The Initial Culture Shock of Characters.

[BentoBox]

I think people are creative and like to make up stories to get attention.

SEE, WE KNEW ALL ALONG THAT NO ONE THOUGHT PEACH WAS A THREAD SO WE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF IT.


You really just kept playing peach because you liked her, and you got lucky other peach mains figured out ATs for her. You never intentionally tried to abuse others lack of acknowledgement for her, nor did anyone ever think she was not a threat.

Quit making up stories.

You can ask pretty much any player who doesn't have much experience against Peach and they'll be unanimous upon the fact that you really cannot play against her like you do against the rest of the cast. Her ability to float and bait just makes her that much more different. Of course, people catch on eventually, but still, to this day, people do find her awkward to play against. Or maybe it's just my scene.

 

[Sky`]

I think people are creative and like to make up stories to get attention.

SEE, WE KNEW ALL ALONG THAT NO ONE THOUGHT PEACH WAS A THREAD SO WE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF IT.


You really just kept playing peach because you liked her, and you got lucky other peach mains figured out ATs for her. You never intentionally tried to abuse others lack of acknowledgement for her, nor did anyone ever think she was not a threat.

Quit making up stories.

I think somebody is just jealous, because they never really thought about anything in that complexity.

Tool.

 

[Yuna]

BTW, to anyone who's delusional enough to think otherwise. Peach is still not much of a threat. She's just different and takes getting used to, like Jiggylpuff was in Melee. However, unlike Jigglypuff, she's not very good and not much of a threat.

 

[Geist]

This whole "culture shock" works against people who aren't experienced with the matchup, sure. I know, because I commonly used Zelda as a trump card in melee and it worked wonders.
But that won't get you far enough when you start facing people who study every mathcup and excel at the game. It's just not enough for a character that only gets any wins by surprising your opponent. A character that can't keep up with the rest of the game is just going to slowly shrink down the tier list.

The overall metagame of Brawl is still young obviously. The Brawl tier list is going to undergo some big changes. In the first few tier lists of melee, Mario was considered high tier...
yeah.

 

[.Marik]

Killing people who think that Yoshi is insanely bad is the most beautiful thing in the game. God I love chaingrabbing MK's.

It is indeed a wonderful thing.

But yeah, knowing your matchups is an important factor for performing well at Brawl/Melee.

That's why you study study study and practice practice practice.

 

[CrAzYdRuNk]

This whole "culture shock" works against people who aren't experienced with the matchup, sure. I know, because I commonly used Zelda as a trump card in melee and it worked wonders.
But that won't get you far enough when you start facing people who study every mathcup and excel at the game. It's just not enough for a character that only gets any wins by surprising your opponent. A character that can't keep up with the rest of the game is just going to slowly shrink down the tier list.

The overall metagame of Brawl is still young obviously. The Brawl tier list is going to undergo some big changes. In the first few tier lists of melee, Mario was considered high tier...
yeah.

Know every match-up doesn't necessarily mean you can play against it well. Like Diddy; many people lose all because they can't figure out what to do against bananas, or what to do with them. Those who know how to play against bananas, but haven't played with them much will still have problems. I can know how to counter MK better then anyone else and still lose horribly. Knowing isn't a way to win, familiarity and adaption are.

People not knowing how to play against a certain character is one of the biggest reasons characters excel. Really it always will be. Its even true with a well-known character; a large movement in metagame happens, and the match-up changes.

 

[Yuna]

I can know how to counter MK better then anyone else and still lose horribly. Knowing isn't a way to win, familiarity and adaption are.

Except the post you quoted didn't use the term "knowing", it used the terms "experienced [people]" and "[people who] study every match-up".

"Experience" and "Study every match-up" could very well have the hidden implication of practicality (practical experience, practical studies).

 

[Geist]

"Experience" and "Study every match-up" could very well have the hidden implication of practicality (practical experience, practical studies).

Exactly.
Someone who studies every matchup is already at a significant advantage when playing against a character who relies on their unfamiliarity to gain an advantage.
If a player is unskilled at the matchup, but knows what to do, that knowledge can give them an immediate edge.

