Smashboards Community Voted Tier List: Version 4 COMPLETE! Break for a few months...

[FamilyTeam]

People really overexaggerate the differences in MUs Marth and Lucina have. No MU that Marth does well in will not be positive for Lucina, and no MU Lucina sucks at will be any better for Marth, and vice versa.
To be honest, in my opinion, Marth is Top 12 at best very optimistically, while Lucina is still around the Top 17 range. There's a small gap them between them at best.

 

[Bowserboy3]

No MU that Marth does well in will not be positive for Lucina

Just dropping this part here.

The sooner people realise this, the better.

 

[Phuckyew]

Lucina isn't that great tbh, there are hardly any solo Lucina mains for a reason. She's a counterpick character that when combined with Marth does well. If you leave marth completely out of the equation she drops down fast. To all people that claim Zero thinks Lucina is top-tier stop being delusional. He didn't say that, he puts them together because if you can play marth you can play Lucina and in certain specific match-ups Lucina does out-preform Marth. Imo Lucina and especially Dark pit shouldn't be on the list at all but instead should be grouped.

Lucina isn't so great? Are you kidding me? When was the last time you saw a waifu with such an ability and movement with swords? Lucina puts the game on another level, and we will be blessed if we ever see a character with her skill and passion in the game again. Marth wins majors. Cloud wins majors. Lucina wins your heart. You can keep your statistics. I prefer my body pillow.


-

EDIT: Tsugood

 

[FamilyTeam]

You're giving people too much credit assuming they're gonna drop the "But Tipper" mentality anytime soon. It's sad, but this is what has made it hard to discuss this character from day one. Especially when so many people think they understand enough about Marth based solely on what they see MKLeo doing.

 

[Bowserboy3]

It makes me laugh how people just assume Lucina loses/does worse in MU's compared to Marth because she lacks a tipper like Marth.

Marth doesn't win MU's because he has a tipper mechanic people. It has never been this way in past games and is not the case in this game either.

Marth wins MU's because of two vital aspects about his character; range and frame data.

Example: Marth doesn't give Mario trouble in Melee and Brawl because he has a tipper mechanic. Marth does well in those MU's because the combination of his quick frame data and his high range gives Mario trouble; getting in, off stage play, safely punishing. All of these are hard for Mario because of Marth's ability to threaten with a long ranged disjointed hitbox. Marth doesn't beat Mario because he can get randomly tippered at 60% and die, for example; Marth beats Mario because he can succesfully limit what Mario can do thanks to his range and frame data. Tippers have no effect on how the MU plays out.

Let's put this into Smash 4 context: Marth still gives Mario trouble in this game; while his frame data has been made, shall we say, less dumb/oppressive, it's still fantastic (such as having one of the lowest overall landing lag/aerial start up totals in the game), and still does what it did in past games. Marth's range has been increased too, so the fact about range still stands true too. This is why Marth gives Mario trouble.

Now, let's look at Lucina. She's a clone of Marth. Lucina has identical frame data to Marth (before people say "but her range is shorter", it's a minuscule difference that has almost no effect on gameplay. Plus, you can still argue that her range is actually still higher than Melee and Brawl Marth too, so there's that). What does this tell us? It shows us that as Lucina has all the things that allows Marth to win MU's, she can do just as well as he can.

The only difference between both the characters are the tipper mechanic Marth has and Lucina lacks.This simply means that Marth can potentially reap rewards earlier than Lucina can (and in the same vein, it also means he could "fail" [fail to KO] for longer than she can). However, no player is able to space tippers 100% of the time. As such, while you can argue Marth can hit a tipper Fair and KO at 90% near the ledge when Lucina cannot, you can also argue that Marth could miss-space that tipper off stage and not KO at 80%, when Lucina doing the same thing in the same situation would land a successful KO.

