Official Viability Ratings v2 | Competitive Impressions

[Vipermoon]

The only really notable thing Greninja's B-Air can do is set-up a jab lock at percents that D-Air can't. But the only really consistent way we have of doing it is Grounded Footstool -> Meteor D-Air -> Footstool -> B-Air Jab Lock -> Finisher. It certainly works well if we get the first footstool.

It's a situational at best thing but hey it's something.

Looks like the timing on the taunt is specific-ish. You have to input the taunt early to make sure to get a later hit so that the Uair still combos (I saw that the other guy was actually able to double jump right before the Uair). But obviously this is the flashy finisher and isn't the purpose of the video

 

[Patriot Duck]

On the subject of Bairs, Ness's is pretty good. It's ever-so-slightly slow at frame 10, but the sweetspot does a whopping 15% and the entire move has 9 active frames. It also autocancels. It's a safe and effective kill move.

 

[Dre89]

has that dishonor. In Smash 4 yeah, they are the worst. At least work in laggy matches, only work on people that have ADHD or just don't care.

Is that a DK icon? I hope not because his dash attack is actually really good. It's like his third or fourth best move (if you count grab as a move). Definitely one of the better dash attacks in the game in terms of utility.

 

[DblCrest]

It's the icon for for SSB64 Donkey Kong. His dash attack in that game was pretty bad

 

[Dre89]

It's the icon for for SSB64 Donkey Kong. His dash attack in that game was pretty bad

I thought so. I just didn't realise he was talking about 64 DK, despite the icon. My bad.

 

[Vipermoon]

On the subject of Bairs, Ness's is pretty good. It's ever-so-slightly slow at frame 10, but the sweetspot does a whopping 15% and the entire move has 9 active frames. It also autocancels. It's a safe and effective kill move.

Ness's Bair is actually kind of busted. Like Uair. But hey, it's Ness. Lots of crap are apparently allowed to be busted on that kid.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

I play both characters and DK's bair is way better than Diddy's. DK's bair is the reason why he's so good at gimping and Diddy isn't. Diddy has a strong enough horizontal recovery to abuse good aerials in gimps, but he can't because his aerials aren't good enough.

DK's bair only comes out two frames slower, the FAF is only one frame slower, but does 13% as opposed to 9, kills earlier and has way more range (it has a huge disjoint).

It has way more utility than Diddy's. He can do two in a shorthop and it combos out of cargo uthrow for a large percent window. It often sets up nicely for a second bair. This isn't confirmed yet but it may be possible to do throw-sour bair-sweet bair, but I need to lab it.

It's ridiculously good at gimping because of the speed, power and massive disjoint. Off-stage it beats nearly everything except counters, which are risky to begin with. Depending on the character, properly spaced bairs can frame trap air dodges into a second bair, upb (needs to be labbed but it has an early sweet spot than can kill offstage at higher percents, but can also do around 30% if you take the full duration). It also has the potential to frame trap them into footstools but this needs to be labbed more. The fact that DK has such a long horizontal recovery means you can go super far off-stage for bair gimps.

Diddy's bair is good but if he had DK's bair he'd easily be like top 3 because suddenly he'd have massive damage on his mid-percent grab combos and he'd be able to safely gimp most of the cast.

I don't think diddy's don't go for gimps because of his recovery. If his recovery was better it'd allow him the freedom to go off stage more. At the end of the day it's not worth a stock to go for such a risk. Everything you said about dk's bair can be said about diddy's bair. It calso combos from throws and dtilt it's also a janky combo starter. Less range and damage hurts the move but all the other specs on this move are ridiculous. 2 frames can be a big difference at times.

 

[bc1910]

Greninja Bair is actually pretty good for walling and edgeguarding.

It has similar range to Sheik's Fair and has a disjoint. 16 frames of landing lag isn't bad (around the same as an Ike aerial). It's -12 on shield now as opposed to -15, which makes it pretty much unpunishable if you land outside shieldgrab range. It's only -5 on shield drop which few characters can punish at the correct spacing.

