steelguttey
mei is bei
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,674
agt just makes peach neutral that much more cool because of agt's startup that peach can bait
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Most people that complain about Zelda speak from emotion rather than reason. What few seem to understand is that Zelda's special attacks were central to her strength/viability before 3.5. Now they're more like filler. Nayru's, Din's, and Farore's received the largest changes out of her moveset and lost utility. I'd agree that Nayru's was the best combo escaper, but I wouldn't call it ridiculous. The invulnerability was on frames 4-11. If she didn't auto-cancel the attack, then she suffered regular lag. If Diamond Dive was auto-canceled, then all the opponent had to do was shield grab after Nayru's or her followup attack. Now she has trouble escaping juggles and returning to the stage. The removal of invulnerability no longer allows the attack to be used as a pseudo approach safely. It can be shield grabbed and loses to a lot of attacks. The top and bottom of the diamond do not have hitbox coverage.bowser's nair doesn't autocancel
bowser's nair can't suddenly shift momentum in 1 of 4 directions
bowser's nair doesn't have disjoint
bowser's nair isn't on a floaty that also has frame 6 (?) kill moves that punish you for spacing around thenaryu'snair
bowser still takes damage if you trade with nair
bowser's nair armor can be broken
all the ways it's different from nayru's, in an easy to digest format, @Oracle
@ 4tlas lmao don't ever suggest that Nayru's was anything short of the most ridiculous combo breaker PM has ever had
Thank you for putting words in my mouth. I didn't say Nayrus was good, I didnt say it was bad, I didnt say it should return, I didnt say I miss it, I didnt say she needed it, I didn't say it wasn't polarizing, I didn't say it wasn't the best combo breaker. I essentially said "these are the few ways in which Nayrus is different from Bowser nair" in an attempt to elaborate on what Oracle said. You did the same, but you also felt the need to throw in some extra bull**** assumptions about my intent.bowser's nair doesn't autocancel
bowser's nair can't suddenly shift momentum in 1 of 4 directions
bowser's nair doesn't have disjoint
bowser's nair isn't on a floaty that also has frame 6 (?) kill moves that punish you for spacing around thenaryu'snair
bowser still takes damage if you trade with nair
bowser's nair armor can be broken
all the ways it's different from nayru's, in an easy to digest format, @Oracle
@ 4tlas lmao don't ever suggest that Nayru's was anything short of the most ridiculous combo breaker PM has ever had
Squirtle with consistent item generation (even if he himself didnt have ut)would be broken as ****, you do not want this for everyone lolI know it's impossible to implement, but sometime I wish every character had access to a turnip-like item. Item tech is just so fun, especially with characters whose movement is less than amazing. I love playing against peach just because I'll get to AGT turnips a couple of times.
Nothing to do with balance, it'd just be fun. Item mechanics are really enjoyable, at least for me.Squirtle with consistent item generation (even if he himself didnt have ut)would be broken as ****, you do not want this for everyone lol
I don't really consider him OP. He's not the most complex character, yeah, but I think he's in a decent place.anyone else think G&W needs a major nerf? I might pick him up as a secondary just cuz he's so easy to play and so rewarding.
I feel like if anything we need to increase the visual clarity on when his moves finish. Learning that matchup for the first time is nothing short of frustrating due to the lingering hitboxes on all his moves and the difficulty in knowing when said hitboxes are done.I don't really consider him OP. He's not the most complex character, yeah, but I think he's in a decent place.
MK is too low. His MU spread is much better then most of the characters he's under. I'd put him top of A tier or the end of S tier tbh.I'm incredibly bored at work, so I made an attempt at a tier list.
No order within tiers.
View attachment 67536
Tell me why I'm wrong. I'm too tired/lazy to have really deeply analysed this at the moment, so most of this is gut feeling.
No order within tiers, but I think I agree.MK is too low. His MU spread is much better then most of the characters he's under. I'd put him top of A tier or the end of S tier tbh.
You're not wrong, the active hitboxes on his moves are really deceptive.I feel like if anything we need to increase the visual clarity on when his moves finish. Learning that matchup for the first time is nothing short of frustrating due to the lingering hitboxes on all his moves and the difficulty in knowing when said hitboxes are done.
