Stop it with the Lazy Man's Way Out! /rant thread

[SuSa]

This is absolutely amazing. A second rant thread in one day? Wow, I must be in a bad mood today.

"The Lazy Way Out"

The best secondary is always MK!

That is not true! it is the easiest conclusion to come to but many ignore matchup ratios and their own bad matchups. They feel just because Meta Knight goes even with the entire cast - that makes him the best secondary.

This is false for multiple reasons!

If your character has a few 40-60 matchups, and let's just say 30-70 matchup and Meta Knight goes 55-45 with all of those matchups - yet someone else goes 60-40 or better, that makes that someone else your better secondary.

Yah, boo hoo you actually have to get off your *** and do some research. You know a great, fast place to start that research?

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=226315

That topic. Using the data from that topic (look at your characters bad matchups, then make a list of every character that has a favourable matchup with that character. Keep this in a notepad. Then compare)

For example, I will use Snake.

Snake goes bad against Olimar, most of us have come to agree on that. He can also have difficulty with D3 and Falco, although most everyone has come to the conclusion that those matchups are even nowadays.

So with this, we have Olimar+d3+Falco, a lazy person would say MK! But let's do some research.

MK vs:
Olimar 60-40 (says MK) and 38-62 (says Olimar)
D3: 60-40 (says MK) and 40-60 says D3
Falco: 55-45 (says MK) and 50-50 says Falco

Now let's look at other possibilities:

Falco (he's been mentioned)
Olimar: 50-50 says both
D3: 60-40 says Falco, 65-35 says D3
Falco: 50-50 (its a ditto)

This means if you didn't have to face any Olimars, Falco would arguably be your best secondary so far. But let's do some further research.

Peach:
Olimar: says 38-62 (same matchup as vs MK!)
D3: Both say 50-50
Falco: both say 55-45 Falco

This means that if you don't really have to face D3, and your Snake has problems with Falco - Peach may be a good choice.

Delving even DEEPER

Kirby:
Says 60-40 ALL MATCHUPS
Olimar has it listed as: 58-42 OLIMARS advantages
D3 has it the same as Kirby
Falco actually says its WORSE, 35-65 - Kirby being the 65.

This right here, with the debate on Olimar - just made Kirby a "better" secondary then MK. He has very similiar matchups against D3 (and debatable Olimar) but a better matchup vs Falco. (I don't know how up-to-date these matchup threads are....)


So how about ya'll put some work into your actual best secondary going off your bad matchups and who covers those the best, even if it requires some work and thought.

MK is the easy way out for a secondary - because he also covers "personal" bad matchups, which an actual secondary that only covers "bad matchups" may not cover.

Just putting it out there.

Have fun number cramming,
SuSa

 

[Browny]

idk... coming from a snake main, this is kinda hard to agree with, when snake covers almost all bad matchups in top and high tier by himself. other people need a secondary to counter a LOT more than just a few. which MK happens to do quite easily

 

[SuSa]

It still works out the same way. 60-40 is still winnable. Let's say you only have 5 matchups that are 65-35 or worse - find the character that covers those the best.

Basically, for those of us who do not want to put in the extra work towards are hardest matchups - we can pick up a secondary who has a far easier time.

People are also not limited to just 1 secondary. I have personally have 2 that I almost never need to use because even my "bad" matchups are winnable.

However back when I was a Pit main this same stuff applied.

Also it may very well turn out MK is your best secondary. But don't take the lazy way out when deciding that.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Precisely-- MK is not "always the best choice". Although most people won't even bother to actually think beyond "omfg MK has all 50/50 at worst therefore he is always the best choice zomfg wtf op ban ban ban!!!!". It's sad, really.

Good post, SuSa. I didn't personally need to be enlightened, but maybe others will read it and begin to understand... and STFU about MK as a result... that would be AWESOME.

 

[Teh Future]

Olimar is prob one of Kirbys worst matchup oollolololollolololololool

 

[SuSa]

I already stated I was going off the matchup #'s and how they may be outdated. Even then I use Peach vs Olimar and Kirby vs Falco/D3 if for some reason my Snake can't beat them. Which has only happened once.

Lazy man would've just gone MK for all 3 matchups.

 

[Denzi]

I'd like to point out that we're kidding ourselves and Falco vs MK is in no way 50:50.

 

[SuSa]

I'll take your word for it, but that's not highly important. XD

 

[Big O]

Lol at the rate this is going SuSa will take over the tactical boards. SuSa's Brawl Tactical Rant discussion. Lol it would be a lot more interesting like that though.

