Secondary for Fox vs Major Disadvantage

[Charoo]

So the general understanding by every1 in the Fox community and smash in general is this: Ice Climbers, Pikachu, and Sheik does very well against Fox. At least 70-30 or higher.

So, I think we should discuss the best secondary for Fox to counter these 3.

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU "BEAT PIKACHU/SHEIK/ICE CLIBMERS WITH EASE AND THINK THIS IS A 90-10 IN FOX'S ADVANTAGE. IT ALSO DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU THINK THAT THESE MATCHES ARE DURABLE AND THAT IF YOU PICK UP A SECONDARY THEN YOU'RE A TRAITOR

That is not the point. If you want to do well in tournament while mainly using fox aka whatever it takes to win but with fox as ur main char. Then, you going to want a secondary to take care of his major disadvantage match ups.

Base on the match up chart and discussion those chars have, these r the chars that consider 7-3 against them:

note: If you're going to pick up a char. to counter them then you want a good counter. Don't pick a 50-50 match up to counter your bad match up. What's the point in that?

Pikachu:
Metaknight
Mr. Game & Watch
Marth
R.O.B.

Sheik:
Ice Climbers
Pikachu

Ice Climbers:
Snake

As you can see, none of the chars. really destroy all 3 of them if you wanted the all in one package deal. So either learn them all or perhaps chooses one that does 60-40 vs all of them like Marth, G&W, MK, etc.

So yeah, lets discuss. Which char. do you think is the best counter pick vs all 3 or just individually.

 

[Red Arremer]

note: If you're going to pick up a char. to counter them then you want a good counter. Don't pick a 50-50 match up to counter your bad match up. What's the point in that?

The point is that you don't have to learn 2 or 3 characters for each possible bad matchup, and that even is all you actually need for a successful counterpick.
If you lose in an even matchup, noone is to blame but your lack of skill.

Snake is a good secondary for Fox, as Snake covers all 3 of Fox's "get *****" matchups.
R.O.B., G&W and maybe Marth could be good choices too.

 

[RPK]

Hm...I might go with ROB as my other then...For me, it used to be Samus @_@ Dont ask why >_< That was my secondary character T3T Other than that I have Falco, and MK...Mmmm....MK x3

 

[Red Arremer]

Samus is only my Low Tier main, haha.

Edit: Also, I forgot that Zero Suit Samus probably is not a bad choice, either.

 

[$Lil' Gerald Is In Dat Style$]

I'll Choose Snake & G&W on Sheik, I'll choose G&W on Ice Climbers, and Pikachu, I'll choose Snake and G&W. Which is gud matchups for me to handle dem. But Sheik, I'll choose anyone like my main, Mario, or my secondary mains.

 

[Fenrir VII]

Diddy isn't a terrible option, either... He messes around with the ICs, and does well against Pika, and Sheik is probably pretty even...

Marth is my personal choice... just because he has mostly even matches against all of them, and he's not hard to play at all...

I could see Zelda handling all three of them, kinda... ICs would be a chore

ZSS sure

GW makes sense, too...

 

[Uzima (Uzi)]

marth defanitly fixes all of fox's **** match ups, he plays a bit differently so its not like you can switch back and forth perfectly, but he still is a very good character and back up fox well.

 

[Charoo]

The point is that you don't have to learn 2 or 3 characters for each possible bad matchup, and that even is all you actually need for a successful counterpick.
If you lose in an even matchup, noone is to blame but your lack of skill.

Snake is a good secondary for Fox, as Snake covers all 3 of Fox's "get *****" match ups.
R.O.B., G&W and maybe Marth could be good choices too.

even is not a counter pick. Even is an even match up. You want to pick a char. that is going to counter a specific set of chars. You don't want some1 that will go even with them and still give you problem learning the match up and such.

Say you're DK, worst match up is Dedede. Sure you can pick peach, zss, g&w, or some other chars. that are 50-50 but why? You are dedicating a char. to counter pick Dedede and nothing more. That character whole purpose is to defeat Dedede and will probably not be use for anything else. So why go for an even match up? Instead, pick soem1 that you know will destroy dedede or beats him pretty well like falco and olimar.

Another example is vs fox. Sure you can go Diddy and be around even with Fox. Why not just go pikachu and destroy him instead? If fox is your major disadvantage match up then you want to pick some1 that will beats him for sure with ease or as little problem as possible.

I understand what you mean by picking an even match up and it's fine but that's only if you just want to go even with them and still not sure if you win or not. For Major Disadvantage cases, you want some1 that will dominate them. You gotta show them what's up.

