The Meteors Approach: What 1.06 Could Mean for Yoshi

[Enoki]

A great neutral game means nothing if you can't punish hard while you have the advantage. Diddy is (or was, idk) the best or second best mostly because he had such an incredible advantageous state. Maybe in theory the neutral game is the most important, but that's not typically how things play out. In theory, Sheik could always beat Diddy, but tournament results proved quite the opposite. Smash is an emotional game, and require lots of reads and such for successful competitive play. Maybe in time I'll prove wrong, but human error and human skill will always allow a greater diversity of success.

I don't mean to argue or anything, I'm just genuinely curious because your views seem radically different from everything I've ever read and observed, or even what the top players seem to think. I definitely understand your saying that only solo viable characters are "good," but no one is ever limited to playing a single character; "Bad" by your definition is not synonymous with unusable. I'm pretty sure we can agree there, seeing as how you're a Yoshi player. :3

I would continue the various character debate, but honestly it would probably just be a rehash of the competitive subforum. I could argue all day about specific characters, but Yoshi-related stuff is probably more constructive overall for us. It is interesting seeing how you perceive the roster though. I've never thought about it so black and white.

But I'm still holding out for Peach and Pikachu to realize their full potential and sweep the world. :3

 

[Delta-cod]

And a great punish game means nothing if your neutral game is trivial to the characters that matter.

Sheik's neutral is stronger than Diddy's (probably?), but not so much stronger that Diddy is trivialized. Thus, Diddy's superior advantaged state allows him to come out on top.

Contrast this with say, Sheik's neutral vs. Luigi's neutral. Sheik is so much stronger here that Luigi is essentially trivialized. Thus, his punish game is irrelevant. ESPECIALLY since he relies on getting a grab from neutral instead of just getting a random hit in, meaning it's even easier to avoid the meat of his punish game.

I'm aware that's not how things always play out, but this is how I think they should play out, and why I think lots of players are bad, even ones people say are good. I boil down Smash to winning the neutral game over and over, and if you know what your opponent wants to do in neutral, and if your character has an easy answer to shut that plan down, then match ups are simple. This is how I think about match ups from Yoshi's perspective. I look at the opposing character and think "what does he want to do in neutral?" Once I know (it's usually not hard to figure out), I ask "how does Yoshi stop that?". Once I answer that question, the match up is literally just beating them with Yoshi's answers forever, until I win.

 

[Enoki]

I think I agree with you in theory, so I'm curious to see if Smash 4 will last long enough for it to get to this point. I think Melee is somewhat close to what you're saying, but that's an unbelievably developed metagame. And even then, aMSa and his Yoshi are still demonstrating that there's always something to be learned.

 

[Delta-cod]

Note how aMSa is developing this with a fast character, though. I find it highly unlikely that you'll see such a meta shift for any slow character, because there's NO WAY they can compete in neutral.

 

[CelestialMarauder~]

Note how aMSa is developing this with a fast character, though. I find it highly unlikely that you'll see such a meta shift for any slow character, because there's NO WAY they can compete in neutral.

In melee anyway. I think slow characters can work in this game as long as they have the right tools.

 

[Delta-cod]

They just have to be able to wall hard enough.