You bring up some good points and this often overlooked.

 

[salaboB]

This does assume something: That your opponent only will choose one of those you're going against when you switch to avoid getting counterpicked. Yes, if you've lost the first round you'll be able to react to their counterpick, but assuming you win the second who will you choose, knowing they can counter your main?

If they have available a character that wrecks, say, Peach (per your example) then you are again safest choosing MK for the trouble matches your Snake has. Because he won't get wrecked by anyone, and you're already being driven off your main so you really don't want the possibility of hitting a bad match there. So who are you going to spend time practicing?

It's most likely going to be the secondary you'll be able to use regardless of who your opponent has available.

Edit: Oh, and I doubt Oli is advantaged against MK. We'd probably have seen Oli's taking bigger tournies if they really had an advantage against both MK and Snake.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

I am not convinced secondaries are even a good idea at all for a lot of players. Every secondary you have you really do have to be ready to use in any matchup (when your opponent gets to counterpick on you!) so you can expect to play every character you use worse for every character you have. Using just one solid character and just playing through your worst matchups is a pretty good strategy.

 

[SuSa]

I am not convinced secondaries are even a good idea at all for a lot of players. Every secondary you have you really do have to be ready to use in any matchup (when your opponent gets to counterpick on you!) so you can expect to play every character you use worse for every character you have. Using just one solid character and just playing through your worst matchups is a pretty good strategy.

Let me know when you beat D3 as Wolf. Who's other matchups are all better then 20-80. His next worst is 35-65 against MK, then everything else is 40-60 or better. Meaning if you don't have a solid counter against D3, you should be getting knocked out by D3.

Next time you win a 20-80 match against someone your skill level, let me know.

@salaboB
But Snake covers all of my Peach's bad matchups. :| who is my MAIN. Secondaries are meant to COUNTER your MAINS BAD matchups.

 

[demonictoonlink]

If feel like djbrowny's post made a great point...

I like this thread a lot, but sadly for me, MK IS the best secondary. You also have to factor in that you can't always choose who you play based on matchups. I get that DDD is a great character that could cover some bad matchups, but I just cannot play him. Sometimes you just have to use a secondary that you feel confident with.

Anyway, great read. I think you should continue on this thread-producing rate.

 

[.AC.]

olimar is kirby´s worst matchup.

 

[salaboB]

Let me know when you beat D3 as Wolf. Who's other matchups are all better then 20-80. His next worst is 35-65 against MK, then everything else is 40-60 or better. Meaning if you don't have a solid counter against D3, you should be getting knocked out by D3.

Next time you win a 20-80 match against someone your skill level, let me know.

I bet it could be argued that having a 20-80 matchup makes Wolf not a solid character.

@salaboB
But Snake covers all of my Peach's bad matchups. :| who is my MAIN.

So if you pull out Snake and he responds with Oli or DDD instead of who you were expecting, you're gonna have lots of fun aren't you?

Edit: I don't disagree that for general uses, things like that are fairly unlikely to happen so having a different secondary than MK makes sense. But there is a reason MK is accepted as pretty much uncounterpickable, and that's a good reason to use him as a secondary if you insist on not using him as a primary (And then secondarying someone who can really maul one of his closer to even matchups).

 

[demonictoonlink]

olimar is kirby´s worst matchup.

Wait....really? Well....I always though it was Marf...hmm...

 

[SuSa]

If feel like djbrowny's post made a great point...

I like this thread a lot, but sadly for me, MK IS the best secondary. You also have to factor in that you can't always choose who you play based on matchups. I get that DDD is a great character that could cover some bad matchups, but I just cannot play him. Sometimes you just have to use a secondary that you feel confident with.

Anyway, great read. I think you should continue on this thread-producing rate.

And if you aren't confident with MK? That excuse can be used for everyone. Also in many instances there are other secondaries. Also depending on what type of tourneys you go to, if you only go to locals and you generally know most everyone who goes and know their characters. - What if there isn't a single ____ character in that area? Should you need a secondary just for them? Almost doubtful.

olimar is kirby´s worst matchup.

So glad I use Peach for that matchup then.

 

[demonictoonlink]

I see where you're coming from, but I was just saying my personal feelings. That was just the situation I'm in...
Also, Meno makes me consider a secondary just for Peach....lol...

 

[SuSa]

I bet it could be argued that having a 20-80 matchup makes Wolf not a solid character.


So if you pull out Snake and he responds with Oli or DDD instead of who you were expecting, you're gonna have lots of fun aren't you?