Essentially, the tipper mechanic rewards AND HINDERS players in certain situations. Lucina lacking said mechanic does not make her an instantly inferior character that has no use in the metagame. The tipper mechanic does arguably make Marth the better choice in the longrun (when you consider the important things such as KO potential), but it certainly DOES NOT invalidate Lucina as a character.

Tippers do not win MU's folks, which is why any MU Marth can deal with, Lucina can also deal with.

 

[FamilyTeam]

Oh no, Bowserboy, hold the bloody phone, you're gonna hurt somebody with all those reality checks you're slapping on people's faces!
People don't realise there's more to the matchup than just landing a tipper and killing. But people borderline don't want to accept that.

 

[Bowserboy3]

I must be one of the only Marth mains on the planet that sees the merits to Lucina.

I wonder if that's because... I realise why Marth wins/loses MU's? Hmm...

 

[Emblem Lord]

With each patch the tipper mechanic mattered less and less.

Now Marth should be higher than Lucina simply because his ceiling will always be higher.

But how these two actually win matches. What you want to do? I mean Marth uses a sword. Lucina uses a sword. So you do sword stuff with them to win.

So...that's it.

The **** is so hard to figure out.

Where ever Marth is, put Lucina one spot behind him and call it a ****ing day.

 

[Bowserboy3]

To be safe, averting the course of discussion a bit.

I'm going to update on Tuesday sometime. Be sure to make any last minute edits to your votes between now and then.

High Tier and Top Tier are going to be real interesting to see the votes on IMO.

 

[Phuckyew]

High Tier and Top Tier are going to be real interesting to see the votes on IMO.

++++++++++++

 

[L1N3R1D3R]

No upvotes or downvotes, as I would ideally swap three of these characters with three of the tier below. (I'll add an upvote as a countervote to Lucas or the Pits later if need be.)
EDIT: +1 If he moves down, Ness and the Pits should, too. But since only one character can move, he shouldn't go down.
Don't understand why people are putting at the top. I admit she's good for mostly the same reasons as Marth, but the three characters I put above her have more consistent and good results than her.


EDIT 1: Moved Lucas to the bottom.

EDIT 2: +1 Alright, I've been convinced.

EDIT 3: Moved Lucario to the second spot mostly because of Tsu.

Moved to the second spot because Tsu is actually crazy.

 

[Frihetsanka]

Moved to the second spot because Tsu is actually crazy.

I still think Corrin is better as a character, but Lucario might be high tier too. Tsu is amazing though.

 

[Phuckyew]

Moved to the second spot because Tsu is actually crazy.

IT HAPPENED, TSU BEAT ZERO 3-1

Edit: GF runback...
GAME 1: HE NERVOUS
GAME 2: Clean dunk from Zero
GAME 3: Downloaded tsu.exe?
GAME 4: GF SET 2 I STILL BELIEVE
**** THIS GAME

 

[DMWN]

The people who are downvoting Lucas are the same people who voted Shulk to where he is now
Safe to say this list is skewed but I'll continue to play

Edit:
Lucina is also very good, she () and Ness () are top 15, if you want to challenge me then DM me

 

[Frihetsanka]

The people who are downvoting Lucas are the same people who voted Shulk to where he is now
Safe to say this list is skewed but I'll continue to play

Edit:
Lucina is also very good, she () and Ness () are top 15, if you want to challenge me then DM me

I agree that Lucas should stay in this tier, but he won't get enough downvotes to move down anyway. Lucina might get enough to move up though, so if I were you I would consider changing my upvote to Lucina (since Ness has pretty much 0.1% chance of moving up at this point).

How is Ness top 15 though? He loses so many MUs, some even 40-60.

 

[FamilyTeam]

The people who are downvoting Lucas are the same people who voted Shulk to where he is now

Too high or too low, you mean?

Anyway, I really think Lucina should move up to ask close to Marth as possible as the time goes on.

 

[Frihetsanka]

Too high or too low, you mean?