For edgeguarding it's a fairly meaty move due to the multi hit properties, with good knockback and a good knockback angle. It works like a worse version of Mega Man's Bair, which is amazing for edgeguarding.

Not one of the best (it would have to autocancel and deal more knockback or combo better) but doesn't belong on any "useless" list.

 

[Vechizen]

I haven't been able to find this discussion yet within the thread (apologies if it has been done already) so I thought it might be interesting.

Is there yet a consensus who a solo viable main is? And what their grouping is? Obviously from a competitive standpoint you want your favourite character to be within the solo-viability realm and I would like to start.

Solo-Viable Mains:
/

Is that a fair assumption? Greninja is a little iffy due to the bad Sheik matchup and I excluded Ness because of the ridiculously disgusting matchup against but I understand if you disagree!

If you do disagree, please mention it and state reasons as to why!

 

[Jamurai]

I pretty much agree with your list. There are a couple of things I think could be changed though.

is definitely solo viable. His MU spread is too good, he can deal with any opponent.

I think is pushing it as a solo viable character, his major problems seem to hold him back from being able to compete at top level, including having sub-par grabs and trouble killing a careful opponent. He doesn't really have any results to help his case.

may be pushing it as well, he's clearly a really good character with not many bad matchups, it's just a question of whether his big problem with Sheik means that he definitely requires a secondary to be viable. Again, not amazing on the results front.

Ones I'm not sure about are , I'm not sure if their matchup spreads are good enough for them to be completely solo viable. Ike has impressive results in the US recently though. Would be cool if someone could expand on them.

 

[HFlash]

I'm really glad that this was brought up because I have been actually looking into this particularly for . So from my limited tournament experience, I have placed around 7-12 in two 35+ tourneys and I keep getting pretty wrecked by Falcon's "bad matchups" aka Ness, Pika, Shiek, etc. So I tell myself, ok, let's do some research. I look at the mlgsmash page on YT and find this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6GSL45zLDU

Essentially, it isn't Mr.R dominating Fatality, it's Shiek dominating Falcon. Out of every mis step for Fatality, he was eating 40 - 50%, particularly when he was taken off stage, and it seemed like there wasn't much he could do about it. Pika Mu is also bad, but until I find a set at a high ranking tournament between top level Falcon and Pikachu, I'll reserve my opinion on that.

The point I'm making is that I don't really think Falcon is solo viable. I do think a Falcon player can be very successful if he supplements the Falcon with a character that does well vs Pika and Shiek.

I would say the character list that does well vs those two would be:
(and maybe despite losing to Pikachu).

Let me know what you guys think!

 

[bc1910]

Having one bad MU doesn't rule you out of solo viability. Several of the Melee top tiers are thought to lose 6:4 or worse to Fox, yet they're all capable of winning nationals (I look to Jiggs and Peach specifically). There were also plenty of characters in Brawl who lost quite badly to MK yet were solo viable.

Plus, Greninja's MU with Sheik is significantly better now that he can touch her shield. This applies particularly to the Marth and Ness MUs too but I digress.

On the results front he has tournament wins in Europe and consistent top 16/8 placings in Japan, plus some wins in smaller/online tourneys. At this point, Greninja is just about solo viable.

Ness should be solo viable (again, one bad MU with Rosalina shouldn't rule him out) but both his Sheik and Rosalina MUs are pretty bad so I'm not as sure. Falcon I would argue falls into the same camp as Greninja, having just one truly problematic MU, but I think his Sheik MU is worse than Greninja's. There seem to be other characters who give him a very hard time too, such as Pikachu and MK.

 

[Yikarur]

6/4 is not an unwinnable MU. it's just not in your favor. A 4/6 (-1) doesn't make you unviable. -2 is a counter and threatens your viability, but not a -1 MU.

 

[Spinosaurus]

Difficult calling Wario solo viable at a national level when he's really reliant on waft. I'm not really sure myself, yet.

Overall I'd say he needs a secondary for his bad MUs. This character's low damage output really holds him back and makes it exceedingly difficult and frustrating to be consistent with him.

