Predictions for Tier List v4 (Includes overview of entire cast)

Shaya · Dec 15, 2009

Players becoming better at the game as to reduce how effective some characters options are is natural.
"How does I beatz Sheikz in meleez!?"

MK has holes in his game that can be abused with great SDI.
And I used to think MK vs Marth was hopeless before I went to the States, and was inflicted with love ever since. Because all the possibilities are there, it just requires you to get even better at the game. As I've already said, Marth doesn't have the holes MK does against players with high level technical skill. Japan diggit. DMG diggit.

The best Marths only lose to the best MKs. Just like how every best main of some character loses to the best MKs.

I'm not saying the Marth v MK match up is even.
It's a winnable match up though.
Something I don't think many characters in the game will be able to claim against MK in the future.

AlMoStLeGeNdArY · Dec 15, 2009

Shaya said:
Players becoming better at the game as to reduce how effective some characters options are is natural.
"How does I beatz Sheikz in meleez!?"

MK has holes in his game that can be abused with great SDI.
And I used to think MK vs Marth was hopeless before I went to the States, and was inflicted with love ever since. Because all the possibilities are there, it just requires you to get even better at the game. As I've already said, Marth doesn't have the holes MK does against players with high level technical skill. Japan diggit. DMG diggit.

The best Marths only lose to the best MKs. Just like how every best main of some character loses to the best MKs.

I'm not saying the Marth v MK match up is even.
It's a winnable match up though.
Something I don't think many characters in the game will be able to claim against MK in the future.

Not to put a hole in your theory but I heard Haze lost to an unranked Diddy not too long ago.

So does that make this diddy player the best diddy ever. Or is the Marth Diddy match up not whatever you guys have at it?

Turbo Ether · Dec 15, 2009

Shaya said:
The best Marths only lose to the best MKs. Just like how every best main of some character loses to the best MKs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O7LM_Brc-Y

Shaya · Dec 15, 2009

Most Marths think Diddy v Marth is even.
;\

Turbo Ether · Dec 15, 2009

Seems evenish.

clowsui · Dec 15, 2009

just so you know, neo is going to say something like "wtf i suck vs diddy, stop posting that video, i'm really bad vs diddy and blocking so i'm just going to go sheik against wyatt from now on."

AlMoStLeGeNdArY · Dec 15, 2009

Should go Zelda v diddy trufax.

OverLade · Dec 15, 2009

Snake/Diddy/ICs/Dedede/WariO all do better vs. MK than Marth.

[/marthisamazingdiscussion]

edit:

Assumming both characters are playing as gay as possible, ADHD is the only diddy I've ever seen camp against Marth, and it seems to **** his Aggro options pretty hard.

Shaya · Dec 15, 2009

Oh, and seems my 'context' of the post you quoted got misinterpreted.

I'm not saying the best marths only lose to MKs.
I'm saying in the situation of Marth vs MK, the best Marths generally only lose to the best MKs.

And Halberd,
D3s and Warios may think otherwise :O.

There is no way a character can be so significant in the higher levels of the scene for almost TWO YEARS (AND ITS ONLY BEEN GOING UP) by losing to the most popular character in the metagame 70:30.

-

Aggro Marth doesn't beat Diddy's camp options.
I've learnt the hard way so many times after NOT playing against Diddy for ages then coming up against one in tournament and going "wait ... ****KK!"
The closest match up Marth has in terms of play style for against Diddy is probably some sort of gay *** mix of Falco and Wario.

Turbo Ether · Dec 15, 2009

Alright, gotcha'.

Palpi · Dec 15, 2009

I thought he lost to Dao. Dao is legit.

AlMoStLeGeNdArY · Dec 15, 2009

Shaya said:
Oh, and seems my 'context' of the post you quoted got misinterpreted.

I'm not saying the best marths only lose to MKs.
I'm saying in the situation of Marth vs MK, the best Marths generally only lose to the best MKs.

And Halberd,
D3s and Warios may think otherwise :O.

There is no way a character can be so significant in the higher levels of the scene for almost TWO YEARS (AND ITS ONLY BEEN GOING UP) by losing to the most popular character in the metagame 70:30.

who loses to MK 7:3 besides Marth?

