Zelda Matchup Thread // OUTDATED

[Darkmusician]

I'm so glad it doesn't have the stars like Yoshi's Down B. But it has a lot of wind push or something if I recall. That and sometimes it hits your shield and then hits again cause the hit box just lingers like too much garlic.

 

[-Tempest-]

I'm so glad it doesn't have the stars like Yoshi's Down B. But it has a lot of wind push or something if I recall. That and sometimes it hits your shield and then hits again cause the hit box just lingers like too much garlic.

Yeah, it's got a fairly good wind push on it that can mess up timings if you're not careful. It can also gimp if you fail to sweetspot the edge.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

I'm so glad it doesn't have the stars like Yoshi's Down B. But it has a lot of wind push or something if I recall. That and sometimes it hits your shield and then hits again cause the hit box just lingers like too much garlic.

you CAN Usmash his Dair and that'll work after he hits your shield, but timing on that is pretty tight comparitively.

 

[MrEh]

I maintain that I'd take TL to Castle Siege for the reasons I stated earlier. Of course, I have no actual experience versus Toon Link at Castle Siege, but that's generally the case with all my theoretical counterpicks that I use in tournaments and they seem to work out pretty well for me (so I'll leave it up to ya'll if you want to take my advice or not).

If Warioware is legal, you should take people there. lol

Though you have power and were light, Your light too.

Link isn't that light. He's midweight actually, which makes him heavier then Marth. XD

Ok, since stage discussion is apparently not as important as "playing smart", then let's just play smart and beat everyone and we should be perfectly fine, right?

Yes.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You guys need to take a chill pill.

Stage discussion is a viable part of the discussion, but in terms of match-up, you rely strictly on a suppose neutral playing field where there is no real stage advantage. That's what makes the point of the match-up.

However, Stage discussion is very important too, while it's not part of the match-ups, it's still necessary to know since you're going to lose sooner or later, so picking the right counterstage is the remedy for that. While winning the first match is important, you also have to counter it since the opponent will most likely secure a a win on the 2nd round with a counterpick. Always be perpared in that case.

Actually, thats not true, characters can be assigned advantages when they have a signifigantly better spread in the neutrals, because that DOES tip the overall match-up in one character's favor.

Bascially, if a character does better in practice then the match-up says, we need to quantify why, and this definately can be an example.

MrEh has a point. Any match up that is easier with Sheik you might as well go MK if you're not gonna go Zelda.

I'm gonna have to disagree, a lot of people here are Zelda/Sheik mains, and you can never really get away from the fact that Sheik and Zelda are part of each other, plus being away to switch in battle is an anti-counter picking mechanic.

Though, still wondering, in Zelda/Sheik does the ability to switch to Zelda effect the match-up significantly?

 

[MrEh]

I'm gonna have to disagree, a lot of people here are Zelda/Sheik mains, and you can never really get away from the fact that Sheik and Zelda are part of each other, plus being away to switch in battle is an anti-counter picking mechanic.

It's not a good anti-counterpicking mechanic though, since Sheik and Zelda's matchups are both pretty bad. lol

Though, still wondering, in Zelda/Sheik does the ability to switch to Zelda effect the match-up significantly?

It doesn't effect any matchup significantly.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

It doesn't effect any matchup significantly.

ahaha... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

oh that's funny. I could list many but we'll just go with pikachu and ike for now.

 

[Brinzy]

Instead of just throwing out random stage suggestions I suggest that we go one stage at a time and discuss it in detail so that the thinking is more organized. But please do not underestimate the power of trapping, conditioning and reading.

You don't have to listen to what I have to say, but don't waste space with sarcastic remarks.

Although I was unnecessarily sarcastic, I was not suggesting that I wasn't going to listen to what you wanted to say. You already posted ways to fight TL, which is more than I could do in that aspect. I'm more interested in what I could contribute (stage discussion); However, while we all understand that you have to play smart, it is rather difficult to discuss on this forum, "Be focused and play smart" as opposed to "______ helps Zelda with this." Sure, knowing what beats what and range and whatnot is also useful, but how do you pin down "playing smart"?

It was not meant to be an attack against you; however, playing smart, as I cannot stress enough, is the best thing that wins matches but is NOT the easiest thing to discuss.

