If you had the ability to banish Melee Fox to the shadow realm, knowing it would irreversibly change competitive Melee forever, would you?

Elec-ant1234

Fluttering Dream Eater
is a Pre-Contributor
personally I wouldn't; although it is pretty funny seeing fox get access to the best techs in the game, with stuff like galint.

Fun Fact! did you know that fox and falco's shine actually can reflect projectiles?
 
Nah, ultimately Fox is the embodiment of what people want out of Melee. And the way he's designed, although very strong, makes him punishable. I think the prevalence of Fox turns out to be good for a lot of mid tiers, since you can always catch him out and stage a comeback; the same isn't necessarily true of the more defensive top tiers.

Would imagine most people on Smogon are probably of a similar mind. I mean Fox is baaically the Lando-T of Melee yeah?
 
Banning characters in a competitive video game that originally wasn’t designed to be played in such a manner has always been a point of contention since game balance was determined by factors outside of the scope of competitive play. In Smash, for example, faster characters will generally get more use out of items than slower characters, while slower, stronger characters can do things like more easily break open a Smash Ball or benefit more from size-changing items. Smash’s game balance was designed in such a way that different characters are Better than others depending on the mode of play, as opposed to matchups within the competitive scene itself.

With this in mind, faster, technical characters like the Melee spacies have always benefited from the environment present within a competitive Smash match. Disparity in these games often comes down to a select group of top tier characters in each installment that performs stronger enough by margin compared to how lower-ranked characters perform at the highest level. While Melee Fox is a very well designed character for competitive play, I do have to bring into question the overall healthiness of Fox’s matchup spread for a game with such a high entry barrier, historically only having two matchups (Falco and Marth) that I would consider a significant challenge for top-level Fox players.

The result of this kind of matchup spread is that the top-level Fox players can quickly gain an overwhelming advantage against the players who main Falco and Marth’s worst matchups and are attempting to make deep bracket runs at majors and supermajors alike. Fox’s metagame influence was actually only worsened in my eyes during Jigglypuff’s time in the spotlight, as the aforementioned mains of Falco, Marth, and other characters like Sheik, Captain Falcon, and Peach have a very rough time going all the way when the only characters they’ll face in bracket would either be a spacie or a Jigglypuff. I guess that last part only makes Sheik’s semi-recent supermajor win all the more impressive, though, so shoutouts to that guy.

Overall, I believe a Fox-less metagame would feel different enough from the metagame Melee players have currently to where sudden, drastic changes should not be made, but should still be considered given the disparity between Melee’s top tiers and the rest of the roster. The Spacies/Jigglypuff combination warps the advancing metagame around those three characters and Marth too much for my personal liking, preventing lower ranked characters from further developing counterplay at major tournaments.
 
was melee fox more or less oppressive than brawl meta knight
infinitely less so
mk is one of the most oppressive characters ever, unless youre ICs a punish means getting a hit or two and then return to neutral where MK is better than you. he plays defensively and you cant break it unless MK fucks up
fox overwhelms you offensively but if you get a punish, fox might easily die from just the one slipup.

op was prolly inspired by this video but who cares
 
infinitely less so
mk is one of the most oppressive characters ever, unless youre ICs a punish means getting a hit or two and then return to neutral where MK is better than you. he plays defensively and you cant break it unless MK fucks up
fox overwhelms you offensively but if you get a punish, fox might easily die from just the one slipup.

op was prolly inspired by this video but who cares
I say this as if people still play competitive-style Brawl matches in the year 2023, but eagle-eyed Meta Knight players may already be aware that there is another character with grab advantage against the character, and it's not who you might think it is. Meta Knight's grab release animation in Brawl is just barely long enough to make him vulnerable to Marth's chain grab, although not to the same extent as his chain grab on the PK Kids remains in this game. Extra vulnerability to grapplers may have been one of the ways Brawl's balance team intended to "balance" Meta Knight, knowing how four of Meta Knight's so-called "worst matchups" (Icies, Marth, Falco, and Pikachu) all have something to do with a throw combo.

The problem with Brawl Meta Knight in bracket is actually moreso with the Ice Climbers in my opinion. All of Marth, Falco, and Pikachu lose more often than not to a well-played Icies, who in turn loses against a well-played Meta Knight if we're looking at matchup charts. What this means in practice is that the characters players might choose to counterpick Meta Knight can't make full use of these already polarized matchups since these same players can't beat the Icies players featured in the same tournaments. The other remaining top tiers I haven't listed yet, those being Olimar, Diddy Kong, and Snake, are even worse off because they can lose against both Meta Knight and the Icies while having varying matchups against each other.