 

[Red Arremer]

Uhm, no?
Look, I don't want to learn the half roster just so I can play every character's worst matchup. That was what I was saying. A good secondary covers the majority of your main's bad matchups, and if that secondary only goes even vs. one or a few of them, well so be it, but you still have only 2 characters you have to learn - your main and your secondary. I won't learn a new character just in order to have a much easier time vs. that character whom the secondary goes even with.

I'll explain counterpicking to you, ok?

Playing a game competitively - this means any game - means that you want to determine skill between several players, usually two or a team of equally amounted players facing each other. Determining skill needs an environment that is the most even and balanced as possible. That is the general concept of competitiveness. I'm sure you understand that concept, that generally, a competitive game seeks balance in between the players so actual skill is determined.

In video games, especially fighting games, game balance is very difficult to achieve. Due to characters having different movesets, traits and other things such as special mechanics (e.g. the Aura of Lucario is a perfect example for that), there will be characters that are advantaged over others. Characters so have strengths and weaknesses, and it's up to the player of a character to cover the character's weaknesses with their strengths, while their opponent tries to exploit the weaknesses of that character.

Perfect balance is literally impossible with a cast of more than 1 character. While it can be extremely close to be completely balanced to the point where every character's matchup to each other has only so small advantages/disadvantages against each other that they are neglectable and able to be called even.

However, most fighting games aren't that balanced as I said, especially with a cast that has more than a small handful of characters. There will be characters that have a major advantage over other characters. Some characters have so many strengths that they have no problem in covering their weaknesses, thus doing very well against most of their opponents, while some characters have so many weaknesses that they can't cover them anymore and are victims to huge exploits of them.

If you have understood these paragraphs explaining the concept of competitive fighting games so far, you might be able to conclude the next line of explanation - regarding Smash - yourself.

Due to the unusual nature of Smash (it not having health bars and the players having to ring-out their opponent in order to win, etc.) and the fact that stages influence the performance of players and characters in this game series, the system of "Counterpicking" (I'll add Stagestriking into it since it's kindasorta part of it) has been introduced.
Counterpicking and Stagestriking are options given to the player to put themselves into a favourable position. They are neither absolutely necessary nor does the player HAVE to use counterpicking or strike a stage. However, they can put themselves into a favourable position by doing so, covering some of their character's weaknesses and/or being able to exploit the opponent's more with the help of a stage, and removing a stage that exploits their character's weaknesses by striking it.
Just like Gimping, Edgehogging, Camping, Chaingrabbing, etc., Counterpicking is an option given to the players. They don't have to use it, but usually, it's not a bad idea to do so.

Now, the thing is following: A favourable position does not mean an advantage only. There is no need to put yourself into an advantage, because in order to determine skill, an even position is all you need. An advantage over your opponent is favourable, but not necessary in order to determine the skill between you and your opponent.
If you are in an even matchup and you lose, nothing is to blame but yourself, since especially in an even matchup, there's nothing that counts more than your own skill and knowledge.

Too many people are focussed on thinking that counterpicking has to do with disadvantaged matchups, but that's wrong, since an even matchup is the only thing you need.

 

[DarkAura]

i second falco and marth

that covers my match up problem up pretty well

i still get ***** by ICs no matter who i use T_T

 

[Charoo]

Uhm, no?
Look, I don't want to learn the half roster just so I can play every character's worst matchup. That was what I was saying. A good secondary covers the majority of your main's bad matchups, and if that secondary only goes even vs. one or a few of them, well so be it, but you still have only 2 characters you have to learn - your main and your secondary. I won't learn a new character just in order to have a much easier time vs. that character whom the secondary goes even with.

I'll explain counterpicking to you, ok?

Playing a game competitively - this means any game - means that you want to determine skill between several players, usually two or a team of equally amounted players facing each other. Determining skill needs an environment that is the most even and balanced as possible. That is the general concept of competitiveness. I'm sure you understand that concept, that generally, a competitive game seeks balance in between the players so actual skill is determined.

In video games, especially fighting games, game balance is very difficult to achieve. Due to characters having different movesets, traits and other things such as special mechanics (e.g. the Aura of Lucario is a perfect example for that), there will be characters that are advantaged over others. Characters so have strengths and weaknesses, and it's up to the player of a character to cover the character's weaknesses with their strengths, while their opponent tries to exploit the weaknesses of that character.

Perfect balance is literally impossible with a cast of more than 1 character. While it can be extremely close to be completely balanced to the point where every character's matchup to each other has only so small advantages/disadvantages against each other that they are neglectable and able to be called even.

However, most fighting games aren't that balanced as I said, especially with a cast that has more than a small handful of characters. There will be characters that have a major advantage over other characters. Some characters have so many strengths that they have no problem in covering their weaknesses, thus doing very well against most of their opponents, while some characters have so many weaknesses that they can't cover them anymore and are victims to huge exploits of them.

