Tournament characters

[Kulty]

Hi guys,

I plan to transfer my Smash 4 environment from a semi-competitive to a competitive environment, meaning that I wish to go to tournaments and stuff. When it comes for characters, according to the definition of main in SmashWiki, most people go to tournaments with one or two mains mostly, but some have 3 for some exceptions. So I wanted to check that fact out with previous tournament results to see how many characters high-skill level players use in big tournaments. I see a lot of people using only one character, others use two and some use 3 as exceptions. I just want to know what is the general consensus when it comes to the number of characters when going to a tournament. How many characters (competitive mains and secondaries included) is the most recommendable to go to tournaments? 1,2 or 3?

 

[Accidental]

I only voted 3 because I personally bring 3 characters to tourneys. However, it depends on your character. Sheik is good with anyone, BUT if you struggle with one matchup as your main character, that's when you bring out the secondary. I only have a third character because both my main and secondary struggle with Sheik.

 

[Wintropy]

Three at the absolute maximum. Any more is just making things difficult to keep track of.

 

[Kulty]

I only voted 3 because I personally bring 3 characters to tourneys. However, it depends on your character. Sheik is good with anyone, BUT if you struggle with one matchup as your main character, that's when you bring out the secondary. I only have a third character because both my main and secondary struggle with Sheik.

Well, if I would have three characters, that would be . My main isif I would have to pick one. What do you think of Mario? From what I know, pretty solid competitively, but struggles against best characters.

 

[Kulty]

Three at the absolute maximum. Any more is just making things difficult to keep track of.

But is three characters considered to be more effective than just two? I would really hesitate between two or three characters to bring to tournaments. Either option or option .

 

[Wintropy]

But is three characters considered to be more effective than just two? I would really hesitate between two or three characters to bring to tournaments. Either option or option .

It really depends on how your characters' matchup spreads work out.

Really, it's down to this:

If you focus on one character, you can dedicate yourself entirely to that character and understand their abilities in minute detail, whereas with a secondary, you divide your time proportionately between more than one character and therefore won't master both of them as quickly.

The drawback of dedicating yourself to a single main is that you risk running into bad matchups. Unless you play Sheik, this is inevitable, so it's good practice to have a backup character for when the going gets tough.

 

[Kulty]

It really depends on how your characters' matchup spreads work out.

Really, it's down to this:

If you focus on one character, you can dedicate yourself entirely to that character and understand their abilities in minute detail, whereas with a secondary, you divide your time proportionately between more than one character and therefore won't master both of them as quickly.

The drawback of dedicating yourself to a single main is that you risk running into bad matchups. Unless you play Sheik, this is inevitable, so it's good practice to have a backup character for when the going gets tough.

That means that I prefer having multiple characters since I don't want to play Sheik just because she's the most boring character to play imo. At the same time, playing multiple characters mean better understanding of matchups, but I sacrifice bigger time to learn my mains just to get better matchup knowledge. Since have trouble against (Roy especially), I picked not only to vary my playstyle and counter Mario and Roy's bad matchups, but I think Villager has the tools to stop almost any character's playstyle. Sure, he may kinda struggle against Sheik, but I figured that Villager can still be fun to play, especially when played properly defensively or agressively. Of course, I want to be aggressive with Villager which is very hard to do.

 

[Zethoro]

It really depends on how your characters' matchup spreads work out.

Really, it's down to this:

If you focus on one character, you can dedicate yourself entirely to that character and understand their abilities in minute detail, whereas with a secondary, you divide your time proportionately between more than one character and therefore won't master both of them as quickly.

The drawback of dedicating yourself to a single main is that you risk running into bad matchups. Unless you play Sheik, this is inevitable, so it's good practice to have a backup character for when the going gets tough.

We don't know for certain that Shiek has no bad matchups. We've seen some characters that seem to have a 50:50 or maybe even a slightly positive matchup against Shiek.
You want to be able to properly CP your opponent's characters in almost every situation, so personally I say having a main with two strong secondaries is a good idea. I wouldn't reccommend more than that, but having one character can cause your playstyle to get read.
Let's take Pax's ZeRo vs. Vinnie for example. Part of the reason I believe ZeRo pulled the 2nd set back was due to the fact that Vinnie analyzed his playstyle, and ZeRo mixed it up by switching characters. When he picked Diddy early on Vinnie wasn't quite as into ZeRo's Shiek so Vinnie was able to deal with his Diddy fine, but as Vinnie sliped into a certain mindset ZeRo turned the tables when he found the chance.
This is part of the beauty of having a secondary, and isn't even including the benefits a secondary has for covering some of another character's bad matchups.
Just something to think about; I could be right or I could be wrong here. Just keep in mind that mastering three characters is obviously far more time consuming than mastering just one.