This looks good to me.I'm incredibly bored at work, so I made an attempt at a tier list.
No order within tiers.
View attachment 67536
Tell me why I'm wrong. I'm too tired/lazy to have really deeply analysed this at the moment, so most of this is gut feeling.
It's counter play. It's kind of silly to me that some attacks, that are very spammable, like ROB's down smash wouldn't have normal SDI modifiers.This looks good to me.
On another topic, what's up with the 1x SDI normalization on multihit attacks? Some multihit attacks aren't functioning reliably or as intended with the increases in SDI multipliers that occurred in the previous two updates. That gives an unnecessary advantage to characters that don't rely on multihits for combos or kills. When you properly space and time an attack, why shouldn't it work the same every time? Imagine if there was a tech that allowed players to take a small fraction of the damage from Falcon's Knee or Fox's U-smash but no knockback.
Multihit moves trade off SDI vulnerability and being poor trading moves in favor of being long lasting, more likely to shield poke, and possibly a couple other things I can't think of off the top of my head. They aren't strictly worse than single-hit moves.This looks good to me.
On another topic, what's up with the 1x SDI normalization on multihit attacks? Some multihit attacks aren't functioning reliably or as intended with the increases in SDI multipliers that occurred in the previous two updates. That gives an unnecessary advantage to characters that don't rely on multihits for combos or kills. When you properly space and time an attack, why shouldn't it work the same every time? Imagine if there was a tech that allowed players to take a small fraction of the damage from Falcon's Knee or Fox's U-smash but no knockback.
A lot easier to hit comfirm off of due to the long lasting hitboxes and multiple points of hitlagMultihit moves trade off SDI vulnerability and being poor trading moves in favor of being long lasting, more likely to shield poke, and possibly a couple other things I can't think of off the top of my head. They aren't strictly worse than single-hit moves.
Being long lasting is itself a tradeoff with being spammable. The best part about multihit moves is they annoy the **** out of your opponent =PMultihit moves trade off SDI vulnerability and being poor trading moves in favor of being long lasting, more likely to shield poke, and possibly a couple other things I can't think of off the top of my head. They aren't strictly worse than single-hit moves.
Not necessarily. I can hit Zelda's fmash like fives times before Samus' ice up smash, for example. It's a case by case basis.Being long lasting is itself a tradeoff with being spammable. The best part about multihit moves is they annoy the **** out of your opponent =P
A lot of moves are spammable in space. Try spamming F-smash or U-smash on shield and get wrecked.Not necessarily. I can hit Zelda's fmash like fives times before Samus' ice up smash, for example. It's a case by case basis.
I was addressing 4tlas' point.A lot of moves are spammable in space. Try spamming F-smash or U-smash on shield and get wrecked.
Yes, because every move can suffer different degrees of counter play. Multi hit moves have more opportunities to shield poke, they beat spot dodges, can cover different get up options by lasting through invincibility, etc. From what I understand, there are very few multi hit moves that double as kill moves. Zelda's fsmash, sure, but the SDI modifiers are .25x, making it next to impossible to SDI out of.Multihit attacks can suffer more limitations than SDI counterplay. Multihits can be unsafe on whiff or shield. Multihits can have significant cooldown. Zelda's U-smash is an example of all 3. The 0.25x is fine. Her combo game centers around U-smash and N-air with U-tilt and F-tilt to setup sometimes. Characters' kill and combo options shouldn't be broken by counterplay. SDI normalization punishes characters with multihit reliance. Fox lands an U-smash, and he knows it'll kill at high percents. Pit lands an U-smash and maybe it'll kill. Falcon lands a N-air and reads the opponent's DI into another attack. Zelda lands a N-air and then nothing with proper SDI. Is that fair?
Samus' Ice Upsmash has long cooldown to balance out the quick startup and massive range. The person I was responding to said multihits are long-lasting as a tradeoff for being bad for trades. I was pointing out that long-lasting is a tradeoff with itself because it means that the move is forced to stay out at least as long as it lasts. I think your point has nothing to do with mine.Not necessarily. I can hit Zelda's fmash like fives times before Samus' ice up smash, for example. It's a case by case basis.