If you have understood these paragraphs explaining the concept of competitive fighting games so far, you might be able to conclude the next line of explanation - regarding Smash - yourself.

Due to the unusual nature of Smash (it not having health bars and the players having to ring-out their opponent in order to win, etc.) and the fact that stages influence the performance of players and characters in this game series, the system of "Counterpicking" (I'll add Stagestriking into it since it's kindasorta part of it) has been introduced.
Counterpicking and Stagestriking are options given to the player to put themselves into a favourable position. They are neither absolutely necessary nor does the player HAVE to use counterpicking or strike a stage. However, they can put themselves into a favourable position by doing so, covering some of their character's weaknesses and/or being able to exploit the opponent's more with the help of a stage, and removing a stage that exploits their character's weaknesses by striking it.
Just like Gimping, Edgehogging, Camping, Chaingrabbing, etc., Counterpicking is an option given to the players. They don't have to use it, but usually, it's not a bad idea to do so.

Now, the thing is following: A favourable position does not mean an advantage only. There is no need to put yourself into an advantage, because in order to determine skill, an even position is all you need. An advantage over your opponent is favourable, but not necessary in order to determine the skill between you and your opponent.
If you are in an even matchup and you lose, nothing is to blame but yourself, since especially in an even matchup, there's nothing that counts more than your own skill and knowledge.

Too many people are focussed on thinking that counterpicking has to do with disadvantaged matchups, but that's wrong, since an even matchup is the only thing you need.

that is true but the point I made this thread is about going even with with counter picking. Yes an even match up is counter pick but that's a general term. I am talking about a counterpick vs chars. that are consider to many fox players, unwinnable.

I didn't make this thread to see who goes even with P.I.S. because we are trying optimize a win. This is a specificsceneraio and not a general term. I am basing this on a situation where a fox player:

1. I s willing to use Fox on every single match up except S/I/P
2. want to pick a char. that will be designated to fight S/I/P and nothing else to cover fox bad match ups.

Under these conditions, why would u want to pick a char. that goes even with S/I/P? As people stated, marth & g&w doesn't destroy them but goes at least 60-40 over them usually. That is enough to counter them. 50-50 is also a good choice but not in this situation. If you're going to pick up soem1 just to beat these guys then why not go for some1 who's the best at it. Why pick Mk to fight fox when you can pick pikachu? Yes, MK is a good counter pick but it's not the best counterpoise which is what I'm looknig for. If your only bad match up really is Fox then you should pick P/I/S to counter him. Why make ur life harder by going 50-50 with Fox? Why not 90-10 or 80-20?

Spadefox, you define what counter picking is which is absolutely right. I myself main Sheik/Fox/Falcon and u can tell that I have no good match up usually. Yet, I pick them specifically for certain chars. to give me the best match up possible even if it's bad vs the opponent still. It's not the best "counter picking" but it's still something.

I just want people to discuss the best char. or a set of chars. that can handle P/I/S the best. Not a char. that go even with them.

I have experience players who think the same as you before. They have Mk as secondary because he covers pretty much everything but they don't want to main Mk. It's a very smart idea to pick MK cause he can counter every1 but we're not doing that. We're only trying to counter P/I/S. In this case, you want to find some1 that can take them all on at 60-40 or better. If there isn't any1 that can do that then we have to go to even match up but as people stated, there are chars. that beat these guys at 60-40 or more.

I am bending the word counter picking for this thread because it is a general term that every1 understand easily. Your definition is right but I am just making it to the extreme. We shouldn't be picking an even match up to beat our hardest match up. We are trying to find some1 because P/I/S are supposedly almost impossible to beat when both peopel are even in skill. You also ahve to take into account that the char. you pick up is a char. that you wont be practicing much vs the opponent who is using their main so technically speaking, secondary vs main isn't a 50-50 match up anymore. We are doing this base on theory anyways. Just because Snake beats ICs doesn't mean that you will when it happens.

edit: lets not start a debate here if we can. No point starting something up that isn't that big of a deal

 

[Red Arremer]

I repeat:
Why should I learn 3 characters if I can use only 2?
My secondary characters NEVER will be as good as my main character, as I spend most of my time with my main character. If I have to learn every character's worst matchup, and playing properly with all of these characters, I'd have to learn and train all day long.
If 1 other character adds up to my main's bad matchups, and goes even against them, why the heck should I learn a third character?

I'm playing this game to play a game competitively, not to humiliate my opponent by making my win to be the easiest. I'm someone seeking a challenge, not a lazy-*** victory.

__

Edit: Just read the whole post over again... sorry, AIM-speak makes me not understand half of the time, I'm not natively English, so I have sometimes a bit hard of a time grasping those abbreviations.

