray, due to the presence of random tripping and slower recoveries from aerials.

No, I don't think of it as better than Melee, but I do enjoy it.

 

[Ryuutakeshi]

I've noticed something.

Ever since Smash 64, there has been a steady increase of "Strategic Thinking/High level play" characters. Yes, there has always been strategies and techniques in the Smash series. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the characters themselves being strategic and technical in their design. They tend to have one huge gimmick as part of their design, and tend to have a huge weakness to counterbalance it.

In Smash 64, I would say Link was the strategic character. He couldn't let other characters get into his face, or he would get annihilated. So he had to manage all the space around his foes. Bombs and boomerangs up the wazoo was probably called "spamming" by the noobs who couldn't beat it, but in reality it was all spacial manipulation.

Enter Melee, and Link loses the strategy he once had. The character that takes his place with this type of play? Ice Climbers. These parka-packing hammerheads required a playstyle unlike any other. Operating a duo character? Unheard of. It required a different line of thinking, of calculating. People had to train themselves to use this character specifically. They had to forgo their tendencies that they needed for the regular characters. However, just like Link in 64, the climbers also had a major weakness: Separation. Split the two apart and suddenly the lone player-controlled climber is at half the strength.

Brawl begins, and even more characters step into this strategic spotlight. Olimar, and Snake to a degree. Olimar had a small horde of vicious, color-coded, plant aliens that obeyed his every command. Snake had traps and incredible stage control, not to mention he was fearsome in close-quarters-combat. Olimar had powerful throws, and if you ever, EVER underestimated his Pikmin, you'd meet a horrific fate. Olimar's major weakness, on the other hand, was that he was easy crippled offstage as he required a tether to come back; something that was easily prevented.

Snake was different though. No major flaws, no weaknesses, and no cons for his pros. He could chain you into an infinite loop of down throws, his smash attacks were pretty nasty, and he had a disjointed forward tilt and up tilt. Not only that, but all his special attacks were nasty little doomsday devices wrapped in tiny little packages. But where Snake truly shined is when the player who used him was a step ahead of the others. A Snake that knows what you're going to do before you do is frightening, indeed.

And now, Smash 4. We have seen a huge influx of strategic characters: Mega Man, Rosalina, Little Mac, Palutena, and Robin.

Mega Man has to zone out his enemies. Rosalina can control a Luma from a distance as a puppet master. Little Mac dominates the ground, but is vulnerable in the air. Palutena has an option for nearly every possible scenario in a single match. And Robin has to keep a watchful eye on the amount of times he uses specific attacks, lest he lose all his power, options, and capabilities.

Can't you see what's happening? This game is beginning to focus less on how fast your fingers can move, and more on how fast your mind can move.

What do you guys think of this new shift in playstyle? Do you like the fact that many newcomers have been designed for intense strategic play? Do you agree with this strategic fighting being encouraged by the development team and Sakurai?

What are your thoughts?

Well, my mind is faster than my fingers so I'd be okay with that. But we'll have to see how the matchups go first before drawing any solid concusions.

 

[NoiseHERO]

It's a good thing I like playing like an annoying troll then, to make my friends mad to make up for my lack of skill. I guess at least 4 out of the 20 characters I'll be constantly picking will probably play like how you described, from what you're getting at.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

To me it just comes across as Sakurai implementing gimmicks to separate new fighters from the old and give them a unique, distinguishable playstyle. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I see why "gimmick" is a word usually viewed in a negative light, but I think it's a rather neutral term.

 

[FalKoopa]

I'd also include Marth, as playing him effectively means making use of his tipper and spacing his moves properly. Peach too, perhaps, making use of the turnips and her floating ability.

In Brawl, Diddy Kong relied a lot on stage control using his Banana peels.

 

[Katy Parry]

Zelda creation was fueled by a defensive playstyle. She's probably the most wait and think character I can think of. I'm glad they're going in that direction.

 

[JaidynReiman]

I'd also include Marth, as playing him effectively means making use of his tipper and spacing his moves properly. Peach too, perhaps, making use of the turnips and her floating ability.

In Brawl, Diddy Kong relied a lot on stage control using his Banana peels.

