The Alabama Power Rankings: Image=protier

[*Cam*]

but you play ic's though. you cant really be a fair judge of people's skill. lol met did good against you cuz he has an up b lol

you 3 stocked me. but all you did was rush in a grab me three times. and i wasnt ready for it.
all you did was run back and forth and until you coudl grab me and i decided not to play patient cuz i thought that would be easily beatable. i just dont think that means that im a bad player who gets 3 stocked by people cositantly. so thats basically why i dont think ic's players can be a good judge of other people's skill if they only play ic's.
its like. i dont think you realizes you have a 0 to death and what that really means dude.

also, i think that kola is on a whole different level of play than met though. but like cam said, thats all i can say without sounding mean about it. its really not meant to be mean though and neither is the previous part of this post.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I wanted to say. ICs can't judge the skill levels of others very well. It's like, "Oh, that guy was a lot better at not getting grabbed 3 times."

Am I really? I wasn't aware my adaptability was that good lol.

I mean, you actually learn when you lose or have even a close match. Other people really don't do that as much as they should. I think Billy is that way too, although I know he has some habits that he never changes up.

 

[theONEjanitor]

i agree with that to an extent. like you can't beat Kola unless you switch up your gameplay. he'll figure it out.

thats something that I'm not the greatest at. i usually just try to wall of snake people from the beginning and keep momentum

also i make tons of button mistakes that cost me momentum

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Yeah, that's pretty much what I wanted to say. ICs can't judge the skill levels of others very well. It's like, "Oh, that guy was a lot better at not getting grabbed 3 times."

However, if "not getting grabbed three times" is a skill that is integral to success in competitive play, than it can be argued that it is a prerequisite for a certain level of ability.

Let's say that there's a player who regularly beats every character but Ice Climbers, and when he has to play a competent Ice Climbers, he loses every time, because "he's not good at not getting grabbed three times." If Ice Climbers are a popular character in the metagame (say, there are a handful of good ones that regularly go to the same tournaments), then how well the player can do against anyone else doesn't matter a whole lot, since that glaring weakness just means that virtually anyone could develop a pocket IC's and wreck the guy.

If it's really that easy to beat someone, then that player is either playing a deeply-flawed character (you be the judge), Ice Climbers are too good (trust me, they're not; they don't do so well in a fair amount of matchups), or the player is severely lacking in a skill that is necessary to succeed, which means he is not a very good player in that metagame. Either way, something needs to be fixed, and only the player can do that. "Skill" is subjective and doesn't necessarily have much to do with how good they are at winning.

It's sort of like if I started maining Ganondorf and started losing to people below my skill level because of it. You can say, "He's so good--If only he didn't play such a ****ty character," but I'm still not good in the current metagame if I don't fix my bad habit (in this case, it's using a ****ty character). If I were to hold on to Ganon and claim "I'm so much better than you! If only I didn't have this cripping handicap that I'm not willing to come to terms with or fix," then, who cares, since I'm not winning matches? That mentality would make me as bad as any scrub, really.

 

[skaterbaj]

I mean, you actually learn when you lose or have even a close match. Other people really don't do that as much as they should. I think Billy is that way too, although I know he has some habits that he never changes up.

^this lol. Bham tourney lookin hype.

 

[*Cam*]

However, if "not getting grabbed three times" is a skill that is integral to success in competitive play, than it can be argued that it is a prerequisite for a certain level of ability.

Let's say that there's a player who regularly beats every character but Ice Climbers, and when he has to play a competent Ice Climbers, he loses every time, because "he's not good at not getting grabbed three times." If Ice Climbers are a popular character in the metagame (say, there are a handful of good ones that regularly go to the same tournaments), then how well the player can do against anyone else doesn't matter a whole lot, since that glaring weakness just means that virtually anyone could develop a pocket IC's and wreck the guy.

If it's really that easy to beat someone, then that player is either playing a deeply-flawed character (you be the judge), Ice Climbers are too good (trust me, they're not; they don't do so well in a fair amount of matchups), or the player is severely lacking in a skill that is necessary to succeed, which means he is not a very good player in that metagame. Either way, something needs to be fixed, and only the player can do that. "Skill" is subjective and doesn't necessarily have much to do with how good they are at winning.

It's sort of like if I started maining Ganondorf and started losing to people below my skill level because of it. You can say, "He's so good--If only he didn't play such a ****ty character," but I'm still not good in the current metagame if I don't fix my bad habit (in this case, it's using a ****ty character). If I were to hold on to Ganon and claim "I'm so much better than you! If only I didn't have this cripping handicap that I'm not willing to come to terms with or fix," then, who cares, since I'm not winning matches? That mentality would make me as bad as any scrub, really.

Although I agree that a person should try their best to learn every matchup, I don't really think you can gauge someone's skill very well when you play them with ICs. You're basically judging them on 3 mistakes, whereas in almost any other matchup you have more encounters to judge them by. You get to judge more aspects of their gameplay other than if they are good at avoiding grabs.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Although I agree that a person should try their best to learn every matchup, I don't really think you can gauge someone's skill very well when you play them with ICs. You're basically judging them on 3 mistakes, whereas in almost any other matchup you have more encounters to judge them by. You get to judge more aspects of their gameplay other than if they are good at avoiding grabs.

Since the Ice Climbers are pretty one-dimensional, I agree; all it does is say, "How good is that person at fighting Ice Climbers?" The ability to do that is quite different from fighting any other character.

 

[shaSLAM]

However, if "not getting grabbed three times" is a skill that is integral to success in competitive play, than it can be argued that it is a prerequisite for a certain level of ability.

Let's say that there's a player who regularly beats every character but Ice Climbers, and when he has to play a competent Ice Climbers, he loses every time, because "he's not good at not getting grabbed three times." If Ice Climbers are a popular character in the metagame (say, there are a handful of good ones that regularly go to the same tournaments), then how well the player can do against anyone else doesn't matter a whole lot, since that glaring weakness just means that virtually anyone could develop a pocket IC's and wreck the guy.

If it's really that easy to beat someone, then that player is either playing a deeply-flawed character (you be the judge), Ice Climbers are too good (trust me, they're not; they don't do so well in a fair amount of matchups), or the player is severely lacking in a skill that is necessary to succeed, which means he is not a very good player in that metagame. Either way, something needs to be fixed, and only the player can do that. "Skill" is subjective and doesn't necessarily have much to do with how good they are at winning.

It's sort of like if I started maining Ganondorf and started losing to people below my skill level because of it. You can say, "He's so good--If only he didn't play such a ****ty character," but I'm still not good in the current metagame if I don't fix my bad habit (in this case, it's using a ****ty character). If I were to hold on to Ganon and claim "I'm so much better than you! If only I didn't have this cripping handicap that I'm not willing to come to terms with or fix," then, who cares, since I'm not winning matches? That mentality would make me as bad as any scrub, really.

i knew either you or cam was going to say something like this lol its true though good players should be adaptable and if you cant adapt you arent a good player in the true sense of what it means, and if you refuse to adapt, then you are just a johning scrub. so eehh, ic johns.

but i still think that ics cant be a fair judge of players, at least in AL. just a judge of who is better at the ic mathcup imo cuz they are such a stupid char

 

[theONEjanitor]

All this does is really reiterate a point that we've touched on before.

Skill doesnt matter. Or at least, 'skill' is a very multi dimensional concept. espcially in brawl where each matchup is so different. What matters is winning.

Like sometimes you can win matches just by frustrating your opponent. Reflex knows a little about this haha. does it mean Reflex is more skilled than his opponents in this case? You can't really say. But what we do know after all is said and done is Reflex made it to the grand finals of the tournament. and really that's what matters.

I pretty much think IC's are broken though. But I think IC's are like Metaknight in that, most people who play IC's aren't actually great at brawl, but they've developed a strategy that people don't know how to fight yet.

I don't really know who the good ICs are. and honestly even without chaingrabs, ICs are still a solid character, but i think a great ICs player is pretty much unstoppable. Except maybe by a Metaknight in a tournament where planking is allowed. in theory at least.

 

[TheSaintKai]

All this does is really reiterate a point that we've touched on before.

Skill doesnt matter. Or at least, 'skill' is a very multi dimensional concept. espcially in brawl where each matchup is so different. What matters is winning.

Like sometimes you can win matches just by frustrating your opponent. Reflex knows a little about this haha. does it mean Reflex is more skilled than his opponents in this case? You can't really say. But what we do know after all is said and done is Reflex made it to the grand finals of the tournament. and really that's what matters.

I pretty much think IC's are broken though. But I think IC's are like Metaknight in that, most people who play IC's aren't actually great at brawl, but they've developed a strategy that people don't know how to fight yet.

I don't really know who the good ICs are. and honestly even without chaingrabs, ICs are still a solid character, but i think a great ICs player is pretty much unstoppable. Except maybe by a Metaknight in a tournament where planking is allowed. in theory at least.

My ICs self agrees with this.
If someone, in theory, could master some incredible desynch strategies,
they'd be pretty close to unstoppable except by planking.

 

[shaSLAM]

saint, anything is possible! go for it and master the unthinkable lol

 

[theONEjanitor]

i always thought ICs had the same potential in melee.

to quote Husband

"THERES ****ING TWO OF EM!!"

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Ice Climbers will remain one of the best characters because of how dominant they are in a lot of matchups, but they are simply too limited in matchups that count (assuming the person actually knows how to play the matchup).

Meta Knight, Snake, Olimar, Peach, and Wario all have a solid advantage in the matchup. Diddy, Marth, ZELDA, and probably others that I haven't thought of all go at least even with the character. They all have methods of dealing with Ice Climbers' simple strategy.

 

[DanGR]

Ice Climbers will remain one of the best characters because of how dominant they are in a lot of matchups, but they are simply too limited in matchups that count (assuming the person actually knows how to play the matchup).

Meta Knight, Snake, Olimar, Peach, and Wario all have a solid advantage in the matchup. Diddy, Marth, ZELDA, and probably others that I haven't thought of all go at least even with the character. They all have methods of dealing with Ice Climbers' simple strategy.

???

Lies.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

???

Lies.

Okay, well, maybe not quite even, but it's close!

I would even argue for even, honestly.

 

[DanGR]

Okay, well, maybe not quite even, but it's close!

I would even argue for even, honestly.

No way dude. Shielding>Zelda.

What does she have? lol

Just run up to her and shield and she can't do anything but jump away and stuff.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

No way dude. Shielding>Zelda.

What does she have? lol

Just run up to her and shield and she can't do anything but jump away and stuff.

Well-spaced N-Air is pretty safe. Well-spaced F-Smash is safe. Hitting with the back of D-Smash is okay. When the shield is weakened, you can go for a U-Smash if you feel lucky.

Desynch stuff doesn't work because of Din's Fire, though it's not like Ice Climbers need them in this matchup.

Basically, use your best (only?) spacing moves and it goes to a standstill if the Zelda plays carefully enough. If Zelda manages to separate them, she can put the hurting on Nana and she makes coming together really hard in that case.

 

[DanGR]

Well-spaced N-Air is pretty safe. Well-spaced F-Smash is safe. Hitting with the back of D-Smash is okay. When the shield is weakened, you can go for a U-Smash if you feel lucky.

Desynch stuff doesn't work because of Din's Fire, though it's not like Ice Climbers need them in this matchup.

Basically, use your best (only?) spacing moves and it goes to a standstill if the Zelda plays carefully enough. If Zelda manages to separate them, she can put the hurting on Nana and she makes coming together really hard in that case.

If you're used to the animation, you can powershield fsmash on reaction and punish at any distance, spaced or not. If you mess up then you're just pushed back enough to walk away and try again or just sit there in your shield and see if she dsmashes next, which you can punish too. I mean, it's not like she's gonna try approaching you with anything. So just take your time trying to powershield it and you'll eventually get a grab.

I got really good at doing this a while back when a friend played strictly Zelda for about a year. It's an even matchup if the ICs player doesn't know what they're doing, imo.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

If you're used to the animation, you can powershield fsmash on reaction and punish at any distance, spaced or not. If you mess up then you're just pushed back enough to walk away and try again or just sit there in your shield and see if she dsmashes next, which you can punish too. I mean, it's not like she's gonna try approaching you with anything. So just take your time trying to powershield it and you'll eventually get a grab.

I got really good at doing this a while back when a friend played strictly Zelda for about a year. It's an even matchup if the ICs player doesn't know what they're doing, imo.

Even from a stutterstep to change up the timing? What can Ice Climbers punish with?

If you don't do so, your shield is a little weakened, allowing for more options from Zelda, such as N-Air.

 

[DanGR]

Even from a stutterstep to change up the timing? What can Ice Climbers punish with?

If you don't do so, your shield is a little weakened, allowing for more options from Zelda, such as N-Air.

If it hits your powershield at all you can punish with a dash-grab.

and I guess if you wanna try n-airing every time their shield is low, good luck. o.o

 

[TheReflexWonder]

If it hits your powershield at all you can punish with a dash-grab.

and I guess if you wanna try n-airing every time their shield is low, good luck. o.o

Well, other things work alright, too, so long as you don't become predictable. More F-Smash, U-Smash, Dash Attack, N-Air, Neutral-B, and Forward-B all have their place.

 

[Saki-]

Dan is posting?

I'm not too sure about the whole Zelda thing myself. Though in theory her smashes and specials sound as if they could eat nana if just for a moment. In the same way that an Ike fsmash can separate both rather well.

 

[BigLøu]

...how do ics lose to olimar lol

 

[I SEE YOU]

The sad truth is brawl is an EXTREMELY defensive game. If you really want to win, runaway. Sure mind games play a big part of this game, but mind games are really for baiting your opponent into doing something that won't work like approach you (which there really is no reason to ever do for 90% of viable characters). If people played slower and thought of their best defensive options, then they would win more often. Sure, it's not the most exciting strat, but we are playing Brawl after all.

 

[I SEE YOU]

...how do ics lose to olimar lol

They don't...

 

[TheReflexWonder]

The sad truth is brawl is an EXTREMELY defensive game. If you really want to win, runaway. Sure mind games play a big part of this game, but mind games are really for baiting your opponent into doing something that won't work like approach you (which there really is no reason to ever do for 90% of viable characters). If people played slower and thought of their best defensive options, then they would win more often. Sure, it's not the most exciting strat, but we are playing Brawl after all.

It's more about being smart than anything else. Playing it safe isn't always the best possible strategy. Defensive options are ridiculously good in Brawl, but it's about being smart with everything you have, rather than just abusing defensive options alone.

They don't...

Because you have ALL SORTS of practice in that matchup. :/

 

[I SEE YOU]

Because you have ALL SORTS of practice in that matchup. :/

JV 4 stock ~> I did not accomplish this, but i'm pretty sure you know what i'm talking about right?

 

[TheReflexWonder]

JV 4 stock ~> I did not accomplish this, but i'm pretty sure you know what i'm talking about right?

I really don't. You know my memory is terrible, though.

 

[TheSaintKai]

Okay, well, maybe not quite even, but it's close!

I would even argue for even, honestly.

I don't have experience in the match up,
but I agree with Reflex from simply theorycrafting.

Zelda's f-smash is straight up gay.
Maybe 55-45 ICs favor.
Eventually we corner Zelda, but if she can maintain enough pressure to get our shield down, she'll win out.

She can't use Din's when we're even at medium range though, without risk.
Naryu's shield pokes well enough that it'll knock one away.

But on the plus side, I don't think she can do that ******** d-tilt of hers on us.

 

[I SEE YOU]

I really don't. You know my memory is terrible, though.

You told me Atomsk beat Logic and it was a JV 4 stock. I think this happened at MLG DC, you were very adamant about how anyone could accomplish this feat vs Olimar; since he just has to throw a pikmin to damage his opponent lol. Olimar boards have Ics vs Olimar as a large disadvantage for Olimar and the Ics boards have the matchup at 6:4 Ics favor.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

You told me Atomsk beat Logic and it was a JV 4 stock. I think this happened at MLG DC, you were very adamant about how anyone could accomplish this feat vs Olimar; since he just has to throw a pikmin to damage his opponent lol. Olimar boards have Ics vs Olimar as a large disadvantage for Olimar and the Ics boards have the matchup at 6:4 Ics favor.

About how no one*

Hmm. I thought the matchup was in Olimar's favor...

That grab is kinda rough. As long as there's a platform to run to, I don't see why it would be worse than a slight disadvantage.

 

[BigLøu]

Lol. At mlg dallas I watched atomsk jv 4 logic, pretty sure the matchup isnt even

 

[TheReflexWonder]

Lol. At mlg dallas I watched atomsk jv 4 logic, pretty sure the matchup isnt even

Ah, well. I'll concede it. I don't have a lot of experience with Olimar.

 

[DanGR]

About how no one*

Hmm. I thought the matchup was in Olimar's favor...

That grab is kinda rough. As long as there's a platform to run to, I don't see why it would be worse than a slight disadvantage.

Blizzard wall.


And what's Olimar gonna do on a platform.

 

[*Cam*]

Ryker posted the tournament results: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=12057498#post12057498

 

[shaSLAM]

ive never seen ic's vs oli before. that mu would be ********

 

[I SEE YOU]

I hope you guys can figure out your Ics problem by saturday, because i will be chain grabbing niggas ALLLLLL DAYYYYYYYY!!!!

 

[TheSaintKai]

I hope you guys can figure out your Ics problem by saturday, because i will be chain grabbing niggas ALLLLLL DAYYYYYYYY!!!!

Represent.
Wish I could be there.

 

[Saki-]

Great, more chain grabs infinites.

Why not just go Dedede against me again bro? :D

 

[I SEE YOU]

Great, more chain grabs infinites.
Why not just go Dedede against me again bro? :D

Dedede vs marth mm?

 

[Saki-]

Sounds pretty tempting lol

Your price?