User talk:Nightgengale

.

I assume good faith...

...but so far, your edits on character pages return edits to how they originally looked in the first place. Most notably Kirby's and Zelda's page. I'd like to tell you, I had wrote Kirby's page so it is similar to Diddy Kong's page in that he was significantly nerfed but now is slightly nerfed (which is the contrary with Diddy), but you undid my edit when the other one looked better. And while she can be considered to be nerfed, Zelda did gain some useful buffs that can counter her nerfs, and I consider the Phantom to be one of them. But that's not all. You have undone edits on her page several times, particularly her changes from Brawl, which risks you of violating this policy: it reads "Such revisions should be used only once." I'm just informing you so you don't get warned by an admin to stop.

I do think you try to do a good job but your edits sometimes look bad. Try to let other users help you edit "accurate reports on characters", so that the wiki looks better. In the case of Zelda, we could consider she was nerfed but as she has gained useful buffs as well, she shouldn't really be considered nerfed. And in the case of Kirby, he is nerfed from transition, but only slightly nerfed when we take into account balance patches. Whaddya say? Would you like me to help? (keep in mind I'm backed up by popular opinion from the community). Again, I assume good faith, so no worries in my side. --BeepYou (talk) 13:25, 3 December 2015 (EST)

I'd also like to bring this up. I'm not saying Dedede wasn't nerfed, I'm saying Dedede underwent a severe Falco case. I'd also like what others have to say, but I'm pretty sure my version is up-to-date, not speculative and less subjective. Drill Blaster Mark 2 (talk) 14:06, 3 December 2015 (EST)

Tournament results don't solely determine how good a character is.Chliu (talk) 23:14, 4 December 2015 (EST)

True...BUT tournament results are a reliable indicator of how good or bad a character is. For many characters, the problem isn't that no one plays them, the problem is that they often lose to characters with better frame data like Sheik. So people slowly start dropping them. The small amount of tournament representation and results that they have goes away as time goes by. So Tournament results do show how good or bad a character is, though yes, other factors do matter.Nightgengale (talk) 22:26, 5 December 2015 (EST)

So Ness loses to Shiek, therefore he is bad and people will slowly start dropping him. Chliu (talk) 13:01, 6 December 2015 (EST)

Most (if not all) characters have at least one even or bad matchup. its HOW MANY bad or good matchups a character has that matters. ONE bad matchup doesn't make a character bad. I never said or implied that, so I think its safe to say that you're trolling.Nightgengale (talk) 21:07, 6 December 2015 (EST)

I wouldn't call it trolling, matchups in tournaments in my opinion is very subjective, for example, some people may say a character is bad just because they have a bad matchup to Sheik, while others would say otherwise. It's more of a 'which is more widely agreed upon' and the number of matchups is the most agreed upon method. Hope this helps. Disaster Flare (talk) 21:11, 6 December 2015 (EST)

You do realize that almost every character has a bad matchup against Sheik right? Melee's Fox is the same way. Matchups and Tournament results are important, and are helpful when it comes to determining how rewarding a character is and whether or not they're worth picking up or not.Nightgengale (talk) 21:19, 6 December 2015 (EST)

Yes I am quite familiar with that aspect, I was merely using Sheik as an example, and I'm not denying that tournament results are important, I'm just saying that no matter what, what Chliu was saying was not trolling. Disaster Flare (talk) 21:21, 6 December 2015 (EST)

Let's agree to dis...actually, I agree with you now 100%...what have you done to me O.oNightgengale (talk) 22:50, 6 December 2015 (EST)

People say I'm very good at these kinds of discussions so. XD Disaster Flare (talk) 22:51, 6 December 2015 (EST)

Fox (SSB4)

Again, Larry Lurr is the best player in SoCal (winning most of the tournaments over there) and one of the best North American players in general, GrimTurtle is the best player in Houston, Texas (winning most of the tournaments over there, including against Trela), MegaFox is the best player in Texas overall (again, winning most of the tournaments over there... and had a very recent win over the likes of Dabuz), and Feel Tension and Snow have been placing well in MD/VA for a while. I don't see how Fox is doing worse overall than he did in Brawl... the only North American Fox in Brawl with several wins over top players is TKD, and the best Japanese Fox in Brawl, Yui, barely won any tournaments over there. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 15:31, 11 December 2015 (EST)

