the effects of spikes and meteors should be reversed

[Kazuya]

By saying taht marths down-air is "nearly impossible" to hit with you have immediately lost all credibility.

I could point you to any number of pro videos showcasing the overwhelming power of this move when used by a skilled marth player.

On the other hand, try to find a tournament/high level play video of Mario even USING his forward air at all... It's funny, because Marths' is faster, stronger, and easier to get into.

Falcos down air is extremely strong and comes out almost immediately. If a move is that fast, it should not be that strong.

How is marios forward air, which is easily cancelled out of, has huge startup lag, and huge lag afterwards lag, as well as being one of the least powerful moves of its' type, even close to balanced?

In general, meteors are weak, and spikes are supreme. They should be reveresed, no question.

I mean, doesn't it make sense that the moves that are harder to hit with and harder to recover after should be stronger? I really don't see how anyone could disagree.

In fact, the basic reason that smash has such divergent tier lists is because the characters with the faster moves also have the stronger moves. Slower moves should be stronger, it is a basic fundamental of fighting game balance.

You make a decent point, but you can't exactly "reverse" a meteor... They can't magically make meteor attacks have a 1 second wait instead of 3... That'd be too broken too.

Sure Melee wasn't very well balanced with some of the main Nintendo Characters being quite sucky (Mario, Link, Gannondorf) - But hopefully Brawl will be different...

From the video I've seen, Link still looks to be slightly slow, below average running speed - But his attack's do certainly seem stronger.

Mario too, his forward A in the Air looks to be a lot stronger (he kills Pikachu and Kirby in the one hit I believe)

And FOR GOD SAKE SAKURI, RELEASE SOME MORE **** INFO ON BRAWL ALREADY!!

 

[Kazuya]

This new player crap is annoying. So Brawl should be made easier just for the sake of new players? If so they can go ahead, make Brawl worth playing for a year and not worth using for MLG tournaments, much less a Smashfest.

How is making an already easy to pick-up-and-play game easier supposed to help anyone? You want perfect balance? Play chess.

I don't know how you expect balance to be easy when there are 26 characters and around 40 moves for each character? If they make the game any 'easier' half of the moves will be broken.

My advice: Don't wanna get owned by a spike? don't get knocked off the stage. Simple.

Oh yeah, and about that comment, "creating the game solely for good players to own new players or people who don't dedicate every second of every day to the game."

I find that ********, it's like saying the guy that picked up the game yesterday should easily be able to put up a good fight with the guy that picked it up 3 years ago. And if you think I play smash all the time you are dead wrong, I don't even have a working gamecube to play on so... yeah...

I believe Red Exodus has said it all.

Tell me, what game have you played for the first time ever that you were able to beat a person that had been playing it for 3 years?

Tekken? Don't think so, unless you go Eddie... Thats Noobs way to heaven.
StreetFighter? Comon, those super moves... An "average/above average" player would kill a noob.
DoA? DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

DoA... Now be honest with yourself - have you seen any DoA game in the last 5 years get a 8/10 or higher? No.. Because all they care about are breasts and looks, not gmaeplay. Simple AAB combo does 100 Damage...

Anyway, do you see what I'm getting at? I sucked at Tekken + StreetFighter, and other games too... Got beat off my cousins all the time, but then I bought the games, played them once a day for a hour or so for a while, an eventually put up a good fight against them. I never won, not till I had played Tekken after a year, but still - being able to them down to there last 15% is an achievement when you've been playing for 2 months, and they have for 5 years...

Fact is, practise and you'll eventually get where you deserve to be. Ifind it offensive not only to the player, but also to Sakuri/Brawl itself that you think somebody should be able to just simply pick up the game and beat somebody thats played it for over 3 years...

Thats my 29 cents...

 

[Red Exodus]

Good to see someone shares my point of view. That's why I don't play too many fighting games. I played DoA before and it wasn't that great, half of the moves were button smash moves. I think DoA s overhyped, the newest one scored an average of around 5 by EGM, which is saying something.

I tried Tekken [can't remember which one but it wasn't 5] and liked it, I just need to practice in order to not get my *** whooped by people that know the game.