I enjoy when you make posts that are a string of factual statements, because you are usually correct with your facts. In this case, you have pointed out most of Zelda's strengths accurately. Then you do **** like firing shots at bad Zelda players and all Sheilda players, because that's totally relevant and constructive. So close.yeah i dont buy that zelda is a bad character, i got closer to winning an infinity and beyond half playing zelda (and losing the other half as peach 100% of the time) than i ever did playing sheik and my sheik is godlike. i go about even with or slightly beat lunchables marth which is a ****ing monster and pretty easily better than all the other PM marths. she has a ton of moves with low startup, no lag, CC-proof, nearly DI-proof, disjointed, lingering that combo into each other. its ridiculously easy to combo 0-55+ on like any combo weight, her shield game is godly, her recovery is godly, idk i get that shes slow in neutral but i have a very hard time thinking of her as "bad".
if you jump around kicking in neutral and playing "shielda", the problem is you, not your character.
Zelda is also incredibly susceptible to juggles, has a very mediocre projectile that fast characters will punish for throwing out (and characters with disjoints will clank away), a poor approach, dies early off the top, and loses to characters with speed/good projectiles/disjoints. She doesn't deal well with characters in her face and often has to rely on reads to get things started.yeah i dont buy that zelda is a bad character, i got closer to winning an infinity and beyond half playing zelda (and losing the other half as peach 100% of the time) than i ever did playing sheik and my sheik is godlike. i go about even with or slightly beat lunchables marth which is a ****ing monster and pretty easily better than all the other PM marths. she has a ton of moves with low startup, no lag, CC-proof, nearly DI-proof, disjointed, lingering that combo into each other. its ridiculously easy to combo 0-55+ on like any combo weight, her shield game is godly, her recovery is godly, idk i get that shes slow in neutral but i have a very hard time thinking of her as "bad".
if you jump around kicking in neutral and playing "shielda", the problem is you, not your character.
Its a teleport with full range of motion, 19 frames of invincibility while traveling (and invisible), and you can stop it at any time during the movement. Its pretty ****ing good. yeah its got 30 frames of landing lag, but it goes so far that zelda can just threaten a high recovery on stage and if you can't cover both that and sweetspot to the ledge unless you're like, sonic or falcon. you can also start the high recovery, shorten it and drift back to the ledge, sweetspot the ledge with shorten from any distance/direction, platform cancel it at any distance with shorten, etc. It has end lag and if they player is predictable or not on point with the tech skill its not great, but her options are incredible. Imagine if fox could shorten his up-b at any point while traveling.Zelda has a godly recovery? Are you sure you're playing the game as us?
I hope you realize that's a good thing.Samus' Ice Upsmash has long cooldown to balance out the quick startup and massive range. The person I was responding to said multihits are long-lasting as a tradeoff for being bad for trades. I was pointing out that long-lasting is a tradeoff with itself because it means that the move is forced to stay out at least as long as it lasts. I think your point has nothing to do with mine.
An omnidirectional teleport that in itself is a 50/50 mix up on whether she's going to cancel with virtually no lag or into a burst to cover herself is pretty good.Zelda has a godly recovery? Are you sure you're playing the game as us?
i agree with literally none of this.Zelda is also incredibly susceptible to juggles, has a very mediocre projectile that fast characters will punish for throwing out (and characters with disjoints will clank away), a poor approach, dies early off the top, and loses to characters with speed/good projectiles/disjoints. She doesn't deal well with characters in her face and often has to rely on reads to get things started.
I would say that, as good a player as you are, your Zelda probably did as well as it did because of a lack of matchup experience if I had to guess. Zelda is mid tier at best.
lmao. no reply, just lmaoAn omnidirectional teleport that in itself is a 50/50 mix up on whether she's going to cancel with virtually no lag or into a burst to cover herself is pretty good.
You don't think she dies early off the top?i agree with literally none of this.