We're clearly on the wrong page. First, notice how I changed the portion stating that he was nerfed in terms of frame data ONLY. That's oversimplfiying the nerfs. I didn't change his standing to the cast statement. So why are you so edgy? Second, it's commonly excepted that fox was nerfed, but benefits so much from the general changes in Smash 4 that he ends up better relative to the cast. You throw results in my face (which is good in a way, i'm glad he has results) when I'm not accusing him of not having results anymore. He's just slightly weaker then his Brawl incarnation. Third, I stated that "He is lighter, and the removal of hitstun canceling makes him even easier to combo and worsens his endurance." Why was this valuable information removed? It should stay there. Fourth, you never actually explained what high tier is, so i'm assuming it means high-mid tier since top tier is a different title. In that case, Fox's standing may be debatable. Fifth, really we should be talking at the discussion page. I'm surprised you messaged me here instead of there.Nightgengale (talk) 23:01, 11 December 2015 (EST)

1. Saying that he was objectively nerfed overall implies that he's worse in standing in Smash 4 than in comparison to his standing in Brawl (as in, it makes it seem as if he does worse in Smash 4 than he does in Brawl, which is false). So yes, I believe it should specifically refer to it as such.

2. That's exactly what I was referring to as well. This is the main reason why I'm confused as to why you're removing the "frame data" part.

3. I reverted it as part of my previous edit, so that was my bad.

4. "High tier" is the tier right below "top tier"... so no, I didn't mean "high-mid tier".

I think we've just had a miscommunication regarding this, but hopefully this clears up my side. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Yeah, it does.Nightgengale (talk) 22:10, 12 December 2015 (EST)

I'm sorry if I'm getting in the way, but "tier lists aren't still official", as stated by the admins. So while I do see him as a high-tier character too, that information should be replaced.... which I already did. -- The 70's called. They said BeepYou was here :v 22:14, 12 December 2015 (EST)

I know SmashWiki emphasizes the importance of factual information...

However, I've looked at your user page and discussion, and I'm not pleased with what I observed. From what it looks like, you try to shut down anyone who doesn't share the same thoughts as you do, and when it comes to a small divide between opinions (i.e. Lucas or Fox in Smash 4), if it isn't your opinion, you flat out tell them "no, you're wrong" or "be reasonable". People have tried to explain that you don't need to be brazen like this, but you don't seem to be taking anyone's advice to heart, as you continue to fall back into said behaviors. With that said, I urge you not to be so aggressive towards opinions from here on. 15DollarsWentSouth 15:10, 16 January 2016 (EST)

Sorry Buddy. I don't care. I'm all about facts, not opinions. If someone comes to me with facts, i'll quickly surrender. I want this wiki to be as factual and truthful as possible. The problem is when people have opinions and little to no facts to back them up. Lucas is a perfect example. Looking at all of the facts available to us, I came to the conclusion based on facts that he was nerfed. My personal opinions on the matter are irrelevant; I abide by the facts. You say its debatable. Ok, that's fine. But you need proof. I have proof of nerfs, so you need proof that the buffs outweigh the nerfs and make X character a better character. And in Lucas case, they simply don't. He got significantly nerfed in his transition. That's not my opinion, but rather what the facts tell us. And I'm truly sorry if I come off as mean, but this Wiki has a good number of people who allow their personal opinions to blind them to the truth. Nightgengale (talk) 05:16, 21 January 2016 (EST)

...I'll give you this-you brought a few things to light which made sense to come to that consensus on Lucas. However, having said that, it still doesn't mean you get to decide what is truth or fable. I've noticed people actually disprove your factoids and yet you refuse to accept it, and I'm doubting if you really are sorry if you come off as bitter on SW. Like I said before, try to resolve dividing opinions with a bit more grace when presenting your evidence. I'll finish by saying this: You won't always find the supposed "facts". 15DollarsWentSouth 19:44, 21 January 2016 (EST)

I don't decide what is truth or fable. I can't just call a character nerfed just like that. I have to do the research, ask local tournament players, participate in tournaments myself, pull out my old wii and Brawl disc and painstakingly compare the two to come to a consensus. Then I have to show people my proof and debate it out constantly. Once again you seem to think that i'm asserting my opinion about characters. In actuality i'm just changing the "Changes from Brawl Section" based on my, at times, intense research, not opinion. Lucas was one of my mains in Brawl, and i'm not happy about him getting nerfed (AT ALL X() But I can't just ignore facts and act like he wasn't. And I know a good amount of people who do just that.Nightgengale (talk) 08:52, 23 January 2016 (EST)

Let me ask you

What do you consider a "slight nerf"? Because, if you think of this like fractions, the numbers aren't too far apart.