That is the kind of game worth playing, one with consistency and a learning curve, not something that is a pick-up-and-play game. I'd only tolerate that if it was easy to learn, hard to master like SSBM. If it's easy to learn and easy to master then it lacks depth, which will cause it to lack replaybility.

 

[Kazuya]

Good to see someone shares my point of view. That's why I don't play too many fighting games. I played DoA before and it wasn't that great, half of the moves were button smash moves. I think DoA s overhyped, the newest one scored an average of around 5 by EGM, which is saying something.

I tried Tekken [can't remember which one but it wasn't 5] and liked it, I just need to practice in order to not get my *** whooped by people that know the game.

That is the kind of game worth playing, one with consistency and a learning curve, not something that is a pick-up-and-play game. I'd only tolerate that if it was easy to learn, hard to master like SSBM. If it's easy to learn and easy to master then it lacks depth, which will cause it to lack replaybility.

I'll admit it, at first when I played Super Smash Bros 64, I actually said I hated it and wanted to play Perfect Dark instead, but literally, after an hour, I figured out how to jump back from a strong attack back onto the ledge an etc - and from then it continued. Then after 2 years of playing that, along came SSBM

It is all about practise man. What the other person is suggesting that he should be able to go into a physics exam without ever doing Physics AT ALL and be able to pass it and get a better grade than a person who's been studying Physics for months and months...


It's common sense, you get what you deserve, you get what you work for - you get what you live for.

 

[LinkGadra]

This new player crap is annoying. So Brawl should be made easier just for the sake of new players? If so they can go ahead, make Brawl worth playing for a year and not worth using for MLG tournaments, much less a Smashfest.

How is making an already easy to pick-up-and-play game easier supposed to help anyone? You want perfect balance? Play chess.

I don't know how you expect balance to be easy when there are 26 characters and around 40 moves for each character? If they make the game any 'easier' half of the moves will be broken.

My advice: Don't wanna get owned by a spike? don't get knocked off the stage. Simple.

Oh yeah, and about that comment, "creating the game solely for good players to own new players or people who don't dedicate every second of every day to the game."

I find that ********, it's like saying the guy that picked up the game yesterday should easily be able to put up a good fight with the guy that picked it up 3 years ago. And if you think I play smash all the time you are dead wrong, I don't even have a working gamecube to play on so... yeah...

Somehow, I don't believe that switching the effects of two types of move (which are really the same type, just different effects) would really allow some one who has never played Smash before to beat some one who has been playing for years.

That said, I for one certainly hope that Brawl maintains the "easy to learn, impossible to master" vibe that has been with the Smash series since Smash64.

Just my two cents.

 

[Knight-errant]

For those that are yelling at almightypancake's post:

I don't think that his point was that brawl should be way easier, or that a newbie should be able to do just as well as an experienced player. This is what he said brawl should be: "more balanced, fun, interesting, and competitive." Those all sound like good things to me. Nothing in there about newbies being as good as advanced players.

What he's saying is that brawl isn't being made only for us hard core people, but that the audience is wider than that. Brawl should be better for everyone, advanced and newbies alike, and not better for one or the other.

(feel free to correct me if you think I'm wrong).

 

[Kazuya]

lol, Knight good on ya for defending AlmightPancake, but comon, way I see it, thats what he was implying lol.

I admire you for wanting brawl to be balanced fun interesting an competitive, but the PAL version of Melee is like that...

It's so fun to play with my friends, interesting as so much is going on and well competitive when I'm playing my old chum Omar (me an him have had some of the most nerve wrecking sweat breaking matches ever).

What I'm saying is, Melee is all of the above, and Brawl will be too. But it will stop being balanced if a newbie is able to beat a pro. I know it sounds quite ironic but think of it as my previous analogy about passing exams lol.

 

[Dylan_Tnga]

For those that are yelling at almightypancake's post:

I don't think that his point was that brawl should be way easier, or that a newbie should be able to do just as well as an experienced player. This is what he said brawl should be: "more balanced, fun, interesting, and competitive." Those all sound like good things to me. Nothing in there about newbies being as good as advanced players.