Shaya · Dec 15, 2009

Marth doesn't lose to MK 7:3.

Alphicans · Dec 15, 2009

Seems more like losing 60:40 at worst.

clowsui · Dec 15, 2009

marth has to be an opportunist vs. diddy

he has to camp when diddy is completely set up or until the point where the marth has at the VERY LEAST a 40% lead, then it's possible to start being a little more aggressive. in situations where both sides are "manipulating the neutral", diddy will win most cases because he has bananas and a lot of baiting tools which is why marth has to camp and try and stay grounded or maximize spacing

but then once he has diddy in bad position (juggle, ledge) he needs to go to town.
"marth + diddy on ledge = harder to get up than vs. mk". abuse this, diddy gets punished hard and reset in like most situations at ledge vs marth
diddy being juggled is relatively easy for marth to handle due to a large disjoint, though spacing tippers might be harder due to what seems like a weird fall speed or horizontal air mobility from diddy and also his ability to move around using side b

Albert. · Dec 16, 2009

Remember guys.... Almost is a bitter, bitter boy.

Couldn't handle Marth :D

noradseven · Dec 16, 2009

Since when did 7-3 become an unwinnable matchup ohh wait smashboards....

Shaya · Dec 16, 2009

7-3 match ups should not really be winnable at a high level in brawl.

Alphicans · Dec 16, 2009

7-3 means that as the 3 you need to make up the disadvantage with skill/match-up knowledge. So basically you'd need to be over twice as good as your opponent to win. Theory wise of course.

Wulfy07 · Dec 16, 2009

Shaya said:
7-3 match ups should not really be winnable at a high level in brawl.

Your assuming perfect play here. People make mistakes, and even 7-3s are winnable. When the human factor is placed into the equation, all theory goes to hell (even 10-0 match ups become winnable). At high levels of Brawl, there are still undiscovered occurrence and good old fashioned over stretching of your abilities that cause people to lose. Theory aside, 7-3 isn't a cement number. Note the change in the IC vs MK metagame over the past year, when things became fleshed out, not all was *as* bad as it seems. (Though the Snake match up may be virtually unwinnable, that's beside the point.

Nic64 · Dec 16, 2009

Turbo Ether said:
I still say Snake beats Marth 6/4. Imo, Snake vs MK is 5/5, and I don't think there's anyway in hell Marth is as hard for Snake as MK is. Making the comparison, because a lot of people consider MK to be a superior version of Marth. For the record, I also think ROB beats Marth. DK is also debatable.

A lot of Snake's consider Marth harder for Snake than MK now. Marth does have similarities to MK and is an inferior character overall, but he just matches up well against Snake. I can't think of any Marth's that think it's that bad if disadvantaged at all either, I hear everything from "close matchup" to "Snake sucks rofl". Marth is like my third or fourth best character and I'm already nearly at the point where I'd prefer to use him vs Snake's than MK(my main).

ROB I'd agree on, I always use Snake or MK vs ROB's. DK not so much, I think DDD is the other one that beats Marth and a few others are really close, DK I don't think does especially well. I know he has good range and he has that gay "you just walked into a smash at 80% and died" factor, but I think he's very readable and has very little that's safe about him...and gets juggled and edge guarded hard. One of those characters that just can't stop the bleeding after they get hit.

Vermanubis · Dec 16, 2009

So, what's the general consensus on the validity of the OP's prediction? So far, I find it to make far more mistakes than improvements. As a Ganon main especially though, he has no place above Link.

I know everybody probably already knows most of these, but I just want to cover just how bad Ganondorf is.

Pros:

-Decent weight. Doesn't help him against most people though, considering it'd only help vertically and most characters are horizontal KOers.

-Some of the best killing moves.

-Good gimp game with tippered uair.

Cons:

-Every character in this game has an approach. Even if a negligible one. Ganon doesn't. Ganon is the only character who can literally do nothing unless his opponent approaches. No other character suffers from this bane.

-Easiest character to grab in the game. Easiest to CG as well.

-No OoS game. If your opponent gets too close, you can't do anything about it. You can either roll, spot-dodge or shield; all of which are extremely punishable.

-No grab game whatsoever.