Too low, probably.

Anyway, I really think Lucina should move up to ask close to Marth as possible as the time goes on.

If Marth will end up at the bottom of top tier (which I assume will happen, but perhaps it won't), then Lucina should be at the bottom of high tier. It's kind of strange to have a character who is really similar to a top tier character be mid tier.

 

[DMWN]

I agree that Lucas should stay in this tier, but he won't get enough downvotes to move down anyway. Lucina might get enough to move up though, so if I were you I would consider changing my upvote to Lucina (since Ness has pretty much 0.1% chance of moving up at this point).

How is Ness top 15 though? He loses so many MUs, some even 40-60.

Yeah, guess I'll change my vote.

I meant that Shulk was put too high, but maybe I'm wrong there.

I believe Ness is top 15 based on what he's already done, his presence above some other characters who are higher, and his foolproof toolset. Sure, his approaches and recovery aren't great and it's tough for him to land, but there are ways around all three. A lot of the matchups you'll hear about, such as Sheik and Lucina, aren't actually all that bad, and Marth is (in my opinion) doable as difficult as it is. Rosalina is his worst matchup, but it's probably the only 60/40 he has, the rest being 55/45.

Once the representation picks back up, so will the results. In the past few months I've become one of Chicago's best Nesses, so there's a mini-example of what I'm talking about.

I just think a lot of characters belong below Ness either because they've done less or they're just not very good and have always been significantly overrated.

 

[Frihetsanka]

I meant that Shulk was put too high, but maybe I'm wrong there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ga2LjmZlQ Consider watching this set.

Once the representation picks back up, so will the results. In the past few months I've become one of Chicago's best Nesses, so there's a mini-example of what I'm talking about.

I take it you view the tier list as kind of a description of what the meta is right now? Personally, I consider it a list of character viability, so while results help prove a point, I'm more interested in theory (such as MU charts). Ness may have some decent results, but he wins very few relevant matchups and loses many. What do you think his MU chart might look like?

 

[Emblem Lord]

Yeah, guess I'll change my vote.

I meant that Shulk was put too high, but maybe I'm wrong there.

I believe Ness is top 15 based on what he's already done, his presence above some other characters who are higher, and his foolproof toolset. Sure, his approaches and recovery aren't great and it's tough for him to land, but there are ways around all three. A lot of the matchups you'll hear about, such as Sheik and Lucina, aren't actually all that bad, and Marth is (in my opinion) doable as difficult as it is. Rosalina is his worst matchup, but it's probably the only 60/40 he has, the rest being 55/45.

Once the representation picks back up, so will the results. In the past few months I've become one of Chicago's best Nesses, so there's a mini-example of what I'm talking about.

I just think a lot of characters belong below Ness either because they've done less or they're just not very good and have always been significantly overrated.

I do not think you understand how match-ups impact a characters tier placement.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Tier Lists are always snapshots of the current meta game, never about trying to guess the future. A character's viability is what you can see at the moment, not theory. If you aren't looking a tier list in the mindset of "description of the meta at the time it was made", you're looking at it wrong.

That's why results should have a fairly heavy weight. Not a 1:1 "read off the total results and make it a list" chart, that would be pretty inaccurate. They is flexibility room for analyzing how many of those placements for a character were lower level compared to international tournaments, if its only in one region or multiple, how much if it was one time pocket use in tournaments, comparing the results with their estimated MU chart (lets face it, there's no such thing as a really accurate MU chart for a character in a game this large with so many regions that lean in different directions for various things), etc. And of course you don't instantly change a tier list based off of a sudden spike in results, you gotta wait to see if it holds out over the next 6 months (otherwise you end up on misguided hypetrains like Palutena). But it should be reasonably close to the ranking of characters based on pure results.

 

[Frihetsanka]

Tier Lists are always snapshots of the current meta game, never about trying to guess the future. A character's viability is what you can see at the moment, not theory. If you aren't looking a tier list in the mindset of "description of the meta at the time it was made", you're looking at it wrong.