 

[BentoBox]

BTW, to anyone who's delusional enough to think otherwise. Peach is still not much of a threat. She's just different and takes getting used to, like Jiggylpuff was in Melee. However, unlike Jigglypuff, she's not very good and not much of a threat.

Do you seriously -still- feel the need to jump the gun everytime Peach is discussed? How's your twilight princess doing?

 

[CrAzYdRuNk]

Except the post you quoted didn't use the term "knowing", it used the terms "experienced [people]" and "[people who] study every match-up".

"Experience" and "Study every match-up" could very well have the hidden implication of practicality (practical experience, practical studies).

They never said anything about the better players being experienced, just good at the game. That doesn't mean they are experienced, especially when it comes to match-up. Studying match-ups gives you more than not, but it isn't going to help you much. Practical studies? That would mean having experience with that match-up, which is exactly what you need to be. I was thrown off by the fact that they never said anything about the better players being experienced.

No matter what though it all comes down to this; being experienced with a match-up will make it easier to play. Being inexperienced with a match-up makes it harder. So characters that aren't played as much as the next currently excel.

 

[Yuna]

Do you seriously -still- feel the need to jump the gun everytime Peach is discussed? How's your twilight princess doing?

Yeah, she's pretty crap. Which is why I'm relying more on Marth and Toon Link nowadays and am going to drop Zelda eventually. It's called being smart. Nevertheless, Peach has never been a threat and she isn't one now, no matter how many Peach fanboys are tooting her horn because, oh, two Peaches have been able to do kinda OK-ish with her.

They never said anything about the better players being experienced, just good at the game.

Let me quote the post you quoted and replied to:

This whole "culture shock" works against people who aren't experienced with the matchup, sure. I know, because I commonly used Zelda as a trump card in melee and it worked wonders.
But that won't get you far enough when you start facing people who study every mathcup and excel at the game. It's just not enough for a character that only gets any wins by surprising your opponent. A character that can't keep up with the rest of the game is just going to slowly shrink down the tier list.

He mentions experienced/not experiences ones and people who study every match-up.

The "hidden" implication here is that using a "weird" character will only work if your opponent is inexperienced with the match-up, i.e., has very little knowledge and experience about the match-up, how to fight the opponent, how to handle themselves, etc.

I don't get where you're getting your interpretations, which sometimes are in direct contradiction to the post you quoted, from.

Studying match-ups gives you more than not, but it isn't going to help you much. Practical studies? That would mean having experience with that match-up, which is exactly what you need to be.

Pray tell, how do you study match-ups? Do you only read about them online and then do nothing in Training Mode or against friends? Do you not go into the game to study how the opposing character(s) work? Do you sit down and write 10-page strictly theoretical essays about the opposing character(s)?

This isn't theoretical astrophysics.

I was thrown off by the fact that they never said anything about the better players being experienced.

Being a good player does not guarantee experience with every single match-up. Besides, it is irrelevant because we're discussing "weird" characters and "culture shock".

BTW, don't think I didn't see whut u did thar. In the post of yours I quoted, you complained about how "knowing a match-up" doesn't mean you'll be able to fight it well despite the fact that the post you quoted didn't say "knowing match-ups" but instead "experience" and "study".

Then you tried to turn it around as you being miffed at the post not mentioning that good players will usually have experience with most if not all match-ups. You just tried to backtrack a blatant error on your part by trying to switch the subject to sometimes else entirely.

And you might have gotten away with it to, if it weren't for the meddling, um, me and my imaginary doggie.

 

[The Real Inferno]

I have a solution for Peach. It mostly involves standing in place with Snake and winning. I'm not sure a character with such large, glaring weaknesses should ever be considered for anything about mid-tier. Sure, a dedicated pro can do well with her, but at the pinnacle of the meta game, some characters just don't cut it anymore. I mean sure, I might use Ness against some random Toon Link, but when I fight Santi, I'm going to fall back on something a bit more reliable.

