The Melee Matchup Chart for Mid Level Play

[Pogogo]

It is a good point though. To whom is the tier list adressed? There is large discrepancy in skill even among top level players. Some top level players are excellent at dealing with things other aren't. I dont think yoshi is the same tier as fox at any skill level but its still a legit point in theory.

 

[Dark Hart]

there is no such thing as mid level play

 

[Roneblaster]

backhanded compliment accepted.

 

[JPOBS]

Im a mid level player according to KK.


f*** yea! look out world.

 

[j00t]

I'd actually beat KK in tournament. Yeah I'm calling you out mother****er.

trollface

 

[Dark Hart]

I stand by what I said

 

[Impp]

I'm the best mid level player.

 

[choknater]

alright, so basically to define mid level play, we should base it on the character usage of all players as less than or equal to Impp in skill level, based on his tournament placings, money matches, and win rations in friendlies. only then can we know what the mid level truly is

 

[KirbyKaze]

I agree.

Impp is the future of this chart.

 

[Impp]

I'm honored.

 

[KirbyKaze]

I feel like by using only the best of mid level play, however, we encounter similar accessibility issues the previous charts had.

This has to encompass all of mid level play.

Someone should probably get cracking on a low level MU chart.

 

[JPOBS]

no, just use reneblade as a base because he's the worst mid level player (can't l-cancel)

so everyone better than him but below say...scar..is mid level.

gogogo

 

[t3h Icy]

Roy is 75:25 Bowser. I know this because I use Roy as my octonary and I saw a video this one time of Roy winning against a Bowser. You can use Fair to out-range Bowser and auto-win.

If you argue against this, you're dumb and wrong.

 

[Tee ay eye]

i didn't make it out of round 1 pools at pound 4

 

[TheLake]

Neither did i

or Rom

or anything for that matter

Impps the best mid player thing


Zelda is the best character in mid level play

cause mid level players are mid level cause of the amount of mistakes they make

and zelda + mistakes = schmorgisborg of hormonoly driven conquest

 

[Nicknyte]

pichu should obviously be higher due to chaingrabs on many characters and an adaptable recovery. at mid level play this is difficult to deal with/avoid

Pichu is literally a pain to deal with if you are fighting an albeit good one. Pichu has rediculous speed and a sweeping Dsmash to send opponents in the opposite direction on top of a strong upsmash. With a bit of UpB Cancelling towards the stage -> Usmash. Mid level play makes pichu damn irritating, and hard because of his size.

EDIT: How the hell does choknater have -5000 posts! Damn Angels!!

 

[Dark Hart]

god this thread is worse than poundslap and vbm's illegitimate prom night dumpster baby

 

[Roneblaster]

i like where this thread is going.

 

[Bamesy]

I think this is sexy.

But sounds more like low level play to me...
Uthrow usmash killing off all your players that aren't Jiggs?

Seriously, I'd call that low level...or players that like to spam techskill but don't pay attention to the million times it has happened/have never been told 'hold right or left'

Mid is like...Nair Shine Uthrow Uair spamming Foxes that don't quite know how to Bair or shine>usmash yet.
Or Samus's that have partially evolved passed dsmash/Dair spamming and moved jab or occasionally actually GRAB
Or Falcos that spam lasers but do combos into fsmash and dsmash instead of Bair/trying to line up Dair Onry

but yeah, good idea KK
E for Effort
A for A...wesome?

 

[Siglemic]

there is no such thing as mid level play

o man thats so deep

jk ur ********

 

[Jonas]

I guess some of the people who'd be eliminated in like R2 pools at Pound 4.

Yeah those people suck

 

[Beat!]

I don't understand the point with this thread. I thought the original match-up chart was created to give everyone a general idea of how all the characters perform against each other, NOT for determining matchups for top players only. Top players know all their good/bad matchups anyway, I don't think you need to determine that for them.

If the original match up chart wasn't created with low/mid/whatever-level players in mind, it feels really pointless to me.