 

[Routa]

Wario is "solo viable". His MU spread is mainly 55:45/45:55 (slightly in favour of Wario/Foe). He has bad MUs against some top tier guys (mainly Sheik and ZSS), but they are still doable.. It is suggested to have secondary if you main Wario. Depending from the region he can be solo viable. If the region is full of Sheiks... Well say bye bye to your dream of solo maining Wario and winning regionals.

 

[Ghostbone]

Jiggs vs melee fox is more like a 3:7 but that's a different game. You can have a counter in the meta and still be solo viable if you go even or beat every other relevant character.

Out of Vechi's list, Wario, Ike, Pit, Yoshi and Greninja aren't solo viable. Villager is sort of dubious but we'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Wario's results mostly come from abadango who doesn't go solo wario, yoshi has never done anything, neither have greninja or Pit (Like Wii fit's results far surpass the latter 3 lol). Ike gets good results but is never actually in contention to win soooo

 

[Wintropy]

This does tie back into what exactly constitutes a -1 (is it 45 / 55 or 40 / 60?), and what constitutes a -2 (40 / 60 or 30 / 70?)

Is -2 an unwinnable matchup, or is that reserved for -3 and higher? Is it divided by a ratio of 5 (45 / 55 = -1, 40 / 60 = -2) or 10 (40 / 60 = -1, 30 / 70 = -2)?

I have yet to find a general consensus on this, because inevitably people will come in with decimals and 5's and make things even more complicated.

If it's the case that 40 / 60 is -1 and 30 / 70 is -2, then yes, I agree that a -2 matchup is a damning nail in the coffin and is a big roadblock to solo viability. Just want to get people's opinions on this, because I know it's been debated in this thread before, but nobody is agreed on the fine details.

If that is indeed the case, then yes, I can see Falcon having a -2 (30 / 70) Sheik matchup (Falcon mains can dispute this if they want), which is a pretty big blow to his solo viability. Then you have a character like Pit (I don't mean to turn this into a discussion of my main, but he fits the criteria of what I want to explain very well) who has no unwinnable matchups, but no unloseable matchups either - yet he's still considered solo viable by quite a few people because he doesn't get countered by anybody, but he doesn't counter anybody either. In other words, you won't need to switch to a secondary for any matchup, but you might decide to do so if you want to beat weaker characters with greater ease. Is that considered when defining who is / is not solo viable? Or is it discounted because it's a matter of comfort rather than necessity?

Discuss.

 

[Ghostbone]

A -2 doesn't automatically make you not solo viable (4:6 = -1 and 3:7 = -2), even if it's against the best character, it just means if you'd otherwise be 2nd or 3rd if that character didn't exist, you'll probably find yourself around 7th or 8th on the tier list instead. -2 isn't unwinnable, it's just hard. ZSS vs MK in Brawl was probably -2 and Salem won Apex soooooooooo.....

-3 is where you get into reasonably unwinnable territory, and that's mostly relegated to ZSS vs heavies.

 

[Wintermelon43]

I consider -1 45:55, -2 40:60, -3 35:65, etc.

 

[bc1910]

Would 55:45 still come under the range of "even" then? Because I usually see 55:45 as being a -1 now, but in the days of Brawl I always observed that as being an even MU with a slight sway in one character's favour.

What has customless Wii Fit done? Genuine question as I do not follow the character.

And Greninja's results in Europe are solid. The character has clearly done something. And I don't wish to debate whether Europe's results "matter". In the main continent, European players aren't that far behind the US or Japan.

 

[Trifroze]

To be honest when it comes to important matchups, a bunch of good ones and one hard counter matchup versus an important character who arguably no one beats still makes you more solo viable than all of your matchups being close to even for example.

As a thought experiment, say there's a single elimination tournament where every player is exactly as good as the next one, and you have to win 6 sets to win the tournament. You personally have two different character choices, with the other one having an unordered top tier spread of -2 / -1 / -1 / -1 / 0 / 0 / +1 / +1 / +1 / +2 and the other one having -1 / -1 / -1 / -1 / -1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / +1 / +1.