 

[Kulty]

We don't know for certain that Shiek has no bad matchups. We've seen some characters that seem to have a 50:50 or maybe even a slightly positive matchup against Shiek.
You want to be able to properly CP your opponent's characters in almost every situation, so personally I say having a main with two strong secondaries is a good idea. I wouldn't reccommend more than that, but having one character can cause your playstyle to get read.
Let's take Pax's ZeRo vs. Vinnie for example. Part of the reason I believe ZeRo pulled the 2nd set back was due to the fact that Vinnie analyzed his playstyle, and ZeRo mixed it up by switching characters. When he picked Diddy early on Vinnie wasn't quite as into ZeRo's Shiek so Vinnie was able to deal with his Diddy fine, but as Vinnie sliped into a certain mindset ZeRo turned the tables when he found the chance.
This is part of the beauty of having a secondary, and isn't even including the benefits a secondary has for covering some of another character's bad matchups.
Just something to think about; I could be right or I could be wrong here.

I agree. Having a solo main to me is not really a good idea, so between two or three characters total should be fine. What option is mostly solid to you : 2 characters or 3 characters? If two, two mains or one main and one secondary? If three, one main with two secondaries, two mains with one secondary or three mains? Having a hard time with numbers XD. I would tend to go with three if I would pick one option, but that's just me. I don't know what you think about it, but I want to know your suggestions.

 

[Wintropy]

For what it's worth, you can just play a character to have fun, too.

I play and . Palutena doesn't cover any of Pit's poor matchups, she's just worse overall, but she's fun so I stick with her.

 

[Kulty]

For what it's worth, you can just play a character to have fun, too.

I play and . Palutena doesn't cover any of Pit's poor matchups, she's just worse overall, but she's fun so I stick with her.

I see. I just want to play three characters at a high-skill tournament level. If I would pick for fun characters (I would call them for fun secondaries), I would likely pick 5 characters to form my personal top 8 characters in Smash 4(then again, I don't take them as seriously. I only play them if I'm bored to play with my competitive characters or just to chill with my friends if we're playing for competitive fun) which are .

 

[Zethoro]

I agree. Having a solo main to me is not really a good idea, so between two or three characters total should be fine. What option is mostly solid to you : 2 characters or 3 characters? If two, two mains or one main and one secondary? If three, one main with two secondaries, two mains with one secondary or three mains? Having a hard time with numbers XD. I would tend to go with three if I would pick one option, but that's just me. I don't know what you think about it, but I want to know your suggestions.

It all depends on what characters you're using. If you use two characters and they both share a very bad matchup to a common character (say, ) you need a character that can throw them by surprise, or a character that you can play proficiently that goes even with them.
I've only gone to a few locals and played on Anthers some so I'm obviously not the best source of info, but a good example of this is that even though gets bodied by his drastic change in playstyle to, say, my or can be just what I need to throw them off guard and win a match.
Unpredictability is important to winning, even in top level play. It's even more important the lower down the ladder you get with players.

 

[Kulty]

It all depends on what characters you're using. If you use two characters and they both share a very bad matchup to a common character (say, ) you need a character that can throw them by surprise, or a character that you can play proficiently that goes even with them.
I've only gone to a few locals and played on Anthers some so I'm obviously not the best source of info, but a good example of this is that even though gets bodied by his drastic change in playstyle to, say, my or can be just what I need to throw them off guard and win a match.
Unpredictability is important to winning, even in top level play. It's even more important the lower down the ladder you get with players.

I'm not exactly sure about it, but I know that Mario is one of the best characters (but not the best) to take on against Sheik, but is the Roy-Sheik decent for Roy? I won't be surprised if it's slightly in Sheik's favour, but I want to know if Roy is decent against Sheik or pretty bad? I don't plan to use Villager a lot compared to Mario and Roy, but I really do like the fact that Villager can counter almost any playstyle in the game due to him having probably the best zoning tools in the game.

 

[Zethoro]

I'm not exactly sure about it, but I know that Mario is one of the best characters (but not the best) to take on against Sheik, but is the Roy-Sheik decent for Roy? I won't be surprised if it's slightly in Sheik's favour, but I want to know if Roy is decent against Sheik or pretty bad? I don't plan to use Villager a lot compared to Mario and Roy, but I really do like the fact that Villager can counter almost any playstyle in the game due to him having probably the best zoning tools in the game.

Mario's MU with Shiek is...okay. It's not great but not terrible. On stages with platforms it becomes better for Mario, maybe a 55:45 or 60:40 in Shiek's favor on BF. Just know that if your opponent plays Shiek, you want to strike FD no matter what.

As for Roy, I don't know but I'd say Roy would have a very hard time facing Shiek.

 

[Kulty]

I'm really willing to take the time of learning 3 characters (2 mains and one secondary) so that I can have more character variety and better matchup knowledge overall. Sure it might be long, but I think it's worth my time.