What he's saying is that brawl isn't being made only for us hard core people, but that the audience is wider than that. Brawl should be better for everyone, advanced and newbies alike, and not better for one or the other.

(feel free to correct me if you think I'm wrong).

Those are good hopes for Brawl, but realize that Melee already achieved that. Its fun for the casual players who have no inkling to the game's true potential, and its fun for those of us who push it to the limit. Its not like melee is a complicated game, at -all- even the ''advanced techniques'' are really, really easy. I bring up once again the point that my friends 12 year old sisters peach is good enough to compete in a melee tournament. I think she might even make power rankings with a bit more training.

So yeah, if nintendo does to Brawl what they did in melee in terms of fun/skill balance then there won't be a problem.

The concern for the professional community, or at least for a few of us is that they MIGHT remove some of the techniques that dominated melee, specifically wavedashing and airdodging.

But I don't see any justifiable reason for them to remove those techniques so I have my fingers crossed that they will still be in there. But if wavedashing isnt in, like I always say Ill still play brawl but Im not gonna waste my time trying to compete because my melee game is incredibly wavedash intensive for spacing. I could NOT space presicely or get as many grabs in without wavedashing and the techniques related to wavedashing and I would therefore suck.

 

[Knight-errant]

I totally see what you're saying about brawl not being as good without wavedashing. However, what if there are new techniques in brawl that didn't exist in melee? What I mean, is wavedashing wasn't really intended by the creators of melee (as far as I know), so there will probably be unintended new advanced techniques in brawl right? Could those possibly make up for the loss of the wavedash (although wavedashing will probably still be in there anyway)?

 

[Dylan_Tnga]

I totally see what you're saying about brawl not being as good without wavedashing. However, what if there are new techniques in brawl that didn't exist in melee? What I mean, is wavedashing wasn't really intended by the creators of melee (as far as I know), so there will probably be unintended new advanced techniques in brawl right? Could those possibly make up for the loss of the wavedash (although wavedashing will probably still be in there anyway)?

I for one am very excited about what kind of new ''unplanned'' techniques and exploits will be found in Brawl, and who will find them. I doubt anything could replace wavedashing though, it has a million and one uses and like I said earlier I couldn't space perfectly without it, I could still *space* myself, but wayyy slower than I could with wavedashing.

 

[Knight-errant]

Good point. So it's going to have to be that wavedashing still exists, or that there will be something very similar to it (I have no idea what though; but something that allows you to posisition yourself, as you were saying Dylan).

 

[TastelessRamen]

Come on, let's be realistic here...

Falcos spike: one of the fastest moves in the game, both before and after, the entire thing is a spike,, as well as being one of the most powerful moves in the game and comboing exceptionally well...

Marios meteor: one of the slowest moves in the game, both before and after, it has a tiny window to spike, as well as being one of the weakest moves for its' delay and comboing okay under very specific circumstances.

Why is it so crazy so suggest that maybe, just maybe... this state of affairs are less than balanced? And that it might make just a little bit more sense if the move with more delay and lag on it was... I don't know... better?

It's not even an issue of meteors versus spikes, it's slow versus fast. And yes it's true, a game this vast is difficult to balance, but making the fastest moves in the game also the strongest will never even get it CLOSE to balanced.

Every character in the game should be viable, why is Sheiks forward air, which is faster, more mobile, has less lag, and is more likely to kill you AND combos well even in the same game as Bowsers forward smash, which yes... is pretty strong, but isn't mobile, isn't any stronger than Shieks forward air (it might send you farther but the angle is terrible), and is nearly impossible to pull off?

Open your eyes, if you want brawl to be balanced the first thing that needs to be done is to give the slow moves better effects/higher damage. This is a fundamental aspect of any fighting games balance and it is something that Smash missed completely.

Now, spikes are generally fast, meteors are generally slow. It follows that meteors should be generally more effective/strong than spikes because they are harder to hit with and more punishable. Where is the contention here?

 

[Knight-errant]

So what you're saying is that ideally, the game will be so balanced that it's impossible to make a tier list because no character will have unbalanced advantages against another? Makes sense, and sounds good to me. It's not fun if you're favorite is mewtwo, or kirby (etc) but you can't realistically play with them because they are simply at a disadvantage.