-Due to lack of viable moves in most cases, his moves stale extremely easily. Dair, uair, ftilt, etc. In theory, these kill very easily, but Ganon has no refreshers, so it can sometimes take up to 120-130% to kill with dair, same for ftilt and even 160% for uair.

-Second to worst, if not the worst recovery in the game. It's easy for him to go above the ledge and get punished, gimped or anything, really.

-Slowest character in the game overall. Jigglypuff's running is only a few frames faster and his aerial mobility is the absolute worst.

-Easiest landings to punish in the game. His aerial acceleration and speed are so bad that he typically can't get out of range of punishment.

-Ridiculously easy to pressure.

Now, in light of this, Link is still pretty bad. But Link at least has several options in most cases. His projectiles and disjointed range, if nothing else, beat Ganondorf out.

Nic64 · Dec 16, 2009

So, what's the general consensus on the validity of the OP's prediction? So far, I find it to make far more mistakes than improvements.

I think a lot of what pierce says makes sense but is overly optimistic, for instance I believe Diddy and IC's are better characters than Snake but actually expecting Snake to drop at all is just...it's not going to happen yet.

Ganondorf over Link is definitely an odd one though, Ganon is terrible awful.

Vermanubis · Dec 16, 2009

Nic64 said:
I think a lot of what pierce says makes sense but is overly optimistic, for instance I believe Diddy and IC's are better characters than Snake but actually expecting Snake to drop at all is just...it's not going to happen yet.

Ganondorf over Link is definitely an odd one though, Ganon is terrible awful.

Aye. I think the general set-up can be tweaked a good bit to make it more accurate, but as most of us as I've seen in the thread so far can agree on, as it stands, it's a little... out there.

As for Ganon, I'm not trying to keep him at bottom because it's an ego trip for me when I win, rather, because he really is just so ****ed flawed. Link can almost match Snake, which is saying a lot as far as his projectile game goes as well.

Oddly enough, I'm more comfortable with Ganon than my secondaries of Fox, DK and Samus. But I can say that comfort only comes from familiarity.

Ugly Man · Dec 16, 2009

Vermanubis said:
Aye. I think the general set-up can be tweaked a good bit to make it more accurate, but as most of us as I've seen in the thread so far can agree on, as it stands, it's a little... out there.

As for Ganon, I'm not trying to keep him at bottom because it's an ego trip for me when I win, rather, because he really is just so ****ed flawed. Link can almost match Snake, which is saying a lot as far as his projectile game goes as well.

Oddly enough, I'm more comfortable with Ganon than my secondaries of Fox, DK and Samus. But I can say that comfort only comes from familiarity.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; Having a good Ganondorf in Brawl is like owning a really fast cow. When you enter it in the horse race, people watch. They compliment you on your fast cow. They wish they had a cow half that fast.

You still lose the race.

Turbo Ether · Dec 16, 2009

Nic64 said:
A lot of Snake's consider Marth harder for Snake than MK now.

Who, specifically?

AlMoStLeGeNdArY · Dec 16, 2009

BassAlbert said:
Remember guys.... Almost is a bitter, bitter boy.

Couldn't handle Marth :D

LoL you can?

adumbrodeus · Dec 16, 2009

Wulfy07 said:
Your assuming perfect play here. People make mistakes, and even 7-3s are winnable. When the human factor is placed into the equation, all theory goes to hell (even 10-0 match ups become winnable). At high levels of Brawl, there are still undiscovered occurrence and good old fashioned over stretching of your abilities that cause people to lose. Theory aside, 7-3 isn't a cement number. Note the change in the IC vs MK metagame over the past year, when things became fleshed out, not all was *as* bad as it seems. (Though the Snake match up may be virtually unwinnable, that's beside the point.

Theory doesn't go to hell, but the reality is that it is possible to predict and punish players at that level if you're that much better. That's why true 100-0 match-ups don't exist, a Ganondorf that perfectly predicts every move an IC player makes will win. As such I prefer the terms "lol

hail" or "total:****".

noradseven · Dec 16, 2009

Alphicans said:
7-3 means that as the 3 you need to make up the disadvantage with skill/match-up knowledge. So basically you'd need to be over twice as good as your opponent to win. Theory wise of course.

Shaya said:
7-3 match ups should not really be winnable at a high level in brawl.