 

[The Legendary Big Boss]

This is a fun and interesting question to me. In Brawl, I was tempted into learning every character and I became pretty proficient at each one. However, I decided to try a different approach in Smash 4. In this game I only have two mains, and I am keeping it that way no matter how tempted I may become. I have to say my skill with my two characters is drastically improving faster than when I tried to learn everyone last game.

I suggest you have two mains. Also try to have your mains have different strengths and weaknesses so they can approach problems (i.e. your opponent) from different angles. For example my Link has good range, good kill power, is heavy, but has a bigger hurt-box, lower speed, and a meh recovery. However, my Pikachu has low range, low kill power, is light, but has a smaller hurt-box, great speed overall, and an amazing recovery. The switch usually throws off my opponents strategies. Plus I have fun playing both of them.

 

[Kulty]

This is a fun and interesting question to me. In Brawl, I was tempted into learning every character and I became pretty proficient at each one. However, I decided to try a different approach in Smash 4. In this game I only have two mains, and I am keeping it that way no matter how tempted I may become. I have to say my skill with my two characters is drastically improving faster than when I tried to learn everyone last game.

I suggest you have two mains. Also try to have your mains have different strengths and weaknesses so they can approach problems (i.e. your opponent) from different angles. For example my Link has good range, good kill power, is heavy, but has a bigger hurt-box, lower speed, and a meh recovery. However, my Pikachu has low range, low kill power, is light, but has a smaller hurt-box, great speed overall, and an amazing recovery. The switch usually throws off my opponents strategies. Plus I have fun playing both of them.

Well, areand a good combination of characters (like different strengths and weaknesses)? Or would you suggest ? Or any character that could go well with(except for )? It's like my roster of characters that I enjoy completely are . Does mastering three characters really hurt your development for learning characters?

 

[The Legendary Big Boss]

Having three mains will not hurt your development; it will just slow it down a lot more. If you really prefer pure aggression then perhaps Roy would be the better choice. But I do not like him competitively because of his inconvenient sweet spot, fast-falling medium weight blend which is combo string food, and his easily gimp-able recovery. If I was in your situation, I personally would probably pick Mario and Villager. For one, I like those two characters and their play-styles a lot myself because they are more stable. Two, you already have experience with them. Three, they are pretty different; Mario is proficient close range and a combo character while Villager is projectile and setup character. Both are not at awkward weights that allow them to be combo-ed excessively and also have decent combo breakers with their N-airs.

Ultimately, though the decision is yours to make. This is only my advice for you.

 

[Kulty]

Having three mains will not hurt your development; it will just slow it down a lot more. If you really prefer pure aggression then perhaps Roy would be the better choice. But I do not like him competitively because of his inconvenient sweet spot, fast-falling medium weight blend which is combo string food, and his easily gimp-able recovery. If I was in your situation, I personally would probably pick Mario and Villager. For one, I like those two characters and their play-styles a lot myself because they are more stable. Two, you already have experience with them. Three, they are pretty different; Mario is proficient close range and a combo character while Villager is projectile and setup character. Both are not at awkward weights that allow them to be combo-ed excessively and also have decent combo breakers with their N-airs.

Ultimately, though the decision is yours to make. This is only my advice for you.

I also thought of switching to for my main ally for Mario. If I consider this, Mario's main weaknesses are :

• No frontal approach
• Poor range on his moves
• Sub-par recovery
• Difficult to find KO setups to finish up stocks

Taking that into consideration, the characters that can really solve all of Mario's issues are imo,and. I might now take ZSS into consideration since I'm now interested in her. Is there any other characters that fixes all of Mario's issues mentionned above? I think that Roy may not be perfect to cover Mario, because he has not-so-good approach options and bad recovery. Villager has all of that. Same goes for Fox, ZSS, Shulk and Sonic imo. I don't know if there are other characters that can fix all of Mario's issues, so I would like to know if you have any other characters in mind that have those attributes. I'm doing this so that I can find the balance of number of characters. If two characters cover up their strengths and weaknesses well together, I'll only master two. If not, I'll take three.

 

[The Legendary Big Boss]

I am sure there are other characters who are able to cover Mario's weaknesses up pretty well too. But you already have a lot of experience with Villager and he does cover these weaknesses. I would choose him if he is the next in line of who you have the most fun playing the game with.

 

[Kulty]

I am sure there are other characters who are able to cover Mario's weaknesses up pretty well too. But you already have a lot of experience with Villager and he does cover these weaknesses. I would choose him if he is the next in line of who you have the most fun playing the game with.

Well, can you give a list of characters that can cover all of Mario's weaknesses? There might be a character that I enjoy more than Villager. I don't have actually have a lot of Villager experience, since I just picked him up recently. Then again, I'm experimenting with the characters again since I'm really having a hard time finding another character that can help Mario a lot.