Yeah, that sounds cool.

Although, it's kind of nice to just have characters that are unbalanced (towards bad, not good) and just have fun with them (i.e. pichu, link, kirby).

 

[Perfect Hero]

Long post

I believe Red Exodus has said it all.

Tell me, what game have you played for the first time ever that you were able to beat a person that had been playing it for 3 years?

Tekken? Don't think so, unless you go Eddie... Thats Noobs way to heaven.
StreetFighter? Comon, those super moves... An "average/above average" player would kill a noob.
DoA? DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

DoA... Now be honest with yourself - have you seen any DoA game in the last 5 years get a 8/10 or higher? No.. Because all they care about are breasts and looks, not gmaeplay. Simple AAB combo does 100 Damage...

Anyway, do you see what I'm getting at? I sucked at Tekken + StreetFighter, and other games too... Got beat off my cousins all the time, but then I bought the games, played them once a day for a hour or so for a while, an eventually put up a good fight against them. I never won, not till I had played Tekken after a year, but still - being able to them down to there last 15% is an achievement when you've been playing for 2 months, and they have for 5 years...

Fact is, practise and you'll eventually get where you deserve to be. Ifind it offensive not only to the player, but also to Sakuri/Brawl itself that you think somebody should be able to just simply pick up the game and beat somebody thats played it for over 3 years...

Thats my 29 cents...

Uh, no. First of all, the A button does a throw. . . I do not believe you can do AAB since that would result in 2 consecutive throws and a kick. Do you even play Doa(at a competitive level)?

Second of all, the combos arent simple, not more then Virtua Fighter but still isn't simpler then Smash. Lets see, I'll take a combo here just to justify this. Hayate(a male character zomg) has to do 8p 4kk ppp 7k on High Counter Hit just to almost reach 100 points. By the way, since I assume you don't play Doa. High Counter Hit is pretty hard to land. There is, Normal Hit(a normal hit...), Counter Hit(When blows trade, and the one with more priority wins), and High Counter Hit when you make your opponent whiff an attack or throw. Each successive hit gives a higher reward. Also, I find it ironic how Smash is as simple or even simpler then Doa in the technical skill department yet you decide to bash it. I think HLP in both games use their mind to win mostly since the general consensus here is Mindgames>Tech Skill.

Third, reviews don't matter. But since you bothered to bring it up.
Doa 4 8.8 http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/deadoralive4/review.html
Doa 3 4.3/5 which would translate to 8.6/10, http://www.gamepro.com/microsoft/xbox/games/reviews/18220.shtml
Doa 3 8.2 http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/105/Dead-or-Alive-3/p1/
Doa U/2U 8.8 http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/doaonline/review.html
Interesting?
Oh yeah, Doa 4 has only been out for less then 2 years, and top players are winning consistently. Also to add to my "consistency", I played Doa for 4-5 months, attended Online Tournaments and placed 3rd at my highest. None of my friends can beat me because they do not play it serious. Now on Smash, my friend has the game since it came out and I played it for 1 week, mastered all the basic tech skill and beat him. Yes he was a scrub but he did play for years. That renders your 3 years arguement useless or I'm just unique, I don't know. I do know though, that both Smash and Doa takes skill. This community(or just you) bashing it is just like the SRK community bashing this one without and base. Scrubs will always lose to serious players in any worthwhile game. So please, do not make a mindless bashing out of one of my favorite games.

On to second bolded part, it should be noted if they are playing competitively or casually. It is possible to beat someone who played for years without knowledge of a higher level for the game.

Okay, on to the actual topic, meteor smashes imo, are find the way they are. At higher percentages, I believe it becomes harder to recover, take Darkrain vs. Kaizer for example. The people doing the commentary for the game when Kaizer meteor canceled Darkrain(C. Falcon)'s dair about 4-5 times. Kaizer did survive but Darkrain still had the advantage. Spikes are find too, my other friend(who play seriously) mostly get off Marth's dair from a ken combo and even then, it is pretty hard to do with di. My cousin mains falco and mainly uses the dair-shine to break the opponent's shield instead of ko ing with it. I believe that is more important than the ko potential of the dair itself.