Edit: I don't disagree that for general uses, things like that are fairly unlikely to happen so having a different secondary than MK makes sense. But there is a reason MK is accepted as pretty much uncounterpickable, and that's a good reason to use him as a secondary if you insist on not using him as a primary (And then secondarying someone who can really maul one of his closer to even matchups).

It can be argued that Wolf is a solid character save one matchup. What he is saying is basically "Be any high tier or top tier character" since those are really the only ones that can be considered 'solid'. So yeah! **** every character below high tier!

But the same can be said about what you just stated about how you can use a secondary for MK to **** his closer to even matchups. What if they choose someone you didn't expect? <_< See where that goes?

Also when CP'ing - isn't it usually
"6. The winner of the previous match chooses their character
7. The loser of the previous match chooses their character"

Which means, you only use your secondary WHEN YOU LOSE. Which to be honest is really the only incident that you should really be using a secondary... considering if you win, do you really need a secondary for the next match?

EDIT @ DTL:
Meno isn't really that hard. :/ He's good, but I've played better online.... then again I use Snake and your probably using TL =p lol

 

[Xebenkeck]

Funny that you made this rant, i was planning on making a thread showcasing who would be a characters best secondary, based on match-ups. I was going to show who did the best vs,your characters 3 worst match-ups. I.e Ness' worst match-ups are falco, g&W, and marth. One of the best characters for ness to choose, other then mk, is DK. I still might do it but im just lacking time right now.

 

[SuSa]

I'd do it, but I don't really care.... I'm just sick of everyone advocating MK as if he's the best secondary for their character.

If you only want to learn 1 character, chances are he is. But if your one of the characters who needs more then 1 character to cover your bad matchups - chances are you main them because you like them and don't want to be MK anyways... so it rather defeats the point.

EG:
Maining Ganon with your secondary being MK, come on... how silly is that?

 

[salaboB]

But the same can be said about what you just stated about how you can use a secondary for MK to **** his closer to even matchups. What if they choose someone you didn't expect? <_< See where that goes?

Yes, it's why if you're smart you choose MK when you don't know who your opponent will be.

I do in fact see exactly where it goes.

 

[SuSa]

Yes, it's why if you're smart you choose MK when you don't know who your opponent will be.

I do in fact see exactly where it goes.

"
Also when CP'ing - isn't it usually
"6. The winner of the previous match chooses their character
7. The loser of the previous match chooses their character""

Oh hey look, he switched to someone with an 80-20 over me - or he stayed that character.

Maybe I should counterpick with my secondary I have to counter that character with a 65:35.... or you know, I could go MK and have a 55:45...

With your logic, everyone should be maining MK with no secondaries.

 

[bobson]

Isn't picking a secondary to cover difficult matchups the "lazy man's way out" already?

 

[Xebenkeck]

I'd do it, but I don't really care.... I'm just sick of everyone advocating MK as if he's the best secondary for their character.

If you only want to learn 1 character, chances are he is. But if your one of the characters who needs more then 1 character to cover your bad matchups - chances are you main them because you like them and don't want to be MK anyways... so it rather defeats the point.

EG:
Maining Ganon with your secondary being MK, come on... how silly is that?

No i know i just listed one character there because i was lazy. But there are about 2-3 other characters that cover ness(my examples) bad match-ups. I only said DK because he is the one i use, and he beats G&W, does reasonable against marth, and Falco isn't as bad a speople make it seem.

EDIT: Bobson, yes it is in a way, but i play Ness and Zelda primarily because i like them, the sole reason i picked up DK was to cover ness, and how he gets godly ***** in some match-ups.

 

[SuSa]

Isn't picking a secondary to cover difficult matchups the "lazy man's way out" already?

Technically yes. But do you really want to lose to the same character - every tournament, simply because your character cannot deal with them? That's borderline stupid. Also by the "lazy man's way out" I mean pick someone because you don't have to think to decide on them simply because they go even or better with everyone...or you can not be lazy and actually think based off of ease of match.

Lazy man's way out of picking your secondary, is that specific enough for you?

 

[demonictoonlink]

Also...It was online...IRL he is awesome...
Also, the posts above have been quite lolzy. Contiinue on.

 

[SuSa]

Lucky, you live near him.

 

[etecoon]

I am not convinced secondaries are even a good idea at all for a lot of players. Every secondary you have you really do have to be ready to use in any matchup (when your opponent gets to counterpick on you!) so you can expect to play every character you use worse for every character you have. Using just one solid character and just playing through your worst matchups is a pretty good strategy.