It's not a good anti-counterpicking mechanic though, since Sheik and Zelda's matchups are both pretty bad. lol

Match-ups that are 45:55 or less for both characters, not counting using the other:

MK: no worse than 35:65 for both, no less than 40:60 for both
Snake: probably best to go with Sheik, who has a 40:60. Snake should not be worse than a 40:60 against most characters though because he's not the most difficult character to read, but I'm willing to 35:65 him for Zelda.
G&W: Use Sheik, 40:60
Marth: Both have a 40:60
Wario: I don't care because it's always under debate.
Lucario: Use Zelda, 40:60

That is a grand total of 6 match-ups, 5 if you ignore Wario because of all the drama they have with Sheik. Naturally, you're going to see these guys the most at tournaments, so they do have a tough time against everyone... alone.

Of these fights, you'll be hurt doing a Sheik to Zelda thing against G&W, and you may be hurt doing a Zelda to Sheik thing against Lucario. For the rest:

Snake: Sheik can get inside his defenses and has needles to work with. Lacking in KO power. Switching to Zelda is worth the chances of dying at about the same % in exchange for more killing moves that are not stale. She has a harder time getting inside his defenses, but that's not too bad because she should only have to hit him one time and go back to Sheik. Sheik is capable of scoring KOs on Snake, but Zelda, once given the %s, does equally fine or possibly better at killing. Using both will not be a detriment. At worst, it leaves the match-up the same, but it is highly likely that this pushes the fight into, say, a 45:55. Most of Zelda's problem is getting inside Snake, which Sheik basically elimiinates for all but one time during the stock, which is when you kill with any attack that isn't Jab.

MK: Sheik has lots of legit things on him. Zelda kills him earlier than Sheik, barring grab-release -> DACUS. Both of them can zone him decently, Sheik because of her speed and Zelda because of her range and lingering hitboxes. Using both, like Snake, is not a detriment. It's a benefit if you cannot get the grab with Sheik.

Marth: Sheik, in my opinion and in the opinion of a few notable Marth players, should have a 45:55 or 50:50 against Marth. The issue she has is KO power, but really, it is not difficult for Sheik to edgeguard Marth or to land a powerful aerial like nair or bair (choosing the fresher option, of course) once he's given the percentage. She loses tilt-lock advantages on him, but she still can tack on some free damage with follow-ups. Zelda is at a solid 40:60. It's like the MK match-up, but instead Marth doesn't **** her off-stage like MK does, he can be hit by rising lightning kicks, meaning a shielded Fsmash could easily mean an early death for Marth, and Marth is not quite as lagless. He does have the power advantage with his tipper, but really, aside from tipper Fsmash, what's killing Zelda far earlier in this fight than in the MK fight? 45:55, probably even 50:50 with using both of them. Again, Zelda can be brought in solely for the kill, and while Marth has an amazing defensive game, he still does not have many safe KO options against Zelda.


Naw, they don't have pretty bad match-ups. They're good for the most part.

It doesn't effect any matchup significantly.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Pit: Even against Zelda, even against Sheik, an easy 60:40 when used together.
DK: Even against Zelda, 45:55 against Sheik, an easy 60:40 when used together.
Toon Link: advantaged against Zelda (consensus says 40:60, though I say 45:55, but whatever), even or loses to Sheik, an advantage for both of them because Zelda's problem is having to approach him often; Sheik means she only has to approach one or two times.
Peach: 45:55 or 40:60 for Zelda, 40:60 for Sheik, at least a neutral together, if not beating her.
Mother boys and everyone below: Zelda/Sheik > just one

 

[adumbrodeus]

It's not a good anti-counterpicking mechanic though, since Sheik and Zelda's matchups are both pretty bad. lol

They have different match-ups against different people. It's not gonna effect a MK, but it prevents Tlink from being a Zelda counter-pick, and this is far from the only example of when Zelda or Sheik does better then the other.

It doesn't effect any matchup significantly.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, no.


Zelda and Sheik serve distinct functions, Sheik can damage-rack, Zelda has raw killing power. They are naturally synergistic, and it shows in a number of match-ups.

 

[Darkmusician]

It only affects the match up if you are actually good with one, the other or both. Logic dictates that you should use both because it's effective and efficient. But there are exceptions to those who specialize in one.