Also, the roster has not "not increased that much". It's almost 1.5x the size of Brawl's. That's twenty new characters (give or take). Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 11:24, 3 February 2016 (EST)

which character do you have in mind?Nightgengale (talk) 11:24, 3 February 2016 (EST)

All the ones you've been changing. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 11:36, 3 February 2016 (EST)

But you came here with a specific character in mind, no? I consider the nerfs on a character by character basis. So telling me which character would really help.Nightgengale (talk) 11:42, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I didn't come here with a character in mind, actually. I'm just noticing your edits, saying how certain number changes aren't slight nerfs and how the roster hasn't increased that much, when neither of those statements are true. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 11:54, 3 February 2016 (EST)

So you did have characters in mind. Toon Link and Lucario.

Check here for both: http://smashboards.com/threads/first-official-4br-smash-for-wii-u-tier-list.429817/ Toon link is now a mid-tier, whereas he was mid-high in Brawl. That's a nerf.

Lucario is now a mid-tier, whereas he too was mid-high in Brawl. That's a nerf. Thanks for asking.Nightgengale (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I'm familiar with the tier list, thank you. And I'm not saying it's not a nerf at all. I'm just saying that, when it comes right down to it, there seems to be a difference between what you see as a "slight nerf" and what I see as a "slight nerf". Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:01, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I'm with Aidan on this issue. Lucas for example, has improved from Brawl, since he's better relative to the cast. John PK SMAAAASH!! 12:03, 3 February 2016 (EST)

(edit conflict) That being said, yes, if you look at just the numbers, it may not be a slight nerf. But if you do the math right and use a tier list ranking as a fraction, the numbers aren't that different. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:04, 3 February 2016 (EST)

Is that so? Then perhaps you disagree, not with me, but with the tier list itself. Understandable, given how controversial and sudden it came about. I'll drive my point home: According to the tier list, Lucario and Toon Link were nerfed to the point of being in a different tier. Nothing slight about that.Nightgengale (talk) 12:08, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I'm not disagreeing with the tier list. Let's take Toon Link. 13/38 (Brawl) is about 0.34. 22/56 (Smash 4) is about 0.39. It is a 0.05 difference. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:10, 3 February 2016 (EST)

You are disagreeing with the tier list, which put Toon Link, formerly a mid-high tier, into the middle of the mid-tier. A nerf. You seem to be taking this from a percent/fraction perspective. Unnecessary, since smash boards was very clear as to which characters fit in where. You're kind of shooting the messenger at this point.Nightgengale (talk) 12:14, 3 February 2016 (EST)

(Reset indent) If I was disagreeing with the tier list, I'd be yelling about how the Mii Brawler needs to be higher (which, in all honesty, it would need to be if customs were counted). Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:21, 3 February 2016 (EST)

How is this not about math? It's a ranking, for fuck's sake. It's "this character is ranked ___ out of 56 characters". Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:23, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I agree, Mii Brawler should be MUCH higher. But ultimately, you are arguing with the tier list, which I don't agree with. So if it tells me that a certain character was nerfed to a lower tier, I will change their page to coincide with the current tier list. Its my self appointed job, and inevitably, I knew I would be stepping on some people's toes in the process. And no, its not about math. Go to this page: http://smashboards.com/threads/first-official-4br-smash-for-wii-u-tier-list.429817/

Look it over. Memorize if you must. According to this list, Toon Link and Lucario have been nerfed to be in the middle of the mid tier. Percentage? Ultimately irrelevant. Ranking? Just a number. The tiers, Top, High, Mid, Low, and Bottom matter. Embrace them, and you will be reborn.Nightgengale (talk) 12:29, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I get it. It's a different tier. But the numbers are still there. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:30, 3 February 2016 (EST)