When it comes to matchup knowledge, it can really have a large impact on a character's effectiveness. For instance, I have quite a bit of Quality Meta Knight and Snake experience. Because of this, I'm confident enough to go into a matchup against them with less popular choices, capitalizing on the fact my opponent probably doesn't practice the matchup, while I have. this works fine and well until I play someone like, say Azen. Well obviously I'm not going to trump someone of that skill level with what I consider nothing more than the tournament equivilent of a parlor trick. People of that calibur don't fail to matchup inexperience.

 

[Yuna]

I have a solution for Peach. It mostly involves standing in place with Snake and winning.

Oh noes! But Peach can just... umm... what can she do against Snake, anyway? Spam turnips while dodging his jillion projectiles, hoping to pull up 10 bob-ombs in a row and hit with all of them?

 

[Brinzy]

ignoring the fact that I'm a bad player, I'm pretty sure that I won't place well in tournaments because Zelda is so unbelievably straightforward to fight that it hurts.

 

[The Real Inferno]

Oh noes! But Peach can just... umm... what can she do against Snake, anyway? Spam turnips while dodging his jillion projectiles, hoping to pull up 10 bob-ombs in a row and hit with all of them?

One time a peach player pulled a bob-omb, stitches and a beam sword all out in the same match on me

 

[Yuna]

One time a peach player pulled a bob-omb, stitches and a beam sword all out in the same match on me

Yes, horrible. Come back to me when you've had a Peach player pull 3 grandfather turnips in a row five matches in a row (+ other items). Or three grandfather turnips, a beam-sword, a bob-omb and two Mr. Saturns in the same match. Or 40 Bob-ombs in one single tournament.

Still, Brawl Peach is pretty horrible. Even pulling off all of that, she'd still stand a pretty **** good chance of losing.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

...You know, Peach could just...Float over the projectiles to Snake? D:

*runs to flame shelter but probably won't make it in time*

I'm curious Yuna, what makes in your opinion makes Peach such a bad character? You certainly don't seem to have much of a liking for her and I wasn't here at the beginning so I've probably missed your reasons and opinions.

I'm obviously going to be inclined to be biased for Peach but I don't think she's as bad as some of you make out...but on the other hand, she does have some nasty weaknesses that can be really capitalized on. She's also one of those characters that suffers when the opponent figures out the match up (true, every character does but I feel it affects Peach more than most)

Currently, I still think Peach is pretty solid but when push comes to shove, it's clear she's not one of the greatest of characters in Brawl

 

[ExCeL 52]

Yes, horrible. Come back to me when you've had a Peach player pull 3 grandfather turnips in a row five matches in a row (+ other items). Or three grandfather turnips, a beam-sword, a bob-omb and two Mr. Saturns in the same match. Or 40 Bob-ombs in one single tournament.

Still, Brawl Peach is pretty horrible. Even pulling off all of that, she'd still stand a pretty **** good chance of losing.

You only hate on Peach cause your scared of her beastmodeness, and you spam UpSmash on her in Wifi.

 

[Yuna]

...You know, Peach could just...Float over the projectiles to Snake? D:

*runs to flame shelter but probably won't make it in time*

I'm curious Yuna, what makes in your opinion makes Peach such a bad character? You certainly don't seem to have much of a liking for her and I wasn't here at the beginning so I've probably missed your reasons and opinions.

I'm obviously going to be inclined to be biased for Peach but I don't think she's as bad as some of you make out...but on the other hand, she does have some nasty weaknesses that can be really capitalized on. She's also one of those characters that suffers when the opponent figures out the match up (true, every character does but I feel it affects Peach more than most)

Currently, I still think Peach is pretty solid but when push comes to shove, it's clear she's not one of the greatest of characters in Brawl

Peach ain't viable. End of story.

Knowing what we know about her at this very moment, objectively speaking, she's not viable to win tournaments. She's not even very viable to place very well considering just how badly she does against Snake and Meta Knight.