I tended to like Marth because he was quite easy to use. I HATE how Marth is getting a lot of stigma now. He plays a bit differently, but I don't see how he's inherently bad anymore. I think Marth is going to be just as competitive as he was before, but he's a bit different now and people will need to get used to him. Lucina appears to basically be like old Marth, except she doesn't have the advantage of hitting at the tip of the blade for more power. Less strategy, but less reward, too. Lucina I think has become the "easy" Marth, with Marth being a bit more complicated now but he'll still be just as competitive in the final game.


But yes, I absolute love the massive focus on strategic characters this time around. Robin looks amazing, and although they'll be complicated, I really look forward to trying them out.

 

[Venks]

I was just talking about this with some friends actually. Excluding Lucina, each of the newcomers brings something unique to the game. I'd like to see how Villager's go about using their tree as the game's meta develops. It's great for blocking approaches, but also an amazing KO move at low percents. Stationary, but very useful.

 

[Renji64]

alot of new playstyles in this game.

 

[Saikyoshi]

I was just talking about this with some friends actually. Excluding Lucina, each of the newcomers brings something unique to the game. I'd like to see how Villager's go about using their tree as the game's meta develops. It's great for blocking approaches, but also an amazing KO move at low percents. Stationary, but very useful.

I imagine the tree will be like SSF2:Bomberman's bombs - powerful, but you have to trick the opponent into standing right next to it.

The fact that there can likely only be one on the stage at a time is going to hurt its effectiveness, though. Bomberman's trap was more useful because he could plant up to nine bombs at various points around the stage. All you have to do to avoid Villager's tree is... not currently be on Final Destination.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

I was just talking about this with some friends actually. Excluding Lucina, each of the newcomers brings something unique to the game. I'd like to see how Villager's go about using their tree as the game's meta develops. It's great for blocking approaches, but also an amazing KO move at low percents. Stationary, but very useful.

I don't think any experienced players would be foolish enough to fall for the Villager's trees though, especially if their characters are long-range specialists. For one example, Rosalina could just send the Luma to take care of the tree, rendering it pretty much ineffective against her.

If anything, the Villager would have to mix up his battle plans in order to properly use the tree.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

I imagine the tree will be like SSF2:Bomberman's bombs - powerful, but you have to trick the opponent into standing right next to it.

The fact that there can likely only be one on the stage at a time is going to hurt its effectiveness, though. Bomberman's trap was more useful because he could plant up to nine bombs at various points around the stage. All you have to do to avoid Villager's tree is... not currently be on Final Destination.

I dunno, the fact that the tree falls off ledges makes me think it'll be more useful on stages like Battlefield, for example. You could set up the tree on the top platform and then chop it to the left or right as you see fit. It'll cover a lot of space that way. Similarly, I think the tree could be very interesting on stages with moving platforms.

 

[Saikyoshi]

I dunno, the fact that the tree falls off ledges makes me think it'll be more useful on stages like Battlefield, for example. You could set up the tree on the top platform and then chop it to the left or right as you see fit. It'll cover a lot of space that way. Similarly, I think the tree could be very interesting on stages with moving platforms.

I doubt that will help it. The chopping animation still makes a startup time that's plenty long enough for the opponent to get far out of the way.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

I doubt that will help it. The chopping animation still makes a startup time that's plenty long enough for the opponent to get far out of the way.

Which is only made worse on FD, where your opponent has a ridiculous amount of room to run around. Baiting an opponent to go near the tree would be borderline impossible on that stage. They wouldn't bother approaching until the tree disappears. Even if they did go near it, I doubt any decent player would get hit by it still.

Anyway I'm getting off topic. I'll shut up.

 

[Pazzo.]

I've always loved a game that makes me think ahead. Hence why I love Smash Bros. so much.

If Sakurai really is attempting to put more thinking into Smash Bros, then more power to him.

 

[Venks]

I don't think any experienced players would be foolish enough to fall for the Villager's trees though, especially if their characters are long-range specialists. For one example, Rosalina could just send the Luma to take care of the tree, rendering it pretty much ineffective against her.

If anything, the Villager would have to mix up his battle plans in order to properly use the tree.