If you want to simply find these characters' worst matchups, go to their board and look at the matchup threads or ask there. There's no point to debate this here, where those characters aren't even really represented.

 

[SuSa]

Champ, I am sorry but Spadefox is right. You want a character who can cover your characters bad matchups. You'd only get to use that advantage if your opponent wins, then stays as their character. If you go their worst matchup - chances are they will be switching (if you won) to one of that characters bad matchups. If you go a character that goes even, they are more likely to stay. Giving you a neutral matchup rather then a disadvantaged one.

If you can learn 2 characters, your best hope is to make sure they don't share a bad matchup - forcing you to learn a third.

Champ, what do you do when you face a Pikachu may I ask? O_o

 

[EdreesesPieces]

Hey what's the issue here? Is Champ saying that he wants to learn 3 characters that hard counter his 3 bad matchups, and you guys are saying the best solution is to just pick a 2nd character that can at least cover decently the 3 bad matchups? Is that the issue?

If that's the issue I think either way you go works. The former option works because Champ is so good with so many characters, that people will have no idea who he is going to use first match. However, 90% of the time, Champ will KNOW who the other person is going to pick if he's familiar with them in Socal or watches them play before the tournament. If you KNOW who the other person mains, I actually think Champ's route is the best way to go to improve your chances of winning. And the reason he's looking for these 3 counters is because he DOES know who the good Pika's, ICs and such are in our region.

It is true that you'd have to spend a lot of work getting the 3 characters good enough, but realize that they HARD counter his bad matchups, so he doesn't have to put as much time into it. On the otherhand, even if he picks just a 2nd character that has even matchups with his bad matchups, the fact that they are even matchups requires Champ to probably spend even MORE time on this 2nd character than he would on the 2nd and 3rd characters combined in the other scenario.

Against Pikachu's champ goes Zelda at low percentages, then Sheik at high percentates. It sounds funny but it works great because it's not that bad of a matchup for Sheik when Pika can't CG her.

 

[SuSa]

He's saying it's better to learn "x" amount of characters that do well against bad matchups while myself and Spadefox are stating learn "a" (where A is less then X) to cover the same matchups - but not necessarily 60:40'ing them.

A better idea for this thread would have been to go to your 3 worst matchups, find all their bad matchups+chars. that go even, find who fits the best, and say "For the best chance, it's better to play ___ or ____ seeing as they ___SDFoas-dof-asf-as-df-toast.

Learning 1 character for 1 matchup is generally a good way to lose that match. You rarely get to play as that character in that matchup. It'd be better to have a secondary that you get to pull out more then once in a blue moon.

/coming from a guy who plays the entire roster - but will only play as 2-3 characters in tournament.

(Main: Snake; Secondaries: MK/IC - depending if I was doing the grabs well in friendlies. My muscle memory for the CG's likes to come and go. )

 

[Red Arremer]

If he wants to find out the worst matchups for these characters, though, he's wrong in the Fox boards.
If he want to know Pikachu's worst matchup, he should go to the Pikachu boards and read the matchup-threads or ask. The same goes for the Ice Climbers and Sheik.

I thought this thread was to discuss Fox's best secondary options, not the hardest matchups for Fox's hardest matchups.

 

[Jmex]

A better idea for this thread would have been to go to your 3 worst matchups, find all their bad matchups+chars. that go even, find who fits the best, and say "For the best chance, it's better to play ___ or ____ seeing as they ___SDFoas-dof-asf-as-df-toast.

That is what he initially said.

He said. Hey guys, what are your your opinions. Ice Climbers/ Pikachu/ and Shiek **** Fox. So he then listed the characters that counter each character. With that list. He then asked which character would you choose, or think is the best to fight against those 3 characters?

He made that list of characters because there Ice Climbers/ Pikachus/ and Shieks biggest challenges. He did not include the characters that go even with all of the characters.

So basically hes asking which one character would be the best secondary for fox to cover the 3 characters that **** fox. Choosing from that list that he made of course.

 

[Charoo]

Champ, I am sorry but Spadefox is right. You want a character who can cover your characters bad matchups. You'd only get to use that advantage if your opponent wins, then stays as their character. If you go their worst matchup - chances are they will be switching (if you won) to one of that characters bad matchups. If you go a character that goes even, they are more likely to stay. Giving you a neutral matchup rather then a disadvantaged one.

If you can learn 2 characters, your best hope is to make sure they don't share a bad matchup - forcing you to learn a third.