Peach, just like, oh, more than half the cast suffers from being good while the SS, S and A Tier are un****ingbelievably brilliant. Because of this, Peach isn't very viable. The problem with Peach, however, is that unlike many Low and Mid Tiers, her followers refuse to accept this fact and singing her praises and claiming she's viable despite zero evidence for it.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

Peach ain't viable. End of story.

Knowing what we know about her at this very moment, objectively speaking, she's not viable to win tournaments. She's not even very viable to place very well considering just how badly she does against Snake and Meta Knight.

Peach, just like, oh, more than half the cast suffers from being good while the SS, S and A Tier are un****ingbelievably brilliant. Because of this, Peach isn't very viable. The problem with Peach, however, is that unlike many Low and Mid Tiers, her followers refuse to accept this fact and singing her praises and claiming she's viable despite zero evidence for it.

I agree about the whole other-characters-being-brilliant part:

Peach is a solid character. She's a really good character but being really good simply isn't good enough Brawl - you have to be fantastic or have something really special. Peach doesn't have that 'special-super-good' thing about her. Her Dair comes close but it just doesn't quite cut it, combined with her *cough* rather poor vertical recovery and lack of range/kill power

What exactly makes her not very viable in your opinion? I can see where you're coming from but I was kind of looking for specific examples like character abilites (e.g. lacj of range)...you've said stuff like she does badly against MK/Snake (not as bad as some characters but all the same they're still bad) which undoubtly will cripple her viablity but if that's the case, what about everyone else she does alright against? Or is that simply not enough to become even close to being partially viable because of how she does against such a dominant force?

For the record, I think the majority of Peach players are pretty happy with where she is on the tier list atm. I certainly am. Your are right in that there's very little evidence to prove her viablity which is probably why she's in D Tier (and unlikely to move up until there is solid evidence)

 

[Snowstalker]

Peach has disadvantages against Snake and MK, but a disadvantage=/=utter ****. The MK boards agree with this statement. IMO, Peach is near the bottom of high tier or the top of middle.

As for my widdle Yushee, he deserves low-mid or high-low.

 

[SaltyKracka]

This topic is pointless, as the basic subject is that of matchup inexperience johns.

 

[Falconv1.0]

What's with the delusion that Peach is a solid character?

 

[Shadic]

She's mid tier?

 

[Jim Morrison]

Peach is a very solid character :/
Shadic, tier placing doesn't make a character solid.

If you want to win by matchup inexpierence play Sonic on the west coast, there's like 0 there.

 

[Shadic]

No, but a character being solid typically means a decent place on the tier list. Of course, there are a few exceptions (Link in Smash64 being last based off recovery) but I've never seen a high-tier character not play solidly.

And character popularity is a curse for Link. He's a low tier character in 2 of the 3 games, but because he's LINK, everybody has played one. He's one of the low-tier characters that you'll run into a lot, which is unfortunate, because I love the way he plays.

 

[Jim Morrison]

...That is quite true, there's a lot of fanboys, however, those tend to not always be good. It's not like there's boatloads of GOOD Links. Get good with your character, play differently, non-obvious, and people won't know how to fight you at first. They'll probably figure something out though.

 

[Snowstalker]

Peach is actually pretty good. She moves between A and D rank for tourney results, which is better than several characters above her. She has bad matchups (like everyone else except MK), but nothing terrible. I would put her anywhere from 15th to 20th.

Also, everyone was good in 64. It was God Tier and Top Tier.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Peach ain't viable. End of story.

Knowing what we know about her at this very moment, objectively speaking, she's not viable to win tournaments. She's not even very viable to place very well considering just how badly she does against Snake and Meta Knight.

Peach, just like, oh, more than half the cast suffers from being good while the SS, S and A Tier are un****ingbelievably brilliant. Because of this, Peach isn't very viable. The problem with Peach, however, is that unlike many Low and Mid Tiers, her followers refuse to accept this fact and singing her praises and claiming she's viable despite zero evidence for it.

4-6 is barely bad.