Some truth to this although playing a second character helps especially if you main a mid/low tier, but you can't just learn a secondary to deal with one or two matchups and those only, that's why I play Snake/MK but don't claim to main/secondary one or the other, I split time on them about equally. Technically I could have a more proficient combo in spite of these being the two best characters in the game but I've put an absurd amount of practice into both of them and am way too lazy to start that all over again(o snap this thread is about me)

 

[Vlade]

Just with your kirby example SuSa:

The falco boards have been discussing it and there is quite a bit of debate about it. Half of us are saying its heavily in Kirby's favour, while the rest of us think it's close to even (or dead even).

This still doesn't mean that Kirby isn't a better secondary though! (I think :S)

 

[SuSa]

Another debate I didn't know of. lol

My point is still standing though XD my examples are sort of just being royally ****ed...

EDIT:

I'm ********. With how the CP system actually works, it'd look like this:

1) Main
2) Secondary if you lost that covers matchup
3) MK, to avoid your secondary or main being CP'd if you had won the 2nd match

:/

 

[Vlade]

But yeah, it didn't really matter. Like you said, your point still stands ^_^

Which I believe is an important point

 

[SuSa]

My point is highly flawed.

My logic only works if you WIN your first round, and LOSE the second. This then assumes your opponent IS NOT MK.



I fail

 

[Jim Morrison]

I just realized the same.
Lol faillll

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Let me know when you beat D3 as Wolf.

I beat a D3 as Wolf. It's a horrendously stupid match-up but it can be done.

Who's other matchups are all better then 20-80. His next worst is 35-65 against MK, then everything else is 40-60 or better. Meaning if you don't have a solid counter against D3, you should be getting knocked out by D3.

1.) Wolf vs D3 is not 8/2 in D3s favour
2.) Wolf vs MK is probably not 65/35 in MKs favour
3.) Sheik is a worse match-up than MK for Wolf

olimar is kirby´s worst matchup.

Wait....really? Well....I always though it was Marf...hmm...

It's the ICs.

...

I have to disagree with almost everything you said. You assume that the 2nd character is played on the same level as your main character (at least that what it sounds like), which is almost never the case. From personal experience (playing myself + watching countless other people play) I can guarantee that your main character is almost always the best choice unless the match-up is really hopeless. As long as the match-up isn't worse than 65/35 you shouldn't switch characters unless you just got flat out ***** the game before or you don't know how to play the match-up.
Personally (this is just my opinion - many ppl will probably disagree) I think there are very few match-ups between S-tier characters and C-tier characters that are worse than 65/35. Most characters have their strong points (and often unique ones like Luigis strange physics) and also exploitable weaknesses (this also includes MK imo), which prevents match-ups to be as one-sided as the character boards make it look like. That's why I think that many characters can do it without a 2nd.
I always have to laugh when somebody writes that D3 vs Snake is 65/35 for D3.
This leads to the other mistake: You assume that the match-up disscusions on the character boards are done well. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Match-up discussions are biased/inaccurate in at least 70% of the cases because somebody wants MK banned or wants his character to have as little bad match-up's as possible (that's where BS like Fox going even with Snake is coming from). If people ask about match-up I always tell them to look at hard facts (aka tourney results) or ask better players (few of them post on the character boards).

Just think about it...how can ICs vs MK be 7/3 for MK when lain takes sets off Dojo and M2K? When Omniswell uses ICs to counter MK?
You are not supposed to win a 7/3 match-up but until Apex nobody thought that ICs would go so close with MK even though there where hard facts en masse.
Same for Kirby: People say that Marth ***** Kirby? Nonsense. If Marth ***** Kirby then there's no way that MikeHaze and Neo lose sets to a Kirby. The match-up is probably even, if played on the highest level but character boards are biased or full of unexperienced players which will screw the accuracy of the ratings.

tl;dr

Character boards are not reliable sources for match-up numbers. Neither are match-up charts.

Next time you win a 20-80 match against someone your skill level, let me know.

There are very few 8/2 match-up's in this game. In fact I'd say there isn't a single 8/2 match-up in this game as long as it's not on a CP stage or a game mechanic (infinites/grab release shenanigans) is involved. If you assume that a 65/35 is close to unwinnable then numbers like 8/2 match-up's are almost impossible to get at.

@salaboB
But Snake covers all of my Peach's bad matchups. :| who is my MAIN. Secondaries are meant to COUNTER your MAINS BAD matchups.

Snake boards say that D3, R.O.B and Olimar are bad match-up's for Snake but ROB and Oli are among my easiest match-up's when I play Snake. I have more tourbles with Wolf, Kirby and Toon Link than with Snakes so-called bad match-ups (imo Snake has no bad match-up at all).
What I'm trying to say: Personal experience >>> what other people say. Don't listen to it.