Champ, what do you do when you face a Pikachu may I ask? O_o

I don't think I ever said that we should main multiple chars. to counter all of our bad match ups. All I did was list some of the chars. that I got from their own respective board of their hardest match up. I do agree with you thought about how choosing a hard match up might make them counter pick themselves on you. I just didn't have to post it cause I was at the beach for a bonfire with friends. The water was cold haha

Edrees beat me to it but yeah. Zelda then Sheik. I use Zelda to 60% then I switch to Sheik afterward. Zelda does well vs Pikachu but I would rather do it with Sheik haha. So send Zelda in to fight and such. Then switch to Sheik. Imo it's 60-40 in Sheik's favor with no chain grabbing cause Sheik got speed, needles, and grab release DACUS. This is the fox board though so we wont discuss it here.

I repeat:
Why should I learn 3 characters if I can use only 2?
My secondary characters NEVER will be as good as my main character, as I spend most of my time with my main character. If I have to learn every character's worst matchup, and playing properly with all of these characters, I'd have to learn and train all day long.
If 1 other character adds up to my main's bad matchups, and goes even against them, why the heck should I learn a third character?

I'm playing this game to play a game competitively, not to humiliate my opponent by making my win to be the easiest. I'm someone seeking a challenge, not a lazy-*** victory.
__

Edit: Just read the whole post over again... sorry, AIM-speak makes me not understand half of the time, I'm not natively English, so I have sometimes a bit hard of a time grasping those abbreviations.

If you want to simply find these characters' worst matchups, go to their board and look at the matchup threads or ask there. There's no point to debate this here, where those characters aren't even really represented.

The last part you posted is your own opinion. You want to seek a challenge so yeah good stuff. I think some people pick ganon or something like that to seek a challenge. Except, not every1 does that on their free time. Some people want to do whatever it takes to win.

The way u replied also make me feel like u didn't read my last post which I stated that Marth is a good option vs every1 cause he goes 60-40 vs them all or something close to it. Of course I think that picking one char. is better than 3 because it's easier to learn. That's why I made this thread to ask what's the best char. to do so. I posted the list on my first page to point out that "dang it guys, nobody destroy all 3 of these chars. by themselves so lets think of soem1 who can do pretty dang close to it"

I still dunno why u keep assuming that I'm saying pick 3 chars. to counter them all

If he wants to find out the worst matchups for these characters, though, he's wrong in the Fox boards.
If he want to know Pikachu's worst matchup, he should go to the Pikachu boards and read the matchup-threads or ask. The same goes for the Ice Climbers and Sheik.

I thought this thread was to discuss Fox's best secondary options, not the hardest matchups for Fox's hardest matchups.

I want the fox board opinion too. For some reason, most fox players have a marth for some reason. I'm also trying to gather information and then present it to the fox board. Then we discuss on who is the best candidate for it.

This is to help every1 that mains fox and not just me. I can get the information myself but I also want to share the information to other Fox players too

This is a thread about fox secondary option but just for Pikachu, Sheik, and Ice Climbers. Under another criteria, another char. might be use instead. P/I/S are our hardest match up so this thread is a separate attention to it for people who want to find a secondary just for them

I think you and I just have a misunderstanding with each other. I read your post and my post and they both don't seem to reply to each other at all haha.

so pretty much, this is what my goal of this thread

I want to give out information to fox players about who are good vs P/I/S. Then, with the given information, we work together to find the best char. that can fight them all efficiently and easily as possible. What this method is should then be consider by all Fox players who are thinking about going solo fox except vs P/I/S only.

That's all. PICKING 3 char. is a topic we have to discuss. Of course, that's a bad idea but it's still an idea. We can't throw everything away instantly without proving that there's something wrong with it. I don't think any1 brought it up yet so we just wont talk about it. So far, every1 been giving input on using 1 char. vs all 3 which is the right choice. We just need to figure out who's the best char. vs all 3. Maybe there's more than 1 choice too.

 

[Red Arremer]

As said, I'm not natively English, so netspeak (like "some1", etc.) makes me fail in understanding. You should've read the Edit too y'know.

 

[NeverKnowsBest]

Marth can counter them all.

=3

I secondary Peach for those 3 match-ups now.

 

[SnowballBob33]

ummmmm, mk

 

[M@v]

If you want just ONE person, then go MK. He beats pika, beats ICs(Imo) and beats sheik. All are like 55:45 - 6:4ish.

Now I use Falco, Mk, Fox, and Peach all in tourney, with Falco being my "Main". I have multiple options vs all 4 of those character's bad matchups. The exception is Marth, since he beats peach, fox, and falco. Mk is the only one I have that beats him.

Ex. Sheik. Falco is even with her. Mk beats her. Peach beats her.

ICs.-Peach beats them, MK is even or beats them.

Pika- MK beats him, peach is even with him.

Snake- Fox beats him, Falco is even, and Mk beats him(Barely)

I'm also learning DDD. If you put time in to more people you can really keep opponents guessing.