 

[Big_R]

i didnt make it past p4 round 2 pools LOL

**** well i say like stuff gets tricky.... cuz i know some matches and will try harder in them. im better against good players that play chars like jiggs and peach. but here in the mw we dont play and kids dont play spacies well so i dont get the practice to play up tempo against those chars... so it makes it complicated...

 

[Zodiac]

Link goes even with sheik in mid level...6 years ago..lol No really mid level is a lot better than people think it is. But uh..Mid level jiggs will prob lose to a mid level marth most of the time but at higher levels it evens out a lot more imo.

 

[KirbyKaze]

I don't understand the point with this thread. I thought the original match-up chart was created to give everyone a general idea of how all the characters perform against each other, NOT for determining matchups for top players only. Top players know all their good/bad matchups anyway, I don't think you need to determine that for them.

If the original match up chart wasn't created with low/mid/whatever-level players in mind, it feels really pointless to me.

The original MU chart was created to reflect high level play.

Low level play and Mid level play were excluded because MUs at those levels are determined more by technical errors (Fox missing an L-cancel on shield, gets ***** for it, blargh) than they are by the actual limitations of the characters. One can argue at those levels that a lot of the worst MUs in the game are very winnable simply due to errors in player gameplay. Kirby Fox, for instance, is very winnable for Kirby when Fox is bad.

In short, by accommodating the opinions of Low level players we'd have to drastically revise a lot of MUs like Fox Peach. Fox clearly beats Peach when Fox is good... but if Fox isn't good, he just makes too many mistakes and Peach eats him alive for it. However, since technical mistakes are a fault of the player, and not a limitation of the character, it was thought best to assume that Fox is going things correctly.

However, some people felt that this process was highly discriminatory and would oppress the voices of the awful / mediocre players. It is for this reason that I have created this thread, so we can have a MU chart that adequately reflects play before people are good.

 

[*P*L*U*R*]

Strangely, I feel like mid-level is harder to define than high-level.

What's an example of a mid-level player?

 

[Rubyiris]

is there a tier for mid-high level players? I feel like I'd solidly beat just about every mid-level player, and have the capability of beating high tier players.

@Plur:

Two of my roommates were "Mid-level players."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRRqLWwYwak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2gmrvICo04
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVHX3ZhqPSg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q55MvkrI46Y

I feel that all of these videos do a very good job of exemplifying mid-level play.

 

[Ryzol_]

Mid level play goes from having very good command of ATs. but using them at all the wrong times to not even being able to SH consistently but making smart plays. But, if you have tech skill and know when to use it, you aren't midlevel.

 

[Rubyiris]

My technical prowess are relatively consistent but I still occasionally do aerials too high and fall into set patterns when I gain momentum. I'm very good at recognizing my own habits and errors and quickly correcting them, however. My control of my characters are very good, and my move choice is solid but I don't always make the correct choice.

 

[-ACE-]

I don't see how you could define mid-level play well enough to come up with an accurate chart. Matchups depend on a lot of specifics and I don't see how you can properly designate which bad habits or shortcomings, specifically, a certain mid-level player would possess (you know, what makes him mid-level instead of high-level). I mean, there are a lot of mid-level players that never miss l-cancels, make very smart decisions with their techs, and exemplify high level play in several areas of their gameplay (just not all). Do we assume that in generic "mid-level" play, everyone makes an equal percentage of mistakes in each aspect of their game? If so, this wouldn't be an accurate representation for mid-level players that have only 1 or 2 major flaws holding them back from being high-level (and I believe there are a LOT of mid-level players that meet this criterion), as they would excel at certain matchups in comparison to this generic style, as well as have extra trouble with certain other matchups. It's just a lot easier to assume that very few mistakes will be made (high level play) as far as making an accurate chart is concerned, imo.

 

[KirbyKaze]

is there a tier for mid-high level players? I feel like I'd solidly beat just about every mid-level player, and have the capability of beating high tier players.

@Plur:

Two of my roommates were "Mid-level players."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRRqLWwYwak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2gmrvICo04
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVHX3ZhqPSg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q55MvkrI46Y

I feel that all of these videos do a very good job of exemplifying mid-level play.

