There completely different! There both different characters and unlike Pokemon trainer you aren't forced to switch. You can play sheik and not play Zelda but it's almost impossible to only play 1 of PT's Pokemon. Therefore they should be seperate.
The suggestion is not that Zelda/Sheik replaces Zelda and Sheik, the suggestion is that since it's a completely unique playstyle, it should be separate from both Zelda and Sheik.
Who here actually use Zelda/Sheik instead of Zelda OR Sheik though...
Quite a few people actually.
Myself and Sonic are easy examples here, and plenty of high-levele players were previously cited.
but marth is the prettiest girl in brawl
Do I have to link to the "proof of Marth's manliness" thread again?!
indeed... shiek is FRIGHTENINGLY efficient at wracking up damage... so shiek doesn't have much trouble getting an enemy to about 100% damage..... then you switch to zelda... who has nothing but beffy attacks... and they will ALL be COMPLETELY fresh.... she has moves that are effective at close trange (Dsmash and Nayru's) and then can devestate at the extent of her range with everything else.... and some of her atttacks can even kill bowser in double digit damage O.O
it is a GREAT combination.... plus they have a few transformation tricks which make transitioning rather easy.
seriously... Zelda/Shiek has some of the most potential in the game
Unfortunately, there are characters that are better at it. Still, Zelda/Sheik gets rid of a lot of both's bad match-ups, and generally improves both their abilities against every fighter. You just need to get room to transform.
I don't know if this has been said so i'm going to say it.
The SBR contains some of the best, smartest, and most experienced players in the community. Just because YOU don't think the list is accurate because your main isn't high tier does not mean there is for sure something wrong with the first version of the list. It just means YOU have the problem and can't accept that not everyone thinks as highly of your main as you do.
A lot of thought, time and research went into the first version of the tier list. Don't think for a minute they just casually arranged the characters using some sort fo popularity contest or they picked names from a hat... although knowing some of the BRoomers the second option is possible...
So what if you're character was ranked 25/39 (omg like my main!) you can come in here and argue it all you want. Nothing is going to change until YOU can actually prove that this and that character should move up and down. The only way to do this is go to tourneys, develope the metagame and get some real experience. Theory crafting about how some ideas are viable and throwing out random names of people who happen to have one or two videos where they screw around with the idea doesn't cut it.
Emblem Lord was not involved in and disagrees with Marth's placement.
He came to the same conclusion that the rest of the Marth community did, that Marth has better match-ups and places better on average then at least 2 chars put ahead of him.
Also, there is NO excuse for ignoring the gap between MK and Snake and the rest of the cast.
Sorry, but that's an enormous argumentium Ad Hominem fallacy.
Sure, they're more likely to be right then the average Smasher, but they aren't omniscient, they can make mistakes. I can point to a post where a backroomer said that Marth had bad match-ups against everyone and their grandmother, only to have me point out that he was wrong on every point except MK, furthermore both character specific boards disagreed with his opinions on this.
Again, backroomers make mistakes, that's why it's our job as a community to attack the list logically, if it stands then it's good. If it doesn't, then they know what to do next tier list...
Or that would work if they actually bothered to provide reasoning to defend the list. So far the only backroomer I've heard on this that actually provided depth on the topic... provided reasoning on why it was wrong.