 

[NeverKnowsBest]

If you want just ONE person, then go MK. He beats pika, beats ICs(Imo) and beats sheik. All are like 55:45 - 6:4ish.

Now I use Falco, Mk, Fox, and Peach all in tourney, with Falco being my "Main". I have multiple options vs all 4 of those character's bad matchups. The exception is Marth, since he beats peach, fox, and falco. Mk is the only one I have that beats him.

Ex. Sheik. Falco is even with her. Mk beats her. Peach beats her.

ICs.-Peach beats them, MK is even or beats them.

Pika- MK beats him, peach is even with him.

Snake- Fox beats him, Falco is even, and Mk beats him(Barely)

I'm also learning DDD. If you put time in to more people you can really keep opponents guessing.

Doesn't he beat everyone =3

<3 M@V

 

[Zhamy]

I think it's best to look at this in two different angles:

1) Are you looking for a secondary? If not, then...
2) Are you looking for a few characters to specifically counter Fox's worst matchups?

Consider the opinions in that light, and I think you can pick based on your preference.

 

[phi1ny3]

Judging by the bad MU's in the original OP, it sounds like lucario would actually be an underdog "runner up" for a secondary.
Most of his MU's are pretty evenish overall normally, but sheiks don't like playing lucario at all as it's a pretty solid disadvantage in many ways, pika has a slight disadvantage (and if you don't like t-jolt camping, BAS actually starts eating t-jolts at a surprisingly early %), and at least by our semi-old MU #'s on both boards (actually, the lucario's are somewhat new) IC's also have the disadvantage vs. lucario (ftilt, dair, and fsmash are suprisingly amazing separators, lingering hitboxes + decent "floaty" aerial movement helps keep away from CGs).
Snake is prolly a better pick, but judging by those MUs, lucario's not a bad option either.

 

[DarkAura]

Judging by the bad MU's in the original OP, it sounds like lucario would actually be an underdog "runner up" for a secondary.
Most of his MU's are pretty evenish overall normally, but sheiks don't like playing lucario at all as it's a pretty solid disadvantage in many ways, pika has a slight disadvantage (and if you don't like t-jolt camping, BAS actually starts eating t-jolts at a surprisingly early %), and at least by our semi-old MU #'s on both boards (actually, the lucario's are somewhat new) IC's also have the disadvantage vs. lucario (ftilt, dair, and fsmash are suprisingly amazing separators, lingering hitboxes + decent "floaty" aerial movement helps keep away from CGs).
Snake is prolly a better pick, but judging by those MUs, lucario's not a bad option either.

i agree with that, Lucario helped me a fair bit when i had a pool with 2 ice climber mains his Fsmash wrecks them. oh yeah i still lost though T_T the match was like 1 stock close as opposed to me being 3 stocked with fox

iv never fought a shiek... period so i don't know anything bout that

but yeah lucario should definitely be considered for those who are willing to learn him

 

[phi1ny3]

I hate his vs. D3 mu though, makes me want to go emo.
Sheiks don't like the idea of having a relatively ineffective ftilt damage racker (they usually have to "swan combo" against lucario after 1-2 ftilts because of floatiness and dair), and having a somewhat limited ability to truly gimp against skilled people + lack of really, really solid kill power is not a good combination vs. Lucario, it's usually in the 60:40-65:35 range. It sounds really overgeneralized, but it's really what it boils down to.

lol I dun like chars based on gimmicks, they get so old to try to analyze technically lol.

 

[M@v]

Doesn't he beat everyone =3

<3 M@V

He definitely doesnt. Does he have disadvantages? cloudy. Even matchups? for sure.

 

[Razmakazi]

hmm...I'd go marth just coz it seems like he hard counters those 3 chars a bit worse than MK does but then again MK is easier to pick up so...that one seems like a bit of a toss up.

Personally if I went into a tourney maining fox i'd just go marth coz the matchups are easier with him and fighting as MK is so much harder than it seems since everyone knows the matchup and you as an MK 2nd kinda...don't until a certain amount of time I guess.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

mk is the better option because if you go marth someone can try to counter you. i think when people make these threads they are implying that they don't want to use MK, it's clear to me MK is always the best secondary to any character.

 

[Fenrir VII]

But at the same time... how many people pick up MK just because he's a good character? quite a few...

so there are a whole bunch of MKs out there, most of which will be better than you, if you focus on Fox as your main... (I realize this is overgeneralization, but bear with me, please)

And when considering that practically every character board rehearses and rehearses "How to beat MK"... with the Sheik boards feeling they do well, for example...