Logic, statistics and match ups on paper are fine, but the numbers are never constant because you have to factor in individual skill AND character matchup knowledge. It's a nice starting point but don't expect every fight with every Snake to feel like 60:40 or w/e unrealistic number they say it is.

 

[adumbrodeus]

It only affects the match up if you are actually good with one, the other or both. Logic dictates that you should use both because it's effective and efficient. But there are exceptions to those who specialize in one.

Logic, statistics and match ups on paper are fine, but the numbers are never constant because you have to factor in individual skill AND character matchup knowledge. It's a nice starting point but don't expect every fight with every Snake to feel like 60:40 or w/e.

Yes, but for match-ups to be consistent and useful, they have to be at the top of the metagame.

Without an established benchmark, it becomes, "well the Falcon player is better then the Zelda player so 60-40 Falcon".

If you establish a benchmark skill level below top of the metagame, then the match-up only describes lower levels of play, so it's useless to top levels of play.


If you describe match-ups at the top of the metagame, then it's useful at the top level of play AND lower levels of play, because at the top of the metagame it accurately describes the interaction, and at low levels of play it describes the strategies that lower level players can adopt to make the match-up reflect it more accurately.


So yes, match-ups vary from person to person, so? That's a topic of discussion for personal improvement, not the overall match-up.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

I'd assume the necessity of proficiency with both characters was a given.

If you can't play sheik near as well as you can play zelda obviously switching to sheik even when it is said that you should won't necessarily help you. But since it's ludicrous to assume that everyone is better who is good with sheik is not comparably good with zelda or vice versa, then you'd have to opperate under the assumption that you are equally proficient with both and allow people to adjust for themselves.

 

[Darkmusician]

And that's why I try to only talk in terms of the highest play levels.

 

[adumbrodeus]

And that's why I try to only talk in terms of the highest play levels.

Exactly, and the top of the metagame is as a good a Zelda and Sheik as is humanly possible, so when talking about Zelda/Sheik match-ups, the assumption is top of the metagame for both characters.


From there, we go into the skills and match-up knowledge needed to implement this and we've got a Zelda/Sheik match-up that's useful to everyone.


Technically, since you have the ability to freely switch, not using both is hobbling yourself anyway.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

And that's why I try to only talk in terms of the highest play levels.

yes except for you JUST CONTRADICTED THAT by saying that we shouldn't expect the matchup numbers written because they are idealistic and at the highest levels of play. Now either you felt like reminding us what we already knew about how matchup discussions in general work or you were trying to say that we shouldn't assume the highest levels of play on both.

 

[Darkmusician]

Dude take it easy.

Adumbrodeus asked a question and I told him what I thought. If you already knew then that's fine.

I am saying that at the highest levels of play said ratios are fine to know, but don't rely on them 100%. And personally I just feel that Snake vs Zelda is harder than 60:40. Just my opinion cause I play alot of good Snakes. Take it for what it's worth.

If you have anything further to say to me do it on AIM because I feel awful wasting so much thread space going further and further off the Topic of Toon Link.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

Dude take it easy.

Adumbrodeus asked a question and I told him what I thought. If you already knew then that's fine.

I am saying that at the highest levels of play said ratios are fine to know, but don't rely on them 100%. And personally I just feel that Snake vs Zelda is harder than 60:40. Just my opinion cause I play alot of good Snakes. Take it for what it's worth.

If you have anything further to say to me do it on AIM because I feel awful wasting so much thread space going further and further off the Topic of Toon Link.

I would imagine most people would assume "hey, if I'm better with zelda than sheik, the matchup ratios won't be completely accurate for me" but whatever.

And, yes, snake is probably worse for zelda than 60:40. We'll get to him in the rediscussion thread soon.

Toon link however... we don't actually have many in here ATM... I haven't played many either. Quivo and Shugo are my biggest experiences and both are frustratingly difficult. Not unwinnable though.

 

[-Tempest-]

Despite what my character icon is at the moment, I'm a Toon Link main as well as a Zelda main.

I don't fight the matchup often enough, but I can give advice on either side, if that makes sense.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Dude take it easy.

Adumbrodeus asked a question and I told him what I thought. If you already knew then that's fine.