Let's talk about it then. At the very least regarding what I said about Zelda's properties and not you or your competition, what would you say about Zelda's matchups and weaknesses if what I said is wrong?i agree with literally none of this.
i only play with like a quarter of the top 20 players in the world every week, i guess everyone secretly sucks.
edit-
lmao. no reply, just lmao
No, it is just a thing. You are talking about how long hitboxes last relative to the move. That proportion is important, and is often what makes multihits good. I am talking about the minimum time commitment of a move, and how multihits being long-lasting means their time-commitment is pretty heavy. Thus they are not spammable and are very effectively punished with outmaneuvering, which is a weakness of theirs. Your point has nothing to do with mine.I hope you realize that's a good thing.
So you're saying the total frame commitment of the move, and how, due to the properties of multi hit moves generally lasting longer, they're worse because their IASA is later? If so, no, that's not correct. Take a look at ROB's down smash relative to his other smash attacks, or even a lot of other smash attacks in the game. Or Peach's down smash, or Zelda's fsmash, all multi hit moves with generally low FAF compared to other smash attacks. Hell, even Samus' fire and ice beam up smashes have the same FAF and one is a multi hit and the other isn't.No, it is just a thing. You are talking about how long hitboxes last relative to the move. That proportion is important, and is often what makes multihits good. I am talking about the minimum time commitment of a move, and how multihits being long-lasting means their time-commitment is pretty heavy. Thus they are not spammable and are very effectively punished with outmaneuvering, which is a weakness of theirs. Your point has nothing to do with mine.
I'm not saying they're worse for any reason. I'm saying that a multihit moves is forced to stay out long enough to put out all the hits. They are inherently committal. Yes, what you're saying is true that the fastest and best multihits are faster than the slowest moves, but we are talking about theoretical inherent design.So you're saying the total frame commitment of the move, and how, due to the properties of multi hit moves generally lasting longer, they're worse because their IASA is later? If so, no, that's not correct. Take a look at ROB's down smash relative to his other smash attacks, or even a lot of other smash attacks in the game. Or Peach's down smash, or Zelda's fsmash, all multi hit moves with generally low FAF compared to other smash attacks. Hell, even Samus' fire and ice beam up smashes have the same FAF and one is a multi hit and the other isn't.
There are some exceptions, like Mewtwo's up smash, but there are exceptions to non multi hit moves either, like Lucas' up smash.
If this still isn't what you're saying, than I have no idea.
, where all of the things said generally apply to multi-hit moves, but there are exceptions. In this post, for example, you could say not all multihits are more likely to shield poke than non-multihits; look at Roy's dtilt. The point is we are comparing the same move as a multihit and as a single hit, and defining the other attributes that get changed as a result.Multihit moves trade off SDI vulnerability and being poor trading moves in favor of being long lasting, more likely to shield poke, and possibly a couple other things I can't think of off the top of my head. They aren't strictly worse than single-hit moves.
How is that any different than any other move that can't be cancelled?I'm not saying they're worse for any reason. I'm saying that a multihit moves is forced to stay out long enough to put out all the hits. They are inherently committal. Yes, what you're saying is true that the fastest and best multihits are faster than the slowest moves, but we are talking about theoretical inherent design.
Those hits are active during the window where a non-multi hit move is inactive and then they have similar IASAs. Like, every move is forced to stay out for the duration of it's hitboxes plus it's associated cooldown UNLESS IT CAN BE CANCELLED EARLIER. Multi hit moves almost always have a significantly smaller window between the last frame of hit box activity and the first actionable frame. For example, Zelda's fsmash concluding 15 frames before actionable versus Marth's fsmash concluding 35 frames before actionable.multihit moves is forced to stay out long enough to put out all the hits
This quote makes it sounds like you're saying that multi hit moves are more of a commitment because they're required to stay out the entire duration of the move but that makes LITERALLY ZERO SENSE.multihit moves is forced to stay out long enough to put out all the hits
Ike's down smash is entirely different because it's cancellable after the first swing.My original post was responding to
, where all of the things said generally apply to multi-hit moves, but there are exceptions. In this post, for example, you could say not all multihits are more likely to shield poke than non-multihits; look at Roy's dtilt. The point is we are comparing the same move as a multihit and as a single hit, and defining the other attributes that get changed as a result.
A multi-hit version of the same move is forced to stay out for at least as long as the multiple hits, whereas a single hit version could be done after the first hit. Look at, say, Ike's Brawl dsmash vs his PM dsmash.