Besides, that isn't even the strongest point of the character itself. Falco does alot of pillaring and shine to dair combos + SHL while Marth has his range and tipper and excellent Dash dance + throw game.

Side Note: Don't believe in cheap.

 

[Stryks]

Absolutely agree, hell spikes shouldnt be in brawl IMO, being spiked whithsuch small percentages is unfair for those who dont use spike using characters... glad I got that off my chest XD...

 

[LinkGadra]

Come on, let's be realistic here...

Falcos spike: one of the fastest moves in the game, both before and after, the entire thing is a spike,, as well as being one of the most powerful moves in the game and comboing exceptionally well...

Marios meteor: one of the slowest moves in the game, both before and after, it has a tiny window to spike, as well as being one of the weakest moves for its' delay and comboing okay under very specific circumstances.

Why is it so crazy so suggest that maybe, just maybe... this state of affairs are less than balanced? And that it might make just a little bit more sense if the move with more delay and lag on it was... I don't know... better?

It's not even an issue of meteors versus spikes, it's slow versus fast. And yes it's true, a game this vast is difficult to balance, but making the fastest moves in the game also the strongest will never even get it CLOSE to balanced.

Every character in the game should be viable, why is Sheiks forward air, which is faster, more mobile, has less lag, and is more likely to kill you AND combos well even in the same game as Bowsers forward smash, which yes... is pretty strong, but isn't mobile, isn't any stronger than Shieks forward air (it might send you farther but the angle is terrible), and is nearly impossible to pull off?

Open your eyes, if you want brawl to be balanced the first thing that needs to be done is to give the slow moves better effects/higher damage. This is a fundamental aspect of any fighting games balance and it is something that Smash missed completely.

Now, spikes are generally fast, meteors are generally slow. It follows that meteors should be generally more effective/strong than spikes because they are harder to hit with and more punishable. Where is the contention here?

This is exactly what I was trying to say! TastelessRamen, I bow to your superior wordplay.

 

[BrTarolg]

there are some people in this thread who simply want brawl to be another melee.

deal with it, because its not going to be.

smash 64 was great, and loads of people cried cause of the new speed changes, mass of characters and move reworking. people cried because of throws not going far enough, and not being able to combo the opponent from 0-100% using aerials in one go.

well TOO BAD. melee isnt perfect, its far from it. anyone who beleives melee to be perfect is just clouded in heaps of arrogance, and probably has no idea just how unbalanced melee is, because theyve never played melee to the level where you get 4 stocked and combod from 0-death reguarly by a better player.

yes, peaches downsmash is incredibly overpowered. same goes for fox's shine. its moves like that which make one character better than the others. frankly, the top tier matches are just spamming as much of the imbalance as you can on the other person.

i mean, if JUST shiek didnt exist, the entire list would swap around - youd end up having loads of roy players come out all of a sudden and stuff like that.

---

yes, its probably a good idea to balance the spikes out. though, i think in brawl they should just make every move a spike, but just give it different hitstun, with increasing amounts as your percentages go up, so some spikes are a bit better than others, slower, etc.

 

[Knight-errant]

I agree; there will definitely be differences in Brawl because it's a totally different game. We'll probably see as many differences between these two as there were between 64 and Melee. I'm looking forward to seeing what changes they made. I mean, it really wouldn't be fun if it was just another Melee with new characters would it?

 

[Red Exodus]

Balance my ***

there are some people in this thread who simply want brawl to be another melee.

deal with it, because its not going to be.

smash 64 was great, and loads of people cried cause of the new speed changes, mass of characters and move reworking. people cried because of throws not going far enough, and not being able to combo the opponent from 0-100% using aerials in one go.

well TOO BAD. melee isnt perfect, its far from it. anyone who beleives melee to be perfect is just clouded in heaps of arrogance, and probably has no idea just how unbalanced melee is, because theyve never played melee to the level where you get 4 stocked and combod from 0-death reguarly by a better player.

yes, peaches downsmash is incredibly overpowered. same goes for fox's shine. its moves like that which make one character better than the others. frankly, the top tier matches are just spamming as much of the imbalance as you can on the other person.

i mean, if JUST shiek didnt exist, the entire list would swap around - youd end up having loads of roy players come out all of a sudden and stuff like that.