Seriously, we get the point, Peach boards are full of fanboys, but now your posting inaccurate, or rather misleading, information about Peach (DDD and Wario having an advantage on Peach from the other thread) making you look as bad as them.

 

[Falconv1.0]

And you might have gotten away with it to, if it weren't for the meddling, um, me and my imaginary doggie.

I have no idea how I missed this first time I read this thread.

I ****ing love you.

 

[Yuna]

*edited into later post*

 

[deepseadiva]

I also disagree with many character boards' delusions with match-ups. How does Peach not have the disadvantage in her D3 matchup? And how the hell is her matchup against MK a 60-40?

Floating against D3.

Peach can answer mostly everything MK has, the key word being answer. She can't really approach. There's also very powerful stage counterpicks.

Irregardless, why is everything about Peach all of a sudden...?

 

[Yuna]

4-6 is barely bad.

Seriously, we get the point, Peach boards are full of fanboys, but now your posting inaccurate, or rather misleading, information about Peach (DDD and Wario having an advantage on Peach from the other thread) making you look as bad as them.

I used qualifiers such as "AFAIK" and "IIRC". If I was wrong about any of these match-ups, then I apologize.

How does Peach not have the disadvantage in her D3 matchup? And how the hell is her matchup against MK a 60-40? I also disagree with many character boards' delusions with match-ups. Especially considering how the D3 vs. Peach match-up was largely based on the words of 1 player whose name I do not recognize at all (please correct me if Foursaken is someone I should be on the lookout for) and Dark.pch, a Peach player notorious for exaggerating Peach's prowess (and outright lying about it... plus, IIRC, he had at a time while tooting his own horn only attended one tournament and based the majority of his Peach BS on WiFi and friendlies... against players who I know are not playing on one of the highest levels of skill). And who knows how old that judgment is, anyway? And how many people's contributions were taken into consideration when making it? I count 2 on the D3 boards based on the quotes. Heck, Dark.pch's rant about the Peach vs. D3 matchup even managed to entirely ignore D3's Waddles, treating them as if they were nonexistant!

Floating against D3.

And this magically negates D3's game how?

Peach can answer mostly everything MK has, the key word being answer. She can't really approach.

So can many characters who nonetheless are bad against MK.

There's also very powerful stage counterpicks.

Name some.

 

[deepseadiva]

And this magically negates D3's game how?

It really hinders his grab game. We've called it at neutral. I think the Dedede's have agreed.

So can many characters who nonetheless are bad against MK.

I'm defending it as a 60-40. It's really not an auto win.

Name some.

Green Greens is incredibly, incredibly effective. Yoshi's Island Melee works very similarly. To a lesser extent Halberd, Norfair, and even Pictochat.

 

[StarFoxcoastocoast]

In a one-on-one battle, I much prefer having a counter-pick behind Falco(My main since Melee came out) that isn't as well known or if I'm at a stage/opponent disadvantage be able to switch to a character that if nothing else makes my opponent think. I've never been worth a **** with Peach but for me it used to be Olimar and has slowly become ZSS who sadly didn't take long to pick up remote popularity x.x

She's done me well so far though. I know Peach's move set-up pretty well so I've never had a problem with her unless there is toad-spam. Which sounds strange.

 

[Yuna]

It really hinders his grab game. We've called it at neutral. I think the Dedede's have agreed.

Peach has to come down sometime. And she has to approach as well. She cannot stay out of grab range forever. And since when does DeDeDe automatically lose or 50-50 all matchups in which he has no chaingrab/cannot grab the opponent?

I'm defending it as a 60-40. It's really not an auto win.

And I'm calling baloney. If we're going to assume Peach is able to space perfectly against D3 in order to never get grabbed, why not assume the same for MK? What the hell is Peach going to use to answer an MK who spaces his moves?!

Green Greens is incredibly, incredibly effectiveness. Yoshi's Island Melee works very similarly. To a lesser extent Halberd, Norfair, and even Pictochat.

I call them working counterpicks. Not "incredibly, incredibly effective".