Simply based on odds the former should have a better chance at not losing one of those 6 sets, even if their -2 matchup is the most common character in the game as long as the meta doesn't completely revolve around them, and it certainly doesn't revolve around Sheik since quite a few characters could be said to go even with her with most clear cases being ZSS, Sonic, Diddy and Ryu. Sheik isn't the type of character to shut anyone down as long as they don't have terrible neutral or disadvantage, so she will probably never be an overpowering #1 character.

If a character is perceived better than someone else, that means they have a higher chance at not losing in a tournament. For example if we had a clear consensus that Ness is a better character than Yoshi (I don't know if we do but this is for the sake of argument), it would be a fallacy to say Ness is less solo viable than Yoshi, because he's perceived as a better character for the exact reason that he's more viable.

 

[Wintropy]

A -2 doesn't automatically make you not solo viable (4:6 = -1 and 3:7 = -2), even if it's against the best character, it just means if you'd otherwise be 2nd or 3rd if that character didn't exist, you'll probably find yourself around 7th or 8th on the tier list instead. -2 isn't unwinnable, it's just hard. ZSS vs MK in Brawl was probably -2 and Salem won Apex soooooooooo.....

-3 is where you get into reasonably unwinnable territory, and that's mostly relegated to ZSS vs heavies.

So is it a matter of quantity over quality (if you have more bad matchups than somebody else, you're weaker?) That makes sense and honestly goes without saying, but what quantity of bad matchups do you need to cross the threshold of non-viability? What is the exact number of bad matchups necessary, inherent in the phrase "most of the top-tiers"?

If it's based on matchup spread, then Pit is theoretically solo viable, because he has (that we know of) no unwinnable matchups, just irritating ones. I don't think he has any matchups worse than -2, and conversely, none better than +2 (I think both are very rare). The reason he isn't solo mained by players is because...why would you when you can just play a character with a similar matchup spread, but more skewed towards wins?

If it's a case of "he hasn't done anything" - well, that kind of ties back into the idea that the character requires a fine degree of loyalty to be consistent. Not very many players have exhibited that distinction (Earth is probably the closest, being a player who has good results with Pit, but I recall that he has a pocket Fox too); yet in theory, it is possible. In that case, it seems to be desire that's holding him back. If one or two dedicated solo Pit mains began to stir things up in regionals and majors, would that be sufficient to validate the theory?

I'm not saying Pit is or isn't solo viable (I don't know and frankly I don't care either way), I'm just interested in getting to know the method behind the madness.

 

[Ghostbone]

bc1910
Well even though technically 5:5's don't truly exist, since one character always has an advantage, if a matchup is even enough that you're calling it 55:45, you probably don't have enough evidence to show that it's really in a certain character's favour at all, and any minor skill differential will nullify that advantage, so the matchup is for all intents and purposes even (5:5).

If it's obvious enough that one character has an advantage, it's probably a 6:4 matchup.
Out of 100 ratios are cancer, it's impossible to be that precise with matchups.

And yea, I think the quantity of bad matchups is more important than having just a couple of worse matchups, if you're overall better against the field of relevant characters (so "adding up" all your -1s, +2s, etc. gives you a better number). That number is probably the best indicator of your solo viability, excluding potential -3s vs the top 3 or so characters.
Pit doesn't make the cut imo but I could always be proven wrong if someone gets top 3 at a national level tournament with solo/mostly solo Pit. (and I would still count switching between Pit/Dark Pit as solo Pit)

Edit: If we want to be super technical, basically no character is solo viable in this game besides Sheik, and even then Zero often switches to Diddy. Smash 4 is just a game where you want to play a couple of characters.

 

[meleebrawler]

The thing about considering the worst bairs/dash is that you can't look at the move in vacuum, you have to look to the character and see if this move has actually a use, a character could have a pretty decent bair but if it's outclassed by all the other options or if it's very strong but it's very impractical to use then it's a bad bair. Lucario bair is very important in his kit, this move alone spreads so much salt so I can't see it being one of the worst.