The numbers are irrelevant. Yes there, but ultimately irrelevant. According to the tier list, that is. Which tier a character falls in is important.Nightgengale (talk) 12:47, 3 February 2016 (EST)

I'm not saying that's not important. But where they fall in the list in terms of the entire cast is also relevant. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 12:48, 3 February 2016 (EST)

According to the tier list, barely. I'm sorry if i'm coming off as obnoxious, but i'm just following through with what the tier list says.Nightgengale (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2016 (EST)

Could you tell why the numbers are almost completely irreverent and why we should never draw conclusions to how they are to the rest of the cast? Also, moving into an adjacent tier isn't that big of a change as this tier list has 11 different tiers. -- Ethan(Discussion) 13:50, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Where did you come from? XDNightgengale (talk) 14:09, 5 February 2016 (EST)

SW:1RV

Please review the policy on the header, as this was in violation of it. Disaster Flare (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2016 (EST)

you got me XDNightgengale (talk) 16:11, 5 February 2016 (EST)

There's also the fact that the discussion you opened up had two users going against you. So, while it is a small majority, right now majority rules in favor of Ike being buffed. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 16:13, 5 February 2016 (EST)

fine by me. I'm kinda tired of enforcing the tier list anyway. Too many wiki users on here disagree with it.Nightgengale (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Well I mean, the most notable argument on the page (Toomai's) is using the tier list. Ike is ranked overall higher compared to the size of the cast. He's low-mid because there's a lot of newcomers or buffed veterans who are better than him, so relative to the rest of the cast he is worse, but relative to himself he has improved since Brawl. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 16:18, 5 February 2016 (EST)

(edit conflict) Let me explain it one more time: it's not the tier list people are disagreeing with. Aidan, the Lovely Dragon Warrior 16:19, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Relative to the rest of the cast, Ike is better and above average. He is in top half instead of bottom half. It's just the awkward rankings this tier uses. -- Ethan(Discussion) 16:23, 5 February 2016 (EST)

tfw getting ganged up on. Ike was put in mid tier, at the distinct "E" bracket. Look at bottom tier. Notice how they are put in 3 distinct brackets, "H" "I" and "J". The brackets are obviously there for a reason. But until the SBR says so directly, you guys will interpret it as you will. IDC. Moving on to more important things. Also YES, many wiki user here obviously disagree with the new tier list, thinking that it came out too early, or got character placements wrong. I'm not making this up.Nightgengale (talk) 16:26, 5 February 2016 (EST)

(Reset indent) We're not disagreeing with his placement. We're disagreeing with you and how you view his placement in terms of the rest of the cast. Aidan, the Lovely Dragon Warrior 16:27, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Give it a rest. He was put in "E" bracket for a reason. But nobody cares/enforces the bracket separations, so why should I waste my time. I don't care about that anymore.Nightgengale (talk) 16:30, 5 February 2016 (EST)

(edit conflict)I was talking to DatNuttyKid. I wouldn't be against not even using this tier list due to DLC and its ranking names. SSB4 is way more balanced than Brawl but somehow above average characters like Ike are in the lower half of mid tier while Brawl with MK below average characters are mid tier. -- Ethan(Discussion) 16:31, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Nightgengale, you're the only one on this side vs. three (I'm not counting myself because I honestly don't know nor care that much). You don't exactly have the right to tell us to give it a rest, particularly when you refuse to let it go as well. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 16:32, 5 February 2016 (EST)

DaTNuttyKid you are kicking a dead horse. I don't care. They can do what they will. I've already let it go. WHY are you still here on MY talk page?Nightgengale (talk) 16:34, 5 February 2016 (EST)

um... cuz you told them to give it a rest? Besides, nothing's forcing you to respond to me. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 16:35, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Yet this is my talk page and you draw people here.Nightgengale (talk) 16:38, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Ayyyy

You're back :) -- BeepYou: is he leaving the wiki? (talk) 22:37, 22 August 2016 (EDT)

Hi. :). I never left, I just greatly reduced how much editing I did on this wiki. I'm on quite a few other wikis. I'm so glad Palutena got a better ranking this time around. IMO she was always underrated. I even use her at