I am saying that at the highest levels of play said ratios are fine to know, but don't rely on them 100%. And personally I just feel that Snake vs Zelda is harder than 60:40. Just my opinion cause I play alot of good Snakes. Take it for what it's worth.

If you have anything further to say to me do it on AIM because I feel awful wasting so much thread space going further and further off the Topic of Toon Link.

But the question assumed top of the metagame, so that really wasn't a useful answer.



And I'm still looking for the answer, at the top of the metagame, does the ability to switch to Zelda significantly improve Sheik's performance against Tlink? And by significantly I mean, "enough to make the 50-50 a 55-45 or better".

 

[-Tempest-]

Not really. Both Zelda and Sheik have a lack of defense against Toon's wall of projectiles, although Zelda does a lot better against it. Sheik is more agile, but has much less projectile and Zair defense. So, it won't impact it a lot. It's a slightly uphill battle either way.

 

[Darkmusician]

But the question assumed top of the metagame, so that really wasn't a useful answer.



And I'm still looking for the answer, at the top of the metagame, does the ability to switch to Zelda significantly improve Sheik's performance against Tlink? And by significantly I mean, "enough to make the 50-50 a 55-45 or better".

Fine then I'll change my answer. Against Toon Link no it won't change it drastically compared to other match ups. At high levels using both in combination is where the true potential is. Even if it doesn't make the match up even you have two characters at your disposal instead of one so learning both is the best thing to do.

I choose to limit myself by only using Zelda but that's just how I play.

 

[sniperworm]

But the question assumed top of the metagame, so that really wasn't a useful answer.

And I'm still looking for the answer, at the top of the metagame, does the ability to switch to Zelda significantly improve Sheik's performance against Tlink? And by significantly I mean, "enough to make the 50-50 a 55-45 or better".

Sheik is faster, can actually hinder TL's camping with needles, better at gimping, and better at racking damage in this matchup. Therefore at the "top of the metagame," since Sheik would've mastered the decayed Ftilt to Usmash, no I don't think that using Zelda helps at all (since I'm assuming that Zelda is for kills).

Fine then I'll change my answer. Against Toon Link no it won't change it drastically compared to other match ups. At high levels using both in combination is where the true potential is. Even if it doesn't make the match up even you have two characters at your disposal instead of one so learning both is the best thing to do. .

Learning both characters is theoretically the best thing to do. However, theory and reality are two different things. It's unrealistic to think that every person has exactly the same potential to master all characters (lets face it, each of us are better at using certain characters than others). That being said, if someone is significantly better with Zelda or Sheik as compared to their skill with the other, it makes little sense to incorporate the other character. Of course there's also the fact that in order to be effective, Zelda/Sheik users need to completely shift their playstyle in whenever they transform. This means that not only do you have to be capable of using both Zelda and Sheik, but you need to be able to transition between the two playstyles flawlessly during the match. This is yet another factor that separates theory from reality.

In fact, theoretically the best thing for all of us to do is to drop Zelda and use MK.

As for the argument about only utilizing half your moveset, that is true. However, does this mean that Ganon mains should waste time "mastering" Utilt and Neutral B so they can use their whole moveset? Of course not. Those moves are terrible and not worth the effort to incorporate into your game. The same could be applied to Zelda or Sheik. If you're terrible with one of them, DownB becomes a terrible move, and it's questionable whether or not it's worth incorporating it into your game.

Anyway, my point is that the answer to whether Zelda, Sheik, or Zelda/Sheik is best to use really can't be answered in theory (because the theory doesn't equate to reality). It has to be evaluated on a case by case basis.

I choose to limit myself by only using Zelda but that's just how I play.

I've discussed this with you before and I honestly believe that your use of solo Zelda is why you've excelled with her.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Sheik is faster, can actually hinder TL's camping with needles, better at gimping, and better at racking damage in this matchup. Therefore at the "top of the metagame," since Sheik would've mastered the decayed Ftilt to Usmash, no I don't think that using Zelda helps at all (since I'm assuming that Zelda is for kills).