This is an interesting perspective. I disagree with it, though. Tier lists should act as guidance on how strong characters actually are, not based on something so finicky as results. Sure, results can provide guidance, but we can't base it fully on that.

Look at Melee, for instance. if Hungrybox were to drop Jigglypuff (or stop playing Melee altogether), would she still be a top 5 character based on results? Top 6? Top 8? I doubt it. Should she drop to high-mid, or maybe even low-mid? Naw. Tier lists are useful as guides to give people an overview of which characters are viable and which are less viable. Going by results is problematic since there are so many factors and characters are sometimes underused. Jigglypuff in Melee is largly carried by Hungrybox, for instance.

Of course, this perspective forces us to try to gauge how much potential a character has. Sometimes we overrate characters, and sometimes we underrate characters.

 

[Browny]

As the person who started this process back in 2009...

Tier lists should be a list which shows the likelihood of a high level player that uses any given character achieving better results over an extended period of time than all of those beneath them had they mained them instead. It is a ranking of viability and nothing else.

If we took 58 people with equally strong fundamentals in fighting games who had never played smash before, and gave them all the same ability to practice/attend tournaments while each using a different character, the tier list would represent the order of results from best to last of each of those players.

People often say that I have too much of a focus on results and believe 100% results matter. No, theory has its place too but ONLY in the absence of results. Dark pit is a great example. He has some of the worst representation of the entire roster, even below Mii fighters yet the theory for him being around the same viability as Pit is very strong. If a character has poor results (not absent, but poor) yet stronger theory then they deserve to be ranked lower as the poor results prove poor viability.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

This is an interesting perspective. I disagree with it, though. Tier lists should act as guidance on how strong characters actually are, not based on something so finicky as results. Sure, results can provide guidance, but we can't base it fully on that.

Look at Melee, for instance. if Hungrybox were to drop Jigglypuff (or stop playing Melee altogether), would she still be a top 5 character based on results? Top 6? Top 8? I doubt it. Should she drop to high-mid, or maybe even low-mid? Naw. Tier lists are useful as guides to give people an overview of which characters are viable and which are less viable. Going by results is problematic since there are so many factors and characters are sometimes underused. Jigglypuff in Melee is largly carried by Hungrybox, for instance.

Of course, this perspective forces us to try to gauge how much potential a character has. Sometimes we overrate characters, and sometimes we underrate characters.

If Hungrybox dropped Jigglypuff and nobody else stepped up: she should absolutely drop on the tier list. She would no longer be a threat in any tournament, that is not a top 5 character. Drop to bottom of mid? No, there is proven theory behind her still with no risk of a patch disrupting that. But the metagame of Melee as a whole would continue its slow crawl forwards without Jigglypuff. Over time she would drop farther and farther as other characters shined more.

Also that general situation has happened in SSB4 multiple times. Happened to Ness and Ike: they both lost a good chunk of their top level mains and then got kicked down the tier list despite the fact they were both getting good results overall in comparison to where people were saying they should be. Look at ZSS, Nairo and Mars aren't doing quite as well and now people are clamouring for ZSS to not be in the top 10. ZSS as a character still might be amazing, probably still has top 5 potential, but if she can't get results she doesn't deserve the spot. Not if other characters are proving themselves to be more important to the meta at this very moment.

 

[Frihetsanka]

If Hungrybox dropped Jigglypuff and nobody else stepped up: she should absolutely drop on the tier list.