I think Idea would smoke you.

I don't see how you could define mid-level play well enough to come up with an accurate chart. Matchups depend on a lot of specifics and I don't see how you can properly designate which bad habits or shortcomings, specifically, a certain mid-level player would possess (you know, what makes him mid-level instead of high-level). I mean, there are a lot of mid-level players that never miss l-cancels, make very smart decisions with their techs, and exemplify high level play in several areas of their gameplay (just not all). Do we assume that in generic "mid-level" play, everyone makes an equal percentage of mistakes in each aspect of their game? If so, this wouldn't be an accurate representation for mid-level players that have only 1 or 2 major flaws holding them back from being high-level (and I believe there are a LOT of mid-level players that meet this criterion), as they would excel at certain matchups in comparison to this generic style, as well as have extra trouble with certain other matchups. It's just a lot easier to assume that very few mistakes will be made (high level play) as far as making an accurate chart is concerned, imo.

We assume that they make equal mistakes.

Assuming very few mistakes makes the chart useless to bad players and devolves it into Super Theory Bros Melee.

 

[-ACE-]

We assume that they make equal mistakes.

Assuming very few mistakes makes the chart useless to bad players and devolves it into Super Theory Bros Melee.

I would consider you vs PP an example of high level play irl that does a decent job of reflecting the sheik vs falco matchup. I could say the same for PP's falco vs Mango's fox for that matchup, m2k's marth vs amsah's sheik, kage/linguini vs hax for ganon vs falcon, etc. I don't see how assuming very few mistakes automatically puts you in the realm of Theory.

I like the idea behind this thread I just don't think the end result will be very useful for many mid-level players :/

 

[JPOBS]

is there a tier for mid-high level players? I feel like I'd solidly beat just about every mid-level player, and have the capability of beating high tier players.

@Plur:

Two of my roommates were "Mid-level players."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRRqLWwYwak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2gmrvICo04
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVHX3ZhqPSg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q55MvkrI46Y

I feel that all of these videos do a very good job of exemplifying mid-level play.

so you're saying you're going to win the amatuer bracket at pound 5 then?

 

[KirbyKaze]

ACE, half of these examples are friendlies. Player vs player is a terrible way to diagnose what the MU is because a lot of good players are not comfortable in specific MUs because of style and other things. Certain player strengths and weaknesses that are not flaws of the characters influence the results heavily and it becomes a sticky business to sort it out... particularly in a case like me vs PP.

But I don't expect you to be able to pick up on the errors PP is making in the MU, nor do I expect you to pick up on the decisions I make that mark me as a worse player...

At any rate, that's largely off topic. If you want to discuss high level play, PM me or bring it up in the other MU chart thread. This is for mid level play.

Discuss Reneblade vs JPOBS. Or Idea vs Rubyiris. Or something.

 

[JPOBS]

I would beat reneblade (<3), and Idea would beat Ruby.

/discussion

 

[KirbyKaze]

Just remember what we talked about for edgeguarding.

I know you won't get it every time, being mid level and all, but if you can get it 60% of the time you got this.

 

[-ACE-]

Sorry bro didn't mean to rattle your cage. I realize that mistakes are made at all levels of play... I said I believe those players provided "a decent" job of depicting the matchup, I didn't say that it was a concrete example. Oh well, carry on good sir.

 

[KirbyKaze]

Don't think on it <3

 

[Dark Hart]

o man thats so deep

jk ur ********

great argument bro

seriously though

mid level play doesn't exist

there's high level play

and people who aren't doing it right

you're either able to play at a higher level, or not

mid level play is just an illusion

 

[JPOBS]

great argument bro

seriously though

mid level play doesn't exist

there's high level play

and people who aren't doing it right

you're either able to play at a higher level, or not

mid level play is just an illusion

thats like saying undergraduate education doesn't exist.

You're either an expert PHD in your field, or you're not doing it right. Undergrad education is just an illusion.