There is a lot of characters that has very few usages for his bairs, to list shaya

I don't what criteria Shaya was using when making that "poor bair" list, but there are many, MANY situations where bair is the better aerial to use. It's so good that I often make myself face the other way with confusion while recovering just so that I can use it to attack people near the ledge. It's far from outclassed by fair.

 

[Nobie]

Mega Man's dash attack isn't great, but it IS his best burst movement option on the ground. Given his below average run speed, that's its best use, to suddenly jolt forward when the opponent wasn't expecting it.

Also if it hits, it usually drags the opponent all the way to the edge.

 

[meleebrawler]

Mega Man's dash attack isn't great, but it IS his best burst movement option on the ground. Given his below average run speed, that's its best use, to suddenly jolt forward when the opponent wasn't expecting it.

Also if it hits, it usually drags the opponent all the way to the edge.

Really, a lot of dash attacks are useful for the burst movement they provide even if they're otherwise unremarkable, like Robin's, Shulk's (especially in Shield) and Jigglypuff's (also her fastest grounded kill move).

With that in mind the worst one is probably Luigi's, as it doesn't provide that or anything else really useful. It's buffs only served to make it not unsafe when it hits like in past games, it's still very risky and unrewarding.

 

[wedl!!]

According to what I've heard from Puff mains, she has a great dash attack (probably her best ground button. which isn't saying much) because of its invincibility and damage/kill power. It's basically like the starving man in Africa's version of GnW's.

I've been told that it's the best in the game before, so take the opinions of Puff mains with a gallon of salt.

 

[Jink8]

So is it worth trying to win/play a tournament with Marth? I feel Roy is my better option but I really wanna see/make Marth shine.

 

[Nobie]

According to what I've heard from Puff mains, she has a great dash attack (probably her best ground button. which isn't saying much) because of its invincibility and damage/kill power. It's basically like the starving man in Africa's version of GnW's.

I've been told that it's the best in the game before, so take the opinions of Puff mains with a gallon of salt.

Jigglypuff's dash attack has trample properties. Jigglypuff's just in a situation like Ganondorf, the only thing holding it back is the character's poor running speed.

Strangely enough, I think Jiggly's jab is pretty good, even though it's frame 5.

 

[Rashyboy05]

So is it worth trying to win/play a tournament with Marth? I feel Roy is my better option but I really wanna see/make Marth shine.

Neither Marth nor Roy has results and if there are any tournament results regarding the two characters then I must've never heard of them. You are much better off maining characters like Shiek, ZSS, Ryu, Ike, Capt. Falcon, etc. if you want to play to win because Marth is not solo-viable. Not sure about Roy since I hardly play the character but I think he is under the same problem with Marth in terms of solo-viability.

With that in mind the worst one is probably Luigi's, as it doesn't provide that or anything else really useful. It's buffs only served to make it not unsafe when it hits like in past games, it's still very risky and unrewarding.

*cough*Marcina's Dash Attack*cough*

 

[Jink8]

Neither Marth nor Roy has results and if there are any tournament results regarding the two characters then I must've never heard of them. You are much better off maining characters like Shiek, ZSS, Ryu, Ike, Capt. Falcon, etc. if you want to play to win because Marth is not solo-viable. Not sure about Roy since I hardly play the character but I think he is under the same problem with Marth in terms of solo-viability.


*cough*Marcina's Dash Attack*cough*

I don't necessarily play to win I just like to know that he has a chance.

 

[Smog Frog]

actually has overall decent ground buttons, its just that she cant move on the ground.

also what makes her da a worse version of da? it does overall more damage(12%/8% vs 10%/6%), virtually the same frame data, and according to @KuroganeHammer it doesnt rebound while his(its?) does.

 

[Jink8]

Is Ike really more viable than Marth? If so, how?

 

[HFlash]

The Falcon Shiek MU is definitely not just -1. If the shiek knows what they are doing (like in that set I posted about Mr. R and Fatality, Falcon just cannot get back to stage vs. Shiek. Maybe he just played the MU wrong or isn't as good as Mr. R, but how one sided one some of those games were highlighted just how horrible that MU is. Definitely at least -2 which means alot assuming both players are of relative similar skill.