You people are the problem 7-3 means at perfect high level play the 7 wins 70% of the time, aka the top ganon vs the top MK should MK should win like 90% of the time and lose 10% of the time.

This is why I always complain that smash matchups are ****ed up they are fine until you get past 6-4 at which point they are vastly underrated, brawl is a broken game but looking at the matchup chart you wouldn't think it was too bad.

Justblaze647 · Dec 16, 2009

noradseven said:
Match-up injustice

Uhhhh no

Here is an example. Bowser vs Diddy is 35:65 ratio... are you saying that skill and match up experience can make up for that deficit at top level of play?

b/c that's impossible...

Nidtendofreak · Dec 16, 2009

a Ganondorf that perfectly predicts every move an IC player makes will win.

No he wouldn't. He would still lose because you are assuming the ICs are on top level as well. His moves are too slow to really punish anything the ICs do. He would end up being infinited for trying to punish. He can do nothing against alternating blizzard walls.

It's 100:0.

noradseven · Dec 16, 2009

Yeah IC:Ganon should be 100:0, assuming top level play.

Justblaze647 said:
Uhhhh no

Here is an example. Bowser vs Diddy is 35:65 ratio... are you saying that skill and match up experience can make up for that deficit at top level of play?

b/c that's impossible...

I am saying that smashboards doesn't know how to assign numbers properly... Im saying that at top level play the bowser will win 35% of the time if this was accurate if this is not true then it needs to be a different ratio...

What Im saying is that was the original definition of a matchup, and every other fighter uses matchups like this in most games 6:4 is p. close and 7:3 is a slight counter, and 8:2 is where things just go bad, in smash everything is like alot smaller than it should be like when ppl say 60:40 here I translate this to like 65:35 or 70:30, because thats what it ends up being like.

And before you say Im wrong please spell out a clear definition of what you or I guess this community describes as matchups, in other words what do the numbers mean to you.

phi1ny3 · Dec 16, 2009

imo it's more than chances of winning the set or even the game. It's a tool and scenario analysis, and how likely a character is going to get them in a favorable one. Otherwise making ratios past 65:35 is meaningless and might as well be dubbed 0:100. Actually, if we are talking "highest level of play", there are characters that are so badly shutdown in 40:60s that the chances should be labeled as unwinnable, which frankly doesn't sound right, does it?

noradseven · Dec 16, 2009

phi1ny3 said:
imo it's more than chances of winning the set or even the game. It's a tool and scenario analysis, and how likely a character is going to get them in a favorable one. Otherwise making ratios past 65:35 is meaningless and might as well be dubbed 0:100. Actually, if we are talking "highest level of play", there are characters that are so badly shutdown in 40:60s that the chances should be labeled as unwinnable, which frankly doesn't sound right, does it?

Yeah it was the chances of winning a single game on a neutral stage but... but if at high level play the player can only win about 20-30% of the time then it should be 25:75 I mean I play ganon alot against good ranked players just as good as me... and yeah the matchups are like 7-3,9-1, guess what this doesn't mean I never win no I win about 20-25% of the time normally assuming they are playing their main and are serious about it this means p. much ill never make it far in a tourney for obvious reasons.

Also you didn't answer my question of what do the numbers mean if my answer isn't right...

I know I sperg out about this stuff but its annoying having to explain that a 3.5:6.5 matchup in brawl is terrible, and a 3:7 in GGAC isn't that bad.

adumbrodeus · Dec 16, 2009

Nidtendofreak said:
No he wouldn't. He would still lose because you are assuming the ICs are on top level as well. His moves are too slow to really punish anything the ICs do. He would end up being infinited for trying to punish. He can do nothing against alternating blizzard walls.

It's 100:0.

Top of the metagame is perfect tech skills and match-up knowledge (as best as is humanly possible).

What match-ups measure (or SHOULD measure) is the difference in skill required to produce a 50-50 split in wins (with execution of course being held both equal and at the top of the metagame). I'll note that uses percentages is ridiculous because at the top of the metagame, equivalents to what we call 70-30 will produce win ratios well over 90% to the advantaged person assuming skill is equal.

So, even at the top of the metagame, there are holes which a Ganondorf player could not get on reaction, but could get on prediction.

