Based on Zhime vs Junebug, I'd put Diddy at -2.
Not a good set to judge the MU from imo...Zhime was flubbing a lot of tech (especially the platform tele-cancels, presumably because this was one of his first tournies in 3.5 and we all know the timing was pretty wack), and both players weren't really playing to the MU well; they were giving away a lot of free punishes, got edgeguarded easily, fell for too many unsafe approaches, etc. Playing well =/= playing well while making use of MU knowledge, and the latter didn't really show up here.
Why do you consider the Ganondorf matchup +2?
Most of my scores are based off 3.02 MU knowledge, along with my 3.5/6 experience to cover some gaps. I gave the Ganon MU a 60-40 score because we pretty obviously win edgeguard/recovery game, and our disjoint gives us a huge edge in neutral game - our options can threaten him much more safely and severely than his. We also have better movement. Ganon in general isn't a character with
that great of an MU spread; he reaps high reward from reads, but has to rely on that because of subpar startup lag, range, and movement. And that can work. But when giving a score to how characters shape up to one another, we should judge with the players playing optimally, and with enough MU knowledge to not fall for the reads that Ganon needs to take stocks. Zelda has the tools to keep him a safe-ish distance away, from which she can continue threatening him.
Ivysaur at worst goes even with Zelda.
As in Ivysaur wins or goes even? Explain your reasoning; I have had an Ivy play partner since 3.02 and have always been considered it at least a slightly advantageous. Can't remember the Zelda board's consensus, but I believe that was the opinion of the Ivy boards back from 3.5 too, and we've been buffed since then.
I actually have no idea how this MU works lol. Have we discussed it here before...? I have a Jiggs friend, but we've only played once in bracket when we met and I didn't want to risk an MU that I assumed would be difficult on both sides...
I'd put King DeDeDe at 0.
Same on this one lol, no idea how it'd go. No knowledge on it, and while he is a big target, he has a ton of disjoint, good recovery (not sure how easy it is to predict and punish waddledash recovery paths, which could be a big factor), good zoning tools, and good juggle game (eww).
I would've agreed with you in 3.02, but since 3.5 I feel we can handle him a tad more easily. Either way, it's disadvantageous. As he is now, we can handle his projectile camping, and while swords suck, we can be pretty threatening if spacing just outside his F-tilt range; we can retreat with LC Nayrus or shield projectiles on reaction, and punish his whiffed grounded normals. It's hard to stay in that position because he has so many mixup options, but the fact that it exists and can be entered fairly easily keeps this from being that bad of an MU. Main reason why I think 3.02 Link was so scary was his effective projectile camping (which we did lose to), and how easily he was able to follow-up on any of the stray projectile hits.
Why is Lucario +2? From the changelog and discussions, I was under the impression that his gameplay was intact, the differences being that some of his go-to options became less safe and aura takes longer to charge.
This is from experience. Lucario does screw Zelda up if he can get in, as he does with...anyone, but as we have a few convenient gtfo panic tools that most characters don't to counter this, in case we mess up and he does get in. LKs are scarier to him that most other characters since he's tall and it stuffs a lot of his approaches (which he neeeeds; he can't just camp it out like other characters), and his recovery is pretty darn predictable. It's easy to cover a high/low recovery and then throw out grounded Nayrus, D-smash, or a high/low LK/Nair.
I'd be ok with that; Mario has a tiny advantage imo, but not by much. The thread's OP said +1 = slight advantage = 55:45, and...idk. I still feel that Zelda can do nasty things to Mario back.
IIRC the two scariest things about 3.02 M2 was his aerial tail disjoint (which completely stuffed all our options if he was nearby), his scary-ass F-air (range was nerfed slightly, since it used to be stupid long), being able to aerial straight out of teleport. Zelda couldn't really react to that with anything else but a yolo LK (which would probably either miss or hit stheild), or good ole predictable panic Nayru's. Those things were all nerfed. Without them, I feel that Zelda wins neutral and edge game slightly.
Didn't he get buffed in 3.6? No idea what they changed though lol...hard for me to tell since I just ignored 3.5 Pit entirely. x)
3.02 </33
Why do you consider the Samus matchup +1?