Well duuuh, if the person is better do you honestly expect to beat them? Do you think it's fair for someone practice and get good only for some casual people to come in and fight toe to toe?

If you think balance is as good as it sounds play Runescape [MMORPG]. The game is so retardedly [meh] balanced that you rely more on luck than skill [as in levels] I've seen people play that game for months and years hoping they get "better" and that their hard work pays off. But nope, it doesn't. People still get owned by noobs and all of the 'advantages' are useless by the time people get to the level [require to get that said advantage].

So next time you get your *** handed to you, give the person a handshake and say "your hard work paid off".


Oh yeah, and tiers don't mean crap [or as much as you think]. Give Shiek to a newb and they'll suck. Give Fox to a newb and they'll suck. Give Shiek to a casual player and they'll suck. Give Fox to a casual player and they'll suck.
When I say they'll suck they won't combo well, they won't KO efficently, nothing. To be good in Smash you have to apply basic knowledge.

If you don't know what to use WDing with it will be useless to your character. People own because they master the basics. They learn SHFFLing [and L-cancelling obviously], they learn WDing, they learn JCing, they learn moonwalking, they learn chain grabbing, they learn edgehogging/gaurding.
By learning those [non character specific] techniques [like wobbling and chain grabbing] they can apply it to other characters, and that is where the game gets deep.

They don't just pick a top tier and automatically own either, you have to learn the character. Take for instance, someone who [by some divine intervetion] has never seen Fox in SSBM for his enitre SSBM 'career'. He's learned to do all of the advanced techniques and learned to play as other characters well but, for unexplainable reason, has never seen Fox in the game.

He doesn't know how Fox moves work, his lag times, nothing. Now I suppose you say he'd own correct? Well he wouldn't. He'd SD a lot but SHFFling fairs off the stage, he'd dair off the stage, he'd illusion Fox off the stage and get hit when the lag of illuson Fox starts and he would only use the shine to project things, since he doesn't know Fox's shine stuns until he learns Fox's useless moves and his useful moves.

So when you talk about balance take into consideration that no 2 people are evenly matched. It's not possible.

 

[Perfect Hero]

Tiers are assuming the players are at an even skill level.

This game does need balance, anyone who doesn't admit that must be a fanboy. In general, Fox's tools or any other tools the High-Top Tier characters have are just better than the tools the lower tier character have.

Also note, its impossible to have a perfectly balanced game while having tons of variety. The point is to get that balance close to enable all characters to be used in the tournament.
Take Virtua Fighter series and Guilty Gear series. Those are incredibly balanced to a point that lower tier characters can win tournaments. That is balance.

 

[Red Exodus]

But no one is even. There isn't a way to measure skills exactly. Most people measure skill by opinions, opinions such as someone can only be good if they SHFFL, WD etc. perfectly and know how to use them, or a person is good if they can place in position 'x' 'x' number of times, and has been to 'x' tournaments.

No 2 people play the same way either, as similar as some players seem there's always a difference [in most cases, many differences] that separates them. It's like DNA, I've heard somewhere that the differences between 2 humans' DNA is around 98-99%, which is understandable, after all too much of a difference would show up physically and mental, like deffects.

Yes Smash is unbalanced, but not to the point where everyone rushes to one character or tournaments ban characters like Akuma, in one of the SFs where he was a glitch or somethin along those lines. At least every character is beatable, the most overpowered thing in this game would have to be either Peach's dsmash or Shiek's dthrow.



EDIT: The reason people complain about tiers isn't because the characters have certain advantages, they complain because someone better beat them. Like I said, no character is unbeatable, only people behind the characters.

 

[Perfect Hero]

But no one is even. There isn't a way to measure skills exactly. Most people measure skill by opinions, opinions such as someone can only be good if they SHFFL, WD etc. perfectly and know how to use them, or a person is good if they can place in position 'x' 'x' number of times, and has been to 'x' tournaments.