I just think that MK may not be the best choice... simply because most people know how to beat an MK by now, so you have to play better than the other person anyway (again with the overgeneralization... )


Whereas somebody like Marth, while a bit straightforward, is not as used, to people will not have just simply rehashed and rehashed how to beat him. most matchup discussion involving Marth basically follows the "be careful about zoning and try to gimp" gameplan, and leaves it at that... leaving Marth as a possibly better CP, if just because of fewer Marth players around...

It seems to me that Marth would be a solid choice against the three....

He's known to do well against pika
Roughly even, but has an advantage against Sheik
Anbd he can zone around the IC's grab game.

GW would seem like a very similar choice here... very solid.

 

[AvaricePanda]

But at the same time... how many people pick up MK just because he's a good character? quite a few...

so there are a whole bunch of MKs out there, most of which will be better than you, if you focus on Fox as your main... (I realize this is overgeneralization, but bear with me, please)

And when considering that practically every character board rehearses and rehearses "How to beat MK"... with the Sheik boards feeling they do well, for example...

I just think that MK may not be the best choice... simply because most people know how to beat an MK by now, so you have to play better than the other person anyway (again with the overgeneralization... )


Whereas somebody like Marth, while a bit straightforward, is not as used, to people will not have just simply rehashed and rehashed how to beat him. most matchup discussion involving Marth basically follows the "be careful about zoning and try to gimp" gameplan, and leaves it at that... leaving Marth as a possibly better CP, if just because of fewer Marth players around...

It seems to me that Marth would be a solid choice against the three....

He's known to do well against pika
Roughly even, but has an advantage against Sheik
Anbd he can zone around the IC's grab game.

GW would seem like a very similar choice here... very solid.

This.

The standard person is going to know the MK match-up much better than somebody who knows the Marth match-up.

Past generalizations though, the large majority of tournament players use only one or maybe two characters (a main and maybe one or two secondaries) and if you know your regions, you're going to know who mains who. So even though on paper, you can be countered if you use someone who isn't your secondary (although with your main and secondary combined, you shouldn't have too bad of match-ups), realistically, you're going to know who's who, and the people you probably don't know are the people who probably aren't as good.

If I was a Fox main and was going to play against Anther, would I pick MK because I'd be afraid he'd pick MK to counter my Marth secondary? No, that's silly. Anther is most probably going to use Pikachu and stick with him, so you can use Marth without worry of a 4-6 match-up.

And 4-6 match-ups are certainly not unwinnable. Just because you may have to play against an MK when you're a Lucario, doesn't mean you're going to auto lose. It just means you're at a slightly disadvantageous match-up, which is very winnable for either of you.

 

[Curaga]

Marth.

Yup.

 

[TKD]

Sheik+Zelda loses to MK, DDD and Marth
(Marth has a strong advantage)
( ! ) This is considering they know how to play the whole two char package well, if they don't, Sheik alone probably loses to many characters.

Pikachu loses to MK, Marth, Pit, Wario, G&W, ZSS, Diddy Kong, Olimar, IC, Lucario, Mario and Luigi
(Marth, G&W, maybe Pit have a strong advantage)

Ice Climbers lose to MK, Snake, Marth, Pit, Wario, G&W, Diddy Kong, Wolf, R.O.B. and Peach
(MK, Snake, Wario, G&W and R.O.B. have a strong advantage)

People think IC don't lose badly to MK, but they do 3/7. The problems are two factors:
- MK's hard to play well and people don't realize that the best MKs play a lot
- IC are even with MK if the MK doesn't know the match-up

Now to list the characters that beat all 3 of them (so you only need to pick up one character):
- Meta Knight
Counters IC
Small advantage vs Z+S
Small advantage vs Pikachu

- Marth
Counters Z+S
Counters Pikachu
Small advantage vs IC

If you want to COUNTER these 3 characters with as few characters as possible, play Marth plus any of IC's counters, or G&W plus any of Z+S's counters. Also I think Sheik and IC don't really counter Fox, but this thread is all about who beats the 3 characters mentioned.

 

[Fenrir VII]

Sheik+Zelda loses to MK, DDD and Marth
(Marth has a strong advantage)
( ! ) This is considering they know how to play the whole two char package well, if they don't, Sheik alone probably loses to many characters.

Pikachu loses to MK, Marth, Pit, Wario, G&W, ZSS, Diddy Kong, Olimar, IC, Lucario, Mario and Luigi
(Marth, G&W, maybe Pit have a strong advantage)

Ice Climbers lose to MK, Snake, Marth, Pit, Wario, G&W, Diddy Kong, Wolf, R.O.B. and Peach
(MK, Snake, Wario, G&W and R.O.B. have a strong advantage)

People think IC don't lose badly to MK, but they do 3/7. The problems are two factors:
- MK's hard to play well and people don't realize that the best MKs play a lot
- IC are even with MK if the MK doesn't know the match-up

Now to list the characters that beat all 3 of them (so you only need to pick up one character):
- Meta Knight
Counters IC
Small advantage vs Z+S
Small advantage vs Pikachu

- Marth
Counters Z+S
Counters Pikachu
Small advantage vs IC

If you want to COUNTER these 3 characters with as few characters as possible, play Marth plus any of IC's counters, or G&W plus any of Z+S's counters. Also I think Sheik and IC don't really counter Fox, but this thread is all about who beats the 3 characters mentioned.