Learning both characters is theoretically the best thing to do. However, theory and reality are two different things. It's unrealistic to think that every person has exactly the same potential to master all characters (lets face it, each of us are better at using certain characters than others). That being said, if someone is significantly better with Zelda or Sheik as compared to their skill with the other, it makes little sense to incorporate the other character. Of course there's also the fact that in order to be effective, Zelda/Sheik users need to completely shift their playstyle in whenever they transform. This means that not only do you have to be capable of using both Zelda and Sheik, but you need to be able to transition between the two playstyles flawlessly during the match. This is yet another factor that separates theory from reality.

Mastering Zelda/Sheik is significantly easier then master melee fox.

The ultimate point is that if you assume inferior players, it becomes useless for the top level, whereas if you assume top level you can use it as a guide for improvement. Sure it might not match up immediately, but the more you learn, the better you'll do.

As for the argument about only utilizing half your moveset, that is true. However, does this mean that Ganon mains should waste time "mastering" Utilt and Neutral B so they can use their whole moveset? Of course not. Those moves are terrible and not worth the effort to incorporate into your game. The same could be applied to Zelda or Sheik. If you're terrible with one of them, DownB becomes a terrible move, and it's questionable whether or not it's worth incorporating it into your game.

...

Wrong, especially utilt has useful edgeguarding options and is worth the time and effort to master due to it's interesting hitbox and raw power. Granted, it takes experience to use properly, but it's a powerful tool.

Anyway, my point is that the answer to whether Zelda, Sheik, or Zelda/Sheik is best to use really can't be answered in theory (because the theory doesn't equate to reality). It has to be evaluated on a case by case basis.

Case by case basis is still theoretical, in fact EVERYTHING we're discussing is theory.

 

[Darkmusician]

In fact, theoretically the best thing for all of us to do is to drop Zelda and use MK.

I've discussed this with you before and I honestly believe that your use of solo Zelda is why you've excelled with her.

Yeah SniperWorm. I hope that someday you'll try using some MK in tournament. He's a great back up character to keep momentum in your favor. Just don't be dumb like me and get Jungle *****. And thanks I'll go with that. XD

 

[KayLo!]

Logic, statistics and match ups on paper are fine, but the numbers are never constant because you have to factor in individual skill AND character matchup knowledge. It's a nice starting point but don't expect every fight with every Snake to feel like 60:40 or w/e unrealistic number they say it is.

Words of wisdom.

I hate the numbering system, tbh. I understand why it's nice to have it as a general reflection of how easy/hard a matchup is, but experience and knowledge of what to actually do in the matchup is far, far more important than "ZOMGIHAVEA60:40ADVONYOU!!!"

Which is why I lol when people argue over the difference between, say, 55:45 and 60:40. *cough*

On that note, I have limited TL experience with Zelda, but he's a quick little spammer. If you can play Sheik, I highly recommend making the switch; otherwise, get inside his wall of projectiles and bait & punish where you can. Everyone's pretty much already said everything I could contribute.

 

[-Tempest-]

I dunno. Maybe it's just me, but I find Sheik is easier to beat as Toon Link than Zelda is.

Sheik's quick, yeah, but Toon's camping hinders her more than it does Zelda, making the speed useless.

 

[Brinzy]

The difference between 55:45 and 60:40 is important because one says "pretty much a neutral" and the other says "you have a bit of trouble."

It's like everyone swears off match-up numbers but can't describe the match-ups effectively in any other way besides general knowledge, which is never enough.

 

[KayLo!]

The difference between 55:45 and 60:40 is important because one says "pretty much a neutral" and the other says "you have a bit of trouble."

It's like everyone swears off match-up numbers but can't describe the match-ups effectively in any other way besides general knowledge, which is never enough.

I somewhat disagree, but there's really no point in arguing about the usefulness of MU numbers since everyone (including myself) uses them anyway.

My main point was that the numbers themselves are far, far secondary to the actual summary of the matchup, but people argue over them like their lives depend on it.

 

[Brinzy]

They may not mean much initially, but I'm pretty sure someone who sees that people believe a match-up to be 55:45 may look for a CP, while a 60:40 may mean that they'll stick with that character. It's somewhat important for that reason, in my opinion.

Now, when you're arguing for 50:50 or 60:40 vs. people who say you have the 40:60... yeah, that's something worth arguing about imo. That reminds me... there's a character that everyone believes to have the advantage against Zelda, but should be completely revamped once I get some testing.