Is Ike really more viable than Marth? If so, how?

Faster ground moves, a throw game, bigger range in moves (particularly aerials) and similar landing lag with aerials along with tipper like KB without having too tip. Marth is in the cusp of seriously being viable, I think he needs some kind of throw game along with a fix to DB (make it brawl like quick, or at least have it consistently link).

 

[Luigi player]

Jiggs vs melee fox is more like a 3:7 but that's a different game. You can have a counter in the meta and still be solo viable if you go even or beat every other relevant character.

Out of Vechi's list, Wario, Ike, Pit, Yoshi and Greninja aren't solo viable. Villager is sort of dubious but we'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
Wario's results mostly come from abadango who doesn't go solo wario, yoshi has never done anything, neither have greninja or Pit (Like Wii fit's results far surpass the latter 3 lol). Ike gets good results but is never actually in contention to win soooo

30:70 sounds to me like it shouldn't really be won by that character, because of such a big difference in the numbers. That's part of the reason people use 5s.

 

[Nobie]

It's a question of whether you think of matchup ratios as percentages or more like, amount of effective tools relative to the matchup. Having only "30" tools doesn't sound as bad as only winning 30% of the time.

Then again, OHKO moves in Pokemon are 30% accuracy, and if you've ever fought an OHKO team you'd know how aggravating that can be~.

 

[Luigi player]

It's a question of whether you think of matchup ratios as percentages or more like, amount of effective tools relative to the matchup. Having only "30" tools doesn't sound as bad as only winning 30% of the time.

Then again, OHKO moves in Pokemon are 30% accuracy, and if you've ever fought an OHKO team you'd know how aggravating that can be~.

Well yeah it really depends on the person/their perspective.


I just see it as "general advantage". 30 vs 70 is like a pretty big difference and pretty bad disadvantage and definitely not "win 30 % of the time". More like 3/100 or something. Like if that one gets a huge read or something like that. It shouldn't really happen unless you outplay your opponent hard by getting huge reads, or are just quite a bit better than him. If it was a ratio every MU besides 100:0 would sound winable to me. But it definitely isn't like that in practice. I don't know why some people see it as ratios... (like, there's not that much luck involved - we aren't playing Pokemon)

 

[**Gilgamesh**]

The Falcon Shiek MU is definitely not just -1. If the shiek knows what they are doing (like in that set I posted about Mr. R and Fatality, Falcon just cannot get back to stage vs. Shiek. Maybe he just played the MU wrong or isn't as good as Mr. R, but how one sided one some of those games were highlighted just how horrible that MU is. Definitely at least -2 which means alot assuming both players are of relative similar skill.

Fatality record vsis pretty bad.
MLG: Mr. R [3] vs Fatality [1] H flash explained this already [Mr.R was mix between aggressive and defensive]

Sktar 3/4: False [3] vs Fatality [1] Dominated him in at least 2 of the matches [loss 1 due to dying while edge-guarding Fatality] [False played really aggressive]

SSC: ZeRo [3] vs Fatality [0] Completely dominated Fatality the entire set. [ZeRo played really defensive]

Honestly I think MU is just plain awful as it appears Sheik can play any style vs him and still dominate the match against Falcon and I won't be surprised if it ends up being a [-3] later on (if it isn't already). Other Falcon main Max Ketchum thinks Sheik destroys Falcon as well.

 

[Xxaz_v]

only work on people that have ADHD

So they work on everyone?


Anyways, time to make a real post. After playing a little, I would say he's top 15. has good throws (excluding up throw) that can set up combos. His frame data is good, but has some janky hitboxes. His Netural game is above average, and thanks to the number of jumps he has, his off-stage game is great. He's mostly held back by his lack of safe kill options.

 

[TurboLink]

Ness's Bair is actually kind of busted. Like Uair. But hey, it's Ness. Lots of crap are apparently allowed to be busted on that kid.

What makes Uair and Bair busted?