Of course, to do it consistently the Ganondorf player would have to literally read the IC player like a book, and the odds of a victory occuring against evenly skilled players are long enough to be nearly irrelevant.

However, 100-0 is pretty much not mathmatically possible.

Hence total:****.

Literally everything has to go perfectly in his favor, but it's possible.

Kewkky · Dec 16, 2009

Even by reading the IC player like a book, thee's nothing Ganon can do to beat a grab-happy shieldcamping IC. His moveset is just too horrible.

noradseven · Dec 16, 2009

adumbrodeus said:
Top of the metagame is perfect tech skills and match-up knowledge (as best as is humanly possible).

What match-ups measure (or SHOULD measure) is the difference in skill required to produce a 50-50 split in wins (with execution of course being held both equal and at the top of the metagame). I'll note that uses percentages is ridiculous because at the top of the metagame, equivalents to what we call 70-30 will produce win ratios well over 90% to the advantaged person assuming skill is equal.

So, even at the top of the metagame, there are holes which a Ganondorf player could not get on reaction, but could get on prediction.

Of course, to do it consistently the Ganondorf player would have to literally read the IC player like a book, and the odds of a victory occuring against evenly skilled players are long enough to be nearly irrelevant.

However, 100-0 is pretty much not mathmatically possible.

Hence total:****.

Literally everything has to go perfectly in his favor, but it's possible.

Okay thanks man now I have a definition to go by for matchups on smashboards they need a definition next to the matchup ratios because in most other games its understood that matchup ratios mean what I said ealier, a different definition is fine but I just at least wanted a definition. I don't know why smash is afraid to say 90:10 though on top to low tier charaacters I mean, other games arn't afraid to do it, heck it p. much shows that like over 1/2 the cast isn't really viable at a national tournment level *hint they arn't.

Now if you have subs to cover your 1-3 ****ty matches then more of the cast is viable but im talking about just playing with 1 character straight.

smashkng · Dec 16, 2009

I assume he means FD because of course Ganon can hit IC in Brinstar/Norfair/Rainbow Cruise.

noradseven · Dec 16, 2009

smashkng said:
I assume he means FD because of course Ganon can hit IC in Brinstar/Norfair/Rainbow Cruise.

ganon sudocide 4 lyfe

adumbrodeus · Dec 16, 2009

Kewkky said:
Even by reading the IC player like a book, thee's nothing Ganon can do to beat a grab-happy shieldcamping IC. His moveset is just too horrible.

I don't think so, firstly, that's only really an issue when Ganondorf is behind, if you get the timing right, you can dash attack them while they're trying to SH blizzard or SH IC block.

After he's behind, not sure, his standing grab IS faster then reaction time (unlike Zelda) so he can provoke a response to somebody simply hiding in shield, unless there's some sort of optimal response that covers all his options when he's trying to threaten you like this, he still has a dismally small chance.

noradseven said:
Okay thanks man now I have a definition to go by for matchups on smashboards they need a definition next to the matchup ratios because in most other games its understood that matchup ratios mean what I said ealier, a different definition is fine but I just at least wanted a definition. I don't know why smash is afraid to say 90:10 though on top to low tier charaacters I mean, other games arn't afraid to do it, heck it p. much shows that like over 1/2 the cast isn't really viable at a national tournment level *hint they arn't.

I think it's not so much that we're afraid as our match-up system tends to center things around the middle more then others do.

But we already know over 1/2 the cast isn't viable.

Predictions for Tier List v4 (Includes overview of entire cast)

「chase you」

Smash Hero

Smash Master

「chase you」

Smash Master

Smash Legend

Smash Hero

Smash Hero

「chase you」

Smash Master

Smash Hero

Smash Hero

「chase you」

Smash Hero

Smash Legend

Smash Master

Smash Lord

「chase you」

Smash Hero

Smash Apprentice

Smash Lord

King of Evil

Smash Lord

King of Evil

Smash Apprentice

Smash Master

Smash Hero

Smash Legend

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Not the Mama

Smash Lord

Smash Legend

Uhh... Look at my status.

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Legend

Information

Network

　　「chase you」　

　　「chase you」　

　　「chase you」　

　　「chase you」　

　　「chase you」　