I'm not saying the tree is this free KO move just that is can KO at low percents. It's not going to work against every character, but it looks pretty nice against close-ranged fighters. The main way I saw it used was as a wall to hide behind as you shoot off Lloid Rockets. Seems really good for certain situations.

Which is only made worse on FD, where your opponent has a ridiculous amount of room to run around. Baiting an opponent to go near the tree would be borderline impossible on that stage. They wouldn't bother approaching until the tree disappears. Even if they did go near it, I doubt any decent player would get hit by it still.

Anyway I'm getting off topic. I'll shut up.

Off topic? I thought the topic was strategy in Smash 4? And wouldn't it actually be really easy to get an opponent near the tree? If you have a stock/percent lead then they need to approach or they'll lose. Then if you can land your down smash and bury them they'll have to struggle helplessly as you drop a tree on them.

 

[Phaazoid]

Ehh. I agree with some of your points but I think you're hand-waving some existing important strategy. If Little Mac was super strategic for the reasons you listed (high power, bad recovery) you may as well be talking about falco in melee. Glass canon, poor recovery. the KO punch adds a bit but it resets when you die.

As for Palutena, having odd hitboxes is different from being a strategic fighter. Sure, it requires some more thought, but not nearly as much as something like where your Luma is.

I would argue the most strategic newcomers we've received are Robin, for having to manage his weapon durability, Rosalina, for being even more of a dual fighter than the IC's in some senses.

I would say the less strategic but still moreso than most would be Little Mac, for always trying to make optimal use of his KO bar, and Megaman, for the combination of having mainly ranged attacks, and not having many options for close range.

You can probably argue this point for any fighter indefinitely, but that's my 2 cents.

 

[STiCKYBULL3TZ]

I love the fact that there are characters that force you to truly think in order to use them effectively. I'm always attracted to characters like this because it's fun to use a "gimmick" character and still beat my friends. These type of characters make you think 5-10 steps ahead of your opponent in order to get the upper hand. I'm a guy who loves puzzles and using strategic characters turns Smash into a kind of puzzle game for me. Love it!

 

[Senario]

Having to think about your moves is all well and good but this sounds a lot like favoring a defensive game when we should have offensive options be better than defensive ones. You can be tactical while having this type of gameplay. Need I point you to axe and his pikachu at evo? Those quick attacks.

 

[KCCHIEFS27]

ITT: characters didn't have weaknesses or unique abilities until smash 4

 

[Xigger]

This game is beginning to focus less on how fast your fingers can move, and more on how fast your mind can move.

That's kind of how competitions usually are. Competitive scenes usually focus on honing skills to give an advantage as well as reading opponents. Mind games enhance both.

 

[Nstinct]

Not that I want this to be a Villager discussion, but I think you guys are forgetting the tree will mostly be good for insane ledgeguards against characters who can't recover overstage easy. It also is an instant stage control move, plant a tree in the middle of stage and stand next to it, you literally stole stage control and can approach or pressure them. Trees can be a momentum cancel.

I have to agree with Phaazoid's post though.

 

[Xigger]

@ Nstinct , I agree. When I was in Sudden Death as Villager, I quickly planted the tree to form a wall between us. I won. The Villager is an odd form of a camper, the tree being the base.

 

[HeavyLobster]

Having to think about your moves is all well and good but this sounds a lot like favoring a defensive game when we should have offensive options be better than defensive ones. You can be tactical while having this type of gameplay. Need I point you to axe and his pikachu at evo? Those quick attacks.

Most of the tactical gameplay in Melee is due to the extreme importance of stage positioning in that game due to generally limited recovery options. Brawl somewhat diminished this sort of tactical gameplay by significantly improving recoveries across the board, while introducing other types of tactical gameplay, usually in the form of item setups. These setups can work in faster games but are easier to pull off in more defensive ones. The best way to incorporate both kinds of strategic gameplay is to find an appropriate balance between offensive and defensive options, and a game can be good competitively if it favors either offense or defense slightly, but if it favors either one too much it can get repetitive. One of the major strengths of competitive Melee has over Brawl is the fact that it is more accommodating to campy characters and playstyles than Brawl is to rushdown. If Melee exclusively favored rushdown characters and didn't have effective defensive characters like Peach and Jigglypuff it would be much less successful competitively.