 

[-Tempest-]

Oh? Who is it?

 

[adumbrodeus]

I somewhat disagree, but there's really no point in arguing about the usefulness of MU numbers since everyone (including myself) uses them anyway.

My main point was that the numbers themselves are far, far secondary to the actual summary of the matchup, but people argue over them like their lives depend on it.

The thing is, the match-up number is supposed to be the most succulent way of summarizing the match-up, as such it's supposed to be clear concise and useful for telling the level of difficulty.

They really are the match-up summery, boiled down to it's purest form.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

I always prefer Zelda for toonie actually.

Toonie has projectiles and sheik does better against camping with needles... but a good toonie isn't really CAMPING with his projectiles. He's using them like peach uses turnips: as disruptors and combo starters. I find zelda is better at defending against toonie than sheik by a lot and is also better at killing.
Sheik's better at wracking damage, but still can't get in on toonie too easily and can't do much to defend against him either in my experience.

While it'd be nice to have sheik's ability to wrack damage, I normally find that, if I switch to sheik, I'll quickly wish I had zelda's defenses back.

 

[MrEh]

My main point was that the numbers themselves are far, far secondary to the actual summary of the matchup, but people argue over them like their lives depend on it.

iirc, Hylian said something very important about that.

Matchup ratios are just numbers.

True words of wisdom right here. Ratios are nothing more then broad estimates, and many factors can affect these ratios in an actual match. Matchups can really be described in 5 basic ways.

1. Auto win
2. Advantage
3. Even
4. Disadvanatge
5. You're screwed

Getting in depth is pointless, since player skill makes a precise ratio moot. The difference between 55-45 and 60-40 isn't even worth discussing. I don't need a silly number to tell me that MK and Snake is a death matchup for Zelda.

ahaha... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
oh that's funny. I could list many but we'll just go with pikachu and ike for now.

Wall of text

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, no.

 

[GodAtHand]

That troll was found to actually have heaping amounts of steroids in his suit case... so he was disqualified.

 

[KayLo!]

True words of wisdom right here. Ratios are nothing more then broad estimates, and many factors can affect these ratios in an actual match. Matchups can really be described in 5 basic ways.

1. Auto win
2. Advantage
3. Even
4. Disadvanatge
5. You're screwed

Getting in depth is pointless, since player skill makes a precise ratio moot. The difference between 55-45 and 60-40 isn't even worth discussing. I don't need a silly number to tell me that MK and Snake is a death matchup for Zelda.

Yeah, that's basically what I was getting at. I just didn't have the energy to make my point so clearly, lol.

 

[MrEh]

Yeah, that's basically what I was getting at. I just didn't have the energy to make my point so clearly, lol.

A bit off topic, but here's a pointless fact.

You're one of the few members on these boards that I actually listen to.

 

[Kataefi]

Okay back on topic now!

If someone continues to derail the topic of Toon Link's matchup then please take it to PMs, the Zelda chat, AIM or whatever ^^ Thanks!

Toon Link vs Zelda. I have some questions:

- does toon link have a general pattern to his camp game? I think this is something that could potentially be exploited perhaps.
- Can din's explode bombs regardless of whether he shields or spotdodges? Would be interesting to know =)

 

[MrEh]

- does toon link have a general pattern to his camp game? I think this is something that could potentially be exploited perhaps.

Link has a lot of options as long as you give him room to work. He an chuck a boomerang, pick up a bomb, and start shooting arrows. And he can always use his Zair as well. There's no gaping weakness to his camping, but there are ways to make it less effective.

Like I said previously, close the gap between yourself and him. And if you're on Battlefield or Yoshi's, learn how to platform camp.

- Can din's explode bombs regardless of whether he shields or spotdodges? Would be interesting to know =)

Nope.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

- does toon link have a general pattern to his camp game? I think this is something that could potentially be exploited perhaps.

yes..... ish.

most players have favourite patterns... LEARN THEM (unfortunately, you'll probably have to do this on the fly unless it's a big name toon link, but in that case, he's probably good enough to mix them up)

 

[Brinzy]

Oh? Who is it?

Ness. I still need to test some things. If my hypothesis is correct, then it'll help.