Again, I say this as if people are still actively playing the game as much as Melee or Ultimate, but I actually think banning the Ice Climbers would be healthier for the post-modern Brawl metagame than a Meta Knight ban would be. One of Brawl Meta Knight's biggest appealing factors to begin with is the fact that he's arguably the Icies' worst matchup as is, meaning that taking away this matchup would indirectly give players slightly less of a reason to pick Meta Knight anyways. Furthermore, an Ice Climbers ban would help out some of those other "still loses against Meta Knight but fares better than others" kind of characters I mentioned earlier in this post, since Marth, Falco, Pikachu, et cetera mains would be more likely to face Meta Knight players at a later round in bracket. Making a deep bracket run with Meta Knight becomes harder on both ends of the spectrum without needing to ban Meta Knight himself, who most players would agree has a more ssizeable playerbase than the Icies regardless. If Meta Knight still proves problematic in an Icies-less metagame, then further action can be taken after the fact.

was melee fox more or less oppressive than brawl meta knight
I would say the metagame influence of each of these characters in their respective games is about the same, as the two have a similar impact on the character select screen for newer players looking to enter the competitive scene. In a similar example to the Meta Knight/Ice Climbers meta of post-modern Brawl, newer fans of Melee might not be the biggest fan of the spacies and Jigglypuff. During Jigglypuff's height of dominance, Hungrybox alone won 24 of the 48 major tournaments held during that timespan. The problem here isn't with Hungrybox as a player, though. The real issue as I saw it was how the rise in Jigglypuff usage by people who wanted to be, quote, "the next Hungrybox" would further result in more players picking up Fox and/or Falco to try and beat those new Jigglypuff players.

The fact that Melee's current top four characters on the PG Stats tier list consists of Fox, his two worst matchups (Marth and Falco), and Jigglypuff is no accident in my opinion. The metagame impact of those four characters creates a sense of disparity at low and high levels of Melee tournaments alike, since between those four characters, you also have the other 22 characters already accounted for in your matchups. This isn't an issue that could be fixed by banning Melee Fox, either, as those players could either switch over to Falco or benefit from Jigglypuff herself losing her own worst matchup.
 
Personal feelings about wanting to watch Melee burn aside, the stance on competitive games in general I picked up from hanging around Smogon is that more games need a UU. If placing Fox in Ubers is the first step towards wider action on clearly detailed and agreed upon power discrepancies, so be it.
 
I don't play Competetive Melee, and I probably never will, but it would be sorta funny to see how the metagame works out.
So sure, Banish Fox Face-down.
 
Would banning Fox accomplish anything? We're at a point in time when lots of characters are seeing good results. Fox might be the best character in the game, but he isn't choking the meta like Meta Knight or Bayonetta did.
 
1688565018997.png


Inspired to do so by this thread my spare time, I made myself a Melee tier list organized by matchup parity. This tier list was constructed by taking all 26 characters in Melee and looking at their winning and losing matchups across the metagame with as up-to-date statistics as I could find. When I found significant cutoffs where a character or group of characters had winning matchups against every character below them, I would create a new tier where the lower ranked characters could more viably function. For example, the seven characters at the top of Melee's ranks have a combined matchup favorability against all 19 of the other characters in the tiers below them, without any of the seven characters in Tier 1 being overpowered relative to each other.

The idea that every character in Tier 1 should win against every character in the tiers below itself, the characters in Tier 2 beat all the characters in the tiers below itself but lose to the Tier 1 characters, and so on was something I came up with was something I came up with to try and discern how large the gaps in viability between characters were compared to others that may have a smaller metagame niche, much like Smogon's usage tiering system we all use today. From this analysis, I've been able to determine two things. The first conclusion I arrived at was that Fox (or Falco, since I was curious about both of them) are not overpowered enough to be considered for a universal roster ban compared to the other 20+ characters in the game. When looking at matchup parity, Fox has enough counterplay in Tier 1 to encourage development of a metagame where multiple characters can be successful. This is a prime example of a healthy top-tier character design: one that can establish an identity as one of, if not the game's best characters without being overwhelming to deal with.

The other conclusion I came to was arguably a lot more interesting, though. After the first two viability tiers based on matchup parity, there exists a pretty massive drop-off in character viability between the top 16 characters in Melee and the bottom 10 characters, easily one of the largest drop offs I could find across the entire Smash series. With the two Links serving as a sort of gateway between each group as opinions on which Link is better continue to change over time, this has led me to wonder what a lower-tier Melee metagame consisting of the nine lowest-ranked characters as well as the two Links might look like. the answer? Very, very unbalanced and just as broken. I would argue that in such a metagame, the two Links would both be more overpowered against the bottom nine characters than Fox is in standard Melee competition, being the closest things Melee has to "Borderline" tier placements.
 
Back
Top