Second characters should only be used if you just can't win with your main character, simply because you're supposed to play best with your main character. Even if D3 is a ***** to beat for my Wolf I still use him before I pick Falco (in case I get *****).

That's my 0.02/opinion.

 

[Tristan_win]

~insert two cents~

Not to mention that everyone knows the meta knight match up for their character so although you might do better then you did with your main in the match before you could do even more then that if you used someone less popular like kirby.

 

[AvaricePanda]

I always have to laugh when somebody writes that D3 vs Snake is 65/35 for D3.
This leads to the other mistake: You assume that the match-up disscusions on the character boards are done well. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. Match-up discussions are biased/inaccurate in at least 70% of the cases because somebody wants MK banned or wants his character to have as little bad match-up's as possible (that's where BS like Fox going even with Snake is coming from). If people ask about match-up I always tell them to look at hard facts (aka tourney results) or ask better players (few of them post on the character boards).

Just think about it...how can ICs vs MK be 7/3 for MK when lain takes sets off Dojo and M2K? When Omniswell uses ICs to counter MK?
You are not supposed to win a 7/3 match-up but until Apex nobody thought that ICs would go so close with MK even though there where hard facts en masse.
Same for Kirby: People say that Marth ***** Kirby? Nonsense. If Marth ***** Kirby then there's no way that MikeHaze and Neo lose sets to a Kirby. The match-up is probably even, if played on the highest level but character boards are biased or full of unexperienced players which will screw the accuracy of the ratings.

tl;dr

Character boards are not reliable sources for match-up numbers. Neither are match-up charts.

What I'm trying to say: Personal experience >>> what other people say. Don't listen to it.

This by a lot.

It's annoying to see, "Snake gets ***** hard by D3," "MK beats Snake like 6:4 he's easy to gimp lololol," by people who don't main either character or know a thing about the match-up. Match-up numbers are horrendously subjective anyway; one person may think a 6:4 is a slight advantage, one other person may think it's a very large advantage. And these opinions differ from person to person and from character board to character board.

But when people say things like, "MK beats ICs 70:30," and are looking at an old match-up discussion from like September...well, it's annoying. They don't know WHY MK could have the advantage other than, "He can just gimp them." Just like a large amount of people who talk about Snake vs. D3 don't know WHY D3 "wins 65/35", they just say, "Well he ***** them."

tl;dr: If you don't actually know of the match-up you're talking about or main either character in the match-up, and are only debating about the match-up based on what you see in a match-up chart or character board number, you shouldn't talk and debate about the match-up like you know everything about it.

 

[Xerit]

If your opponent's main is a character you have trouble with (meaning you probably lost the first match) having MK as a secondary is a good choice because regardless of the character you know at worst you're looking at 50/50 assuming you can play a good MK. Meaning you don't have to learn 3 characters just in case one secondary isn't enough to cover all the bad matchups.

However it becomes even more important if you win the first match and are playing a easily counterable character (DK, Wolf etc etc) because then the safest thing for you to do is pick MK so you can't be counterpicked.

Its not so much that MK is the best for every matchup, its that hes the safest for every matchup. If money is on the line, why take a risk with a counterable secondary/main when you can learn MK and know you're un-counterable?

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

This is very true. The best secondary for ZSS for instance is Kirby, because Kirby literally covers every bad match-up she has and does so better than MK or any other character would.

The issue of course is that you don't always know what your opponent will CP. If you lose the first match and win the second, then what?

 

[Xerit]

This is very true. The best secondary for ZSS for instance is Kirby, because Kirby literally covers every bad match-up she has.

Round 1

Opponent - Falco vs You - ZSS = Opponent wins

Round 2

You switch

Opponent- Stay Falco vs You - Switch to Kirby = You win!

Round 3

What do you do? Go back to ZSS? Your opponent will just switch to Falco and you'll be fighting uphill again. Stay Kirby? Then your opponent can switch to IC's and you're even worse off than you would be against Falco with ZSS.

Thats why this whole idea falls down when you actually put it in a tournament situation. Every character except MK has bad matchups. If you had MK as your secondary you'd just stay MK for the last match and be safe, instead you have to choose Kirby most likely since you know your opponent will just switch back to Falco and hope that your opponent doesn't know a character Kirby can't handle.


Edit: Sorry posted before I saw your edit. I see you realize where this whole thing falls down but i'm gonna leave this up as its still a good example.