...why wouldn't I? +1 is generous. +2 wouldn't be too far-fetched either. Samus is a character that relies on slow+strong projectiles, which are great for projectile pressure, hard follow-up punishes, etc. Slow is a key word. We invalidate slow projectiles for camping at a distance, and hers are among the few that remain threatening at a close-distance, but are more than slow enough for us to react to even when spacing closely. Link's projectile game is totally different (irrelevant), but one of the big reasons why that MU is harder is because he beats our disjoint with bigger disjoint. He wins the priority fight, although we can still punish him because of his meh frame data. Samus is basically the same thing, but with better frame data (but not much better than ours). This isn't scary because we outprioritize basically all of her normals, because even though she has high priority moves, disjoint > non-disjoint, even if we only have a little.
I'd put Squirtle at -3. On Smashboards and reddit, the prevailing opinion is that Squirtle mains have never come close to optimizing the character's meta. Some of the top known Squirtle mains publicly claim online that they're not great at the character. Contrariwise, Zelda has nearly been pushed to her limits the past several versions, and she's not much different from 3.5. The matchup is considered -2 with Zelda's optimal strategy, but I see it as -3 when someone decides to truly invest in Squirtle and push him to his limits. Squirtle has often been cited as a near unwinnable matchup on this board. Heck, it could become -4.
I'm more than willing to bandwagon this opinion with all my bags of salt, but I haven't experimented with this MU for a long time (who the **** would want to keep playing if secondaries are an option >___<), and from what I've heard he got pretty badly nerfed. And more recently, I've been realizing how nice Zelda's crouch cancel is vs. Sheik, who suffers to crouch cancels just as badly as Squirtle (or so I've heard). So...giving it the benefit of the doubt for now, until I give it another go. If we play super lame, maybe we could do about as well in this MU as some other 40:60 MUs...maybe bring this back to at least 45:65ish instead of just giving up on it completely (only for the sake of clarifying things though...can't imagine anyone would play this in bracket if they had alternate options).
Toon Link is at least -2 according to Lunchables, and I'd agree.
He's short, has a good projectile game, good edgeguarder, and ZSS's combo weight/falling speed.
http://smashboards.com/threads/tink-matchup-guide-thread.393875/page-2#post-19596488
Agreed. This one I wasn't 100% on, but now I'm convinced it should be 40:60ish.
Yoshi got significantly nerfed in 3.6. Oracle's 3.5 sets versus Hamyojo suggest that the matchup was near even. I'd put it at 0 minimum in 3.6.
No idea how badly this was, but Odds mentioned he was picking up a Yoshi as a secondary, believing him to be one of the more underlooked characters with crazy potential in 3.5 (along with ROB), and iirc he has maintained this stance since 3.6's release. Tbh I haven't checked his changelog though, and haven't met any half-challenging Yoshi's. He sounds like an even-ish MU, but he looks too jank to make reliable pre-judgements on; he's prob a lot scarier to play than he seems to be on paper.
@
Zerudahime is Zelda. In general, the matchup would range from -2 to -3 versus him in the ditto.
That's...not how it works. MU scores are based off of both sides having the same awareness/knowledge of tools/options, the same
skill/experience, and both playing optimally. It's ok to use a top player for referencing in MUs, but it's nonsensical to say that Zelda beats Squirtle because we pit the best Zelda vs. some of the best Squirtles and Zhime comes out on top most of the times. Top players are useful in MU comparisons
because they play as optimally as we can conceive a character to, or at least exemplify aspects of that ideal. But if you pit a top player like Zhime against an opponent that is chosen specifically because they're worse...it loses usefulness in MU scoring. Besides, MU scores are supposed to be a rouge standard that we can use to guesstimate the difficulty of MUs against those of us around the same skill. If I played another Zelda at my same skill/knowledge/etc. level, then we'd be at 50:50 right? We both couldn't be losing to each other 30:70 lol...
I'd use the matchup summary for ZSS and put her at -2.
From what little I've played of the MU, I'd agree. I assumed that ZSS would have advantage if playing super safe (since both destroy each other in combos, so neutral game is super important and ZSS has ridiculous movement. Although I can see Zelda stuffing a lot of her approach options in neutral...
Btw, forgot to mention that I won't be updating my chart because I already posted my votes to the thread (I actually already changed it once, don't wanna cause the OP anymore trouble again), but thoughts still appreciated.
|
|