Now, you see, I strongly disagree with this. I quote: "In gaming, a tier list is a list that ranks all characters based on the strength of their fighting abilities and their potential to win matches under tournament conditions, assuming equal skill on the part of each player." Source: https://www.ssbwiki.com/Tier_list

A tier list is not merely a representation of what the current meta looks like, but rather how strong characters are in the meta. You could make a list of what the current meta looks like, but that'd be different from a tier list and should be called something else (perhaps a "Results list" or "Meta list"?). Overbuff makes such a list for Overwatch and calls it "Meta report", such as this: https://www.overbuff.com/blog/2017-02-22-overwatch-hero-tier-list-and-meta-report-season-3-review

Also that general situation has happened in SSB4 multiple times. Happened to Ness and Ike: they both lost a good chunk of their top level mains and then got kicked down the tier list despite the fact they were both getting good results overall in comparison to where people were saying they should be.

No, they got kicked down because DLC characters and patches made them weaker comparatively to the rest of the cast, and they (especially Ness) were overrated to begin with.

Look at ZSS, Nairo and Mars aren't doing quite as well and now people are clamouring for ZSS to not be in the top 10.

They'd probably be wrong, then. ZSS is clearly top 10. People should try to look at a character's tools and MU chart and not just results. Take Duck Hunt for example. Duck Hunt didn't magically get better just because a few Duck Hunt mains traveled to the US. Duck Hunt was already decent, but many people didn't realise it until GENESIS 4 (I did though).

What purpose does a tier list serve? Several, I believe. For one thing, many people find it entertaining to theory-craft. The most important part, however, is that it can help players understand which characters are strong and viable at a higher level and which aren't. If we focus too much on results, then we are likely to underrate some characters (such as Lucario prior to Frostbite, or Corrin right now, or Duck Hunt prior to GENESIS 4) which would make the tier list less useful as a guide. If we turn the tier list into a meta report it'll be much less useful as a guide and, I'd argue, much less fun to make as well.

Meta reports are fine. They're not quite the same thing as tier lists though. We're making a tier list here, not a meta report. A tier list for the game in every country, not a meta report for the top level North American metagame.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

A tier list is not merely a representation of what the current meta looks like, but rather how strong characters are in the meta.

That's one and the same.

The meta is what's going on right at this very moment, nothing more. We have zero ability to guess the future. Zero. Not even a slight hint. There are previous metas, and there are current metas. Those are the only metas we can observe. There are no observable future metas. When you try to claim you know how the future will go you get silly claims. Peach in Brawl was claimed to be "underrated" and "on the verge of breaking out" for years. She got placed higher than her results and MU chart said she should because of "potential" and these claims of what she'll do in the future.

Never really happened. Because assuming we know what is going to happen in the future is pointless. Which in turn makes a tier list that tries to include those ideas pointless. Pikachu had the same thing: got dragged up too high because of overzealous theorycrafting that never came true (coughESAMclaimingPikawentevenwithMKcough).

Another problem with using potential or heavy theory for characters is: the bar keeps moving. Every time a character fails to live up to their potential people can just say "they need more time" or "they're breaking through, its almost there" pretty much indefinitely. How long do you plan on giving Corrin a freeride despite the fact they have never lived up to people's expectations? One more tier list? Two? Several years? People are not willing to let go of the idea of "potential", thus characters get overrated and stay overrated as long as its acceptable to use "potential" in a tier list.

This is why a character's fortunes are closely tied to their ability to get results at that moment in time. I once again point towards Palutena: considered bottom 5. Several people started to do well with her, most people started to consider her mid tier. Her results fell off, she's back down to low tier but the higher bit of it. That is exactly how a tier list should function. It would have been worthless back when she was bottom 5 to place her in mid tier because of "potential", she wasn't showing it at the time thus she had zero right to be there. On the flip side, people shouldn't have been sticking her into mid tier quick so quickly because it takes time for counter play to develop.

"Meta Report" is just a different way to say "Tier List". Blizzard uses their own terminology for things, as I've found out sticking with Hearthstone for several years.

 

[Frihetsanka]

The meta is what's going on right at this very moment, nothing more.