 

[deepseadiva]

Peach has to come down sometime. And she has to approach as well. She cannot stay out of grab range forever. And since when does DeDeDe automatically lose or 50-50 all matchups in which he has no chaingrab/cannot grab the opponent?

It just is. I can go grab quotes and things if you're bothered.

And I'm calling baloney. If we're going to assume Peach is able to space perfectly against D3 in order to never get grabbed, why not assume the same for MK? What the hell is Peach going to use to answer an MK who spaces his moves?!

Yuna, it's not an auto win. I really don't see MK 70:30ing anyone below mid tier.

Oh, and fair.

I call them working counterpicks. Not "incredibly, incredibly effective".

We have our opinions.

 

[Yuna]

It just is. I can go grab quotes and things if you're bothered.

Please do. And please, no Dark.pch quotes. I don't care how well he plays, his debating skills and "facts" are very questionable.

Yuna, it's not an auto win. I really don't see MK 70:30ing anyone below mid tier.

I believe this match-up is a 70:30. Also, I never used the term "auto-win", I said it was a bad match-up for Peach. Also, I forgot to mention G&W before.

Oh, and fair.

Yes, and? All MK has to do is perfect shield (or possibly just normal shield) into a Fair himself. Unless Peach auto cancels in slaps, which is also not without risks.

We have our opinions.

Yes. And we can discuss them in a calm, civil manner since we're both obviously intelligent and logical human beings (hint hint).

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

Yuna, I must ask - if you disagree so strongly about Peachs match ups, why don't you visit and share your input? We won't reject your ideas on the match ups as long as you can back them up so really, I don't see any reason as to why you shouldn't at least try posting something in the match up thread. Unless you hate Brawl with a passion (except I doubt it's that strong since you wouldn't be posting here)

Why is MK 70:30 in your opinion? Why is she at a disadvantage with DeDeDe? I would appreciate if you could elborate on such things, at the very least somewhere else if you don't want to post on this thread

The match up thread may need some tweaking but in case you were wondering, like Meno said DeDeDe is down as even. Wario is also even (although the Wario mains have got it down as 60:40 Peach's favour...not sure why, I guess that will come up later)

Peach has developed a lot since Brawls release (although that's true for everyone) and she's nowhere near as bad as she used to be. Also, you didn't answer my other question - What in your opinion makes her so crap?

 

[Yuna]

Yuna, I must ask - if you disagree so strongly about Peachs match ups, why don't you visit and share your input? We won't reject your ideas on the match ups as long as you can back them up so really, I don't see any reason as to why you shouldn't at least try posting something in the match up thread. Unless you hate Brawl with a passion (except I doubt it's that strong since you wouldn't be posting here)

Because I do not have enough insight into Peach to say for certain what is and isn't true for her matchups. However, based on what I read in, among other things, the King DeDeDe match-up thread and the Meta Knight matchup thread, I can state that I disagree with a lot of the things that were said and ultimately used to base the match-up ratios on.

For one thing, Dark.pch failed to even mention Waddle Dees/Doos.

Why is MK 70:30 in your opinion? Why is she at a disadvantage with DeDeDe? I would appreciate if you could elborate on such things, at the very least somewhere else if you don't want to post on this thread

Range, priority, safeness, aerial prowess, ground game, comboability, stringability, edgeguardability, KOability, recovery. MK beats Peach in pretty much ALL of this.

The match up thread may need some tweaking but in case you were wondering, like Meno said DeDeDe is down as even. Wario is also even (although the Wario mains have got it down as 60:40 Peach's favour...not sure why, I guess that will come up later)

Just out of curiousity, what is the general consensus about Peach vs. G&W (not just what has been said in the character specific boards)?

Peach has developed a lot since Brawls release (although that's true for everyone) and she's nowhere near as bad as she used to be.

Yes. But she still isn't viable at the national level.

Also, you didn't answer my other question - What in your opinion makes her so crap?

I did. Many times over. Just maybe not specifically directed at you:
Peach is not crap. There's just so many characters so much better than her.