Agree 100%...

I'm not sure that Sheik / ICs are "counters" per se... I don't find Sheik to be THAT hard of a matchup, to be honest... the lock is crappy, but it's basically a free 60% for Sheik... and she can't really kill out of it.. so then she still has to land a reliable kill move... and esp since it doesn't start at 0, I don't find her THAT scary, to be honest...

ICs are interesting... I would define "Major disadvantage" as anything 7-3 and above... which, I feel ICs have the easier time in this match so far perhaps 7-3..I'm abit mixed on it, though... they have interesting grab setups and priority... and are just interesting characters... What I find frustrating is that Fox can split them, but still is in danger of being CGed by popo until Nana gets back (if he's under 40ish). It's a tough match, but not unwinnable...

But at the same time, if you're arguing that ICs are not a counter, then you might inadvertently be arguing that Pika is not a counter, either... since they have similar grab range... and I feel that ICs have the better grab setups here... and ICs cg you 0-death, while PIka's shouldn't quite kill you...

I don't feel that a character can be a counter because of one grab... I mean, not for Fox. I understand that DK vs DDD is terrible, but Fox is much more adept at avoiding grabs, imo...

I still think it's easier for them to win than it is for Fox, but I don't think the matches are unplayable..

 

[AvaricePanda]

People think IC don't lose badly to MK, but they do 3/7. The problems are two factors:
- MK's hard to play well and people don't realize that the best MKs play a lot
- IC are even with MK if the MK doesn't know the match-up

I was under the impression that the match-up was pretty much even (and I know a bit about it, seconding ICs). MK has nothing that actually puts him in a major advantage in the match-up, and AFAIK, it's the only match-up in the MK boards that is listed as even. Top ICs and MKs seem to agree.

Ice Climbers probably wouldn't be beating top MK mains if the match-up was truly 7-3 MK.

 

[Force Frontal by Chicken]

Picking up a character that has a completely different play style to your main might not be a good idea. It's going to take a lot of time to learn the individual parts of their game plan to get good with a very different character. IMO the only characters that have a similar optimized play style to fox are Pika and MK so I would look to pick either one of them up... though you should just play your main unless your other characters are close to the same level that your main is...

and also imo, I think fox can have the upper hand in the sheik matchup if you learn to punish everything right. and I also think fox v pika is actually somewhat close because other than the cg, fox is better than pika in most ways and pika shouldn't be able to kill fox until around 200%... and after you get around 100% from the cg ****, he can't combo you so your damage will build up very slowly. You just have to focus on not getting hit by any move that could kill you.

 

[-Aka-]

I secondary Falco because his play style is so natural next to Fox's. He covers bad match ups surprisingly, Pika vs Falco isn't terrible. IC is camping, and running, if they can't grab you, it's winnable. But once they get a grab it's all over obviously. Sheik can go either way imo. My falco has gone up against rookies rob and I've won the majority of the matches just because of how smooth it is, I'll admit I've lost EVERY game against his rob with fox, but not falco. I've personally beaten a few g&w's with Falco just because I'm used to the match up, but hell we've all seen some crazy stuff like rookie beating out snakeee's zss. \

Picking a secondary to me is just picking a character with a smooth play style. I get that someone people play it as "such and such has a great match up against such and such I'll play them!" but if you're going like that, then just pick MK ffs. I don't care if you don't agree, I'm just voicing my opinion.

 

[718_ROOKI3]

My falco has gone up against rookies rob and I've won the majority

That was wifi bro. Dont judge games from wifi. My R.O.B. vs Falco offline is extremely good and till you play me offline, you wouldnt know if your falco can beat my R.O.B

My Secondaries
ROB - Beats Pika, Sheik, ICs
Toon - Beats Pika, Sheik, ICs
Wolf - Beats ZSS, Olimar
D3 - Beats Snake, Wario

This is how i play the game of fox cannot finish the job. and someone earlier said that picking up characters far off from your mains playstyle isnt good... that's false. it just takes time and dedication. I main fox but look at my secondaries, im confident they are good and have used them in tourny already. just be a smart player and your intelligence makes up for not maining "said" character(s)

 

[NeverKnowsBest]

How do you guys handle Game and Watch?

I get *****....