Indeed. Tier lists and meta reports share some similarities, yet they are not the same thing. If Dabuz drops Rosalina because she's not as fun as Olimar, then of course Rosalina's results will drop, but she's still a top tier. If Nairo decides to drop Zero Suit Samus in order to main Bowser, then ZSS doesn't drop out of top tier and Bowser doesn't become top tier. In a meta report, that might happen, but the actual characters remain the same.

Another problem with using potential or heavy theory for characters is: the bar keeps moving. Every time a character fails to live up to their potential people can just say "they need more time" or "they're breaking through, its almost there" pretty much indefinitely. How long do you plan on giving Corrin a freeride despite the fact they have never lived up to people's expectations?

Two things: First, yes, there will be disagreement. We'll have to deal with it, very few people will have exactly the same order when it comes to tier lists. That's fine. Second: I would argue that Corrin has already lived up to some of the expectations. If you look at Das Koopa's list her results are not bad. She has yet to live up to top 15 or top 12, but top 20-22? Sure.

I once again point towards Palutena: considered bottom 5. Several people started to do well with her, most people started to consider her mid tier. Her results fell off, she's back down to low tier but the higher bit of it. That is exactly how a tier list should function.

She should not have been bottom 5 but a lot of people underestimated her.

"Meta Report" is just a different way to say "Tier List".

No, it's not.

"A tier list is decided based on the analysis of the following:

• The metagame and the effectiveness of the characters' strategies
• Each character's moveset and statistics
• Each character's matchup spread
• Each character's tournament results"

A meta report only cares about tournament results (and in some cases, usage stats, such as the Overbuff meta report). If Captain Falcon is, say, the top 10 most used character then he'd be top 10 on Overbuff (if they did Smash), but he wouldn't be top 10 on a tier list. Results matter, but they're not everything.

 

[FamilyTeam]

,,,,,,,,

+1

It has been a while, but I decided to cast my vote here in the first time in months.
Really, the sooner we all agree Marth and Lucina are very close to one another, the better.

 

[Bowserboy3]

UPDATING...

 

[Bowserboy3]

UPDATED

Lucina moved up into the High Tier. There were enough votes to warrant her moving up into the next tier.

Lucas was the only other character worth looking at, with 5 - votes, but Lucas actually averaged out in the 8th place, above Dark Pit (who incidentally is not next to Pit, in 7th place), which invalidated those voted in the longrun (not that they'd have made a difference anyway).

I'm personally kind of sad to see Lucario only placing 4th overall that round. I feel he should have totally been either 1st or 2nd when you consider he's the only character of that select bunch to almost win a national (as ZeRo stated, it was pretty much a major with all the top names in attendance).

However, I am glad to see Peach moving up in people's perspectives. One of my wishes before I started this list was to see Peach move up (while I believe Lucario should be above her and Corrin, I think her placement here is spot on).

And for a moment, I was worried Lucas would place above Ness, but luckily Ness averaged out above him in the longrun. I personally see no reason to have Lucas above Ness. Like DMWN said, Ness is just fundamentally a better character. Lucas's MU's get blown up more than they should; people forget SDI practically breaks a lot of what he can do, much more so than it does, say, Bayonetta, where "just SDI" is an "argument".

And just for the record, I'd personally put Luigi either side of Falcon; not sure which position would suit him better, but that's where I'd see him.

Anyway, we can move onto the High Tier now. This is where things get exciting.

Spoiler: Rules

With the naming phase out of the way, we can focus on each individual tier. In these rounds, we go one tier at a time and settle on a proper order for the characters.

What's more, during these rounds, you can even vote to move ONE character Up or Down a tier (new tiers will not be created at the top or the bottom).

With Mid Tiers all voted on, we can move onto the High Tier.

High Tier:,,,,,,,

For your information, is at the end of this tier, but characters that move a tier from the last round cannot be voted on. As such, please vote on the selection above (essentially High Tier minus Lucina).

Your vote can be these characters in whatever order you like. For example, you could have Ryu at the top, the 2nd place, the last place, wherever you like. Just be sure not to add or remove characters in this tier.

Here's an example vote

High Tier:,,,,,,,
+1

Here, this voter wants to see Ryu go up a tier, so Ryu is placed at the top of the tier, and is given a -+ vote. The opposite is true for giving a - vote; if the voter wanted to vote Ryu down for example, he would be placed at the bottom and would be given a - vote. However, remember you can only + or - vote one character.

The character with the a noticeable amount of + or - votes will move up or down to the next tier. However, they cannot be voted upon in the next round, and will be left in a set of brackets to symbolise this: ( ).

Spoiler: Current List as of 4.20

Top Tier:,,,,,,,,,
High Tier:,,,,,,,()
Mid Tier (+) [LOCKED]: ,,,,,,,()
Mid Tier [LOCKED]:,,,,,,,
Mid Tier (-) [LOCKED]:,,,,,,
Low Tier [LOCKED]:,,,,/,,,
Bottom Tier [LOCKED]:,,,,,

My vote for this round:


+

Unsure just yet whether I want to see Marth go up into top tier or simply stay at the top of this one... I don't really believe Marth is outright better than ANY character in the top tier, so I want to see him stay in the 11th place, but I do feel classing him as a "top tier" is the right move.

I may change this later down the line. Hopefully he'll just stay 11th...

 

[L1N3R1D3R]

+1 He deserves it at this point. MKLeo and Mr. E have done impressive things with him, and more and more top players including komorikiri have picked him up. He really has no major* weaknesses besides somewhat bad landing and recovery, both of which he can make up for with his range and tipper.

Meta Knight is second until proven otherwise. He absolutely demolishes floaties, including proven threat Rosalina and rising threat Peach, and even outside of those matchups he has shown to be ridiculous through players like MKLeo, Abadango, Tyrant, Ito, Oatmeal, and many more.

From Ryu on downward is bound to change based on what happens in the near future, they're all so close in viability. Ryu is on the top of them for now, though, given what his players have done with him recently.

 

[Zerp]

()
+1

 

[FamilyTeam]

He really has no weaknesses besides somewhat bad landing and recovery, both of which he can make up for with his range and tipper.

• Okay frame data
• Terrible point blank range game
  
• Terrible disadvantage state
• Highly predictable recovery pattern
• Bad ability to land, which makes him extremely suscetible to getting juggled
• Makeshift kill throw
• Rage murders his only throw conversion

Don't say he "really has no weaknesses". That's just really not right.

 

[Bowserboy3]

• Okay frame data
• Terrible point blank range game
  
• Terrible disadvantage state
• Highly predictable recovery pattern
• Bad ability to land, which makes him extremely suscetible to getting juggled
• Makeshift kill throw
• Rage murders his only throw conversion

Don't say he "really has no weaknesses". That's just really not right.

In terms of frame data, both Marth and Lucina's frame data is still actually very good (such as posessing one of the lowest landing lag totals in the game, as well as one of the quickest aerial start up totals, just a couple of examples).

At point blank range, Marth has specific combos and setups thanks to his sourspot. Of course, point blank range is never really the ideal way to play him (I'm sure you know that's pretty much stating the obvious), but at said range, he's far from terrible. In terms of getting a KO at said range, this can be an issue, however.

Again, both Marth and Lucina's disadvantage states are far from terrible, not when they have tools like frames 1-5 intangible Up B's to escape pressure (platforms forgiving). Remember disadvantage can also apply to things like being stuck at the ledge, of which both of them have less trouble than most characters thanks to their Jab (which can be used to bait reactions and stuff attempts of the opponent; again, positive I'm stating the obvious to you at this point - you know Lucina just as well as I know Marth).

Both their recovery pattern is predictable, but for a predictable recovery, it's quite tough to mess with safely, thanks to it's ability to shark through the stage, stage spike, and it's speed. Marth and Lucina players should ALWAYS save their jump and recover from as low as possible. This is very hard to mess with.

Landing is a notable issue. However, they are not without usable mixups; B reversing Shield Breaker to instantly reverse momentum is a boon for them to have, and not something situational.

Their kill throw isn't what I would call "makeshift". It simply becomes more threatening with rage. It's usually more useful for Marth, however.

Dthrow followups becoming harder/untrue with rage though is a notable issue, as little as it is (when you can get just as much damage off of a Dancing Blade, for example).

I know you, and you know full well you were overexaggerating there, but I 100% understand the intent.

Marth does indeed have some weaknesses people, let's not be silly.

 

[Deleted member]

+1

 

[FamilyTeam]

Yes - people don't really know me for my subtlety.
It's terrible in the scope we are currently looking at, not terrible "in general".
If Marth is gonna be compared to the big boys @ Top 10, then let's actually discuss him as such.

 

[Frihetsanka]

+1

Edit: I moved Meta Knight up two spots.

 

[Emblem Lord]

Yes - people don't really know me for my subtlety.
It's terrible in the scope we are currently looking at, not terrible "in general".
If Marth is gonna be compared to the big boys @ Top 10, then let's actually discuss him as such.

ughhguhg

Please keep posting like this.

Tired of smashboards naivete when comparing characters to top tiers.

If you can't beat disadvantage for free like Sheik and some others then your disadvantage state sucks and that's the bottom line. The more objectivity the better.

 

[Kirby Dragons]

-

 

[Phuckyew]

(/)

+

If you were to google "ssb4 tier list" two years ago, the first result would take you to eventhubs, where Marf was ranked somewhere around 13th. In 2015, this placement was considered ridiculous. Marf was a character who suffered from poor frame data, pathetic tipper sweetspots, awkward knockback angles, and a lowered damage output from his previous appearances. All these factors resulted in poor theory, and subsequently, poor tournament placings. Things were looking grim for the Hero King...

But then lord Soccereye saw something traumatizing... an average For Glory match. It was your standard Marf vs. Shiek match-up, nothing particularly uncommon; but what happened next was nothing short of horrifying. After Marth misspaced his jab and experienced a fair and balanced 605 frames of ending lag, the Sheik player managed to land a grab. Just like that, Samurai's flashbacks began.

For those of you who don't know, I must now provide some context. It may come as a shock to many that Sm4sh was NOT the first Smash Brothers game created by Massive Hero Sack of Rye. In fact, he released three titles prior to this installment. While one of these titles was perfect in every way, he once published a horribly unbalanced, glitchy, and chaotic mess. This disaster is called Super Smash Brothers Melee (which I will call SSBM for short). When rushing out this piece of ****, Masquerading Shamrockguy forgot to patch a few things, including but not limited to: ground sliding, furries, a starving african child, and a stupid ninja bit*h with a ******** down throw which can CHAINGRAB PIKACHU UNTIL 90% UNLESS YOUR DI IS PERFECT, AT WHICH POINT YOU'RE ONE UP SMASH AWAY FROM DEATH ANYWAYS SO WHAT THE FU*KING POINT? Anyways, this ninja is Sheik, and she could do this to Marf too. 16 years later, I'm happy to report this “game” ultimately met its fate; only being played in the homes of alcoholics, in the country of Sweden, and on Saturday night EVO slots.

Anyways, back to our For Glory match. Sheik followed this down throw with a string of 70 fairs, carrying Marf offstage until caving in his skull with a bouncing fish at 70%. This bout of PTSD proved too much for Mashaquille O'Sakurai, and so he got to patching... And patch he did. With his improved range, power, frame data, tipper, and introduced with the sole intention of to get sh*t on and called bottom tier, I think it's time returned to his rightful home on the tier list. Let's be honest, a Smash Bros top tier isn't complete without him.