No 2 people play the same way either, as similar as some players seem there's always a difference [in most cases, many differences] that separates them. It's like DNA, I've heard somewhere that the differences between 2 humans' DNA is around 98-99%, which is understandable, after all too much of a difference would show up physically and mental, like deffects.

Yes Smash is unbalanced, but not to the point where everyone rushes to one character or tournaments ban characters like Akuma, in one of the SFs where he was a glitch or somethin along those lines. At least every character is beatable, the most overpowered thing in this game would have to be either Peach's dsmash or Shiek's dthrow.



EDIT: The reason people complain about tiers isn't because the characters have certain advantages, they complain because someone better beat them. Like I said, no character is unbeatable, only people behind the characters.

Yeah, I have to agree with you there. Smash is unbalanced but not horribly. What SSBB's goal should be the balance of GGXX or VF's calibur.

I think akuma was intentionally made that powerful where even the developers admitted to it I think. One of the Play To Win articles mentioned it.

 

[TastelessRamen]

Sorry guys, smash IS horribly unbalanced.

If you go to a tournament you will see the same four or five characters, and even that is stretching it.

You might see someone use a Luigi, or a Bowser, or a mario, and they might do pretty well, but they won't win.

The game is FAR, FAR, from balanced. A well played Sheik can literally completely immobilize Link. It doesn't matter how good Link is, he can't move, Sheik wins.

This is the definition of unbalance.

So you all know, the characters you will see at the tournament are...

Fox,
Falco,
Marth,
Sheik,
sometimes Peach.

Maybe Captain Falcon or Ganondorf if you feel lucky enough to spy a unicorn.
If you do see a Mario, he will be owned pretty fast and probably switch characters soon afterwards.

The tier list is not a product of people who are worse than others. It may not be entirely accurate, but it is the product of constant experimentation by the best players in the game.

And if you're so knowledgable on the game that you can say otherwise, I would LOVE to see you win a high level tournament with Bowser or Yoshi.

It cannot be done.

 

[Red Exodus]

Maybe that's because I'm not a Bowser or Yoshi player. One of my oldest mains is Fox yet I'm not much better with him compared to my other mains like Samus, Captain Falcon, Marth, Mario or ICs. It takes skill to handle each character, but more people have played characters like Fox and Shiek and found more tactics and exploits.

If smash was played without advanced techniques, SHFFLing, WD, JC, etc. you'd see how balanced it is, but you can't expect the game to be perfectly balanced when it was meant to be played so casually.

P.S. SSBM is that unbalanced? Play SSB64, or watch a video with a good Ness, Kirby or Pikachu player and you'll see broken. SSBM is improved on SSB64s mistakes.

 

[Perfect Hero]

Sorry guys, smash IS horribly unbalanced.

If you go to a tournament you will see the same four or five characters, and even that is stretching it.

You might see someone use a Luigi, or a Bowser, or a mario, and they might do pretty well, but they won't win.

The game is FAR, FAR, from balanced. A well played Sheik can literally completely immobilize Link. It doesn't matter how good Link is, he can't move, Sheik wins.

This is the definition of unbalance.

So you all know, the characters you will see at the tournament are...

Fox,
Falco,
Marth,
Sheik,
sometimes Peach.

Maybe Captain Falcon or Ganondorf if you feel lucky enough to spy a unicorn.
If you do see a Mario, he will be owned pretty fast and probably switch characters soon afterwards.

The tier list is not a product of people who are worse than others. It may not be entirely accurate, but it is the product of constant experimentation by the best players in the game.

And if you're so knowledgable on the game that you can say otherwise, I would LOVE to see you win a high level tournament with Bowser or Yoshi.

It cannot be done.

The point is they are still beatable and the goal of SSBB should be to balance all the characters. YES, it is an uphill battle but not entirely impossible. See Fumi Versus Bombsoldier. A Yoshi player beats a Falco player. That is just one example of a lower tier character beating a Top Tier character. Both players aren't some random scrub either.

Also, what you are comparing this "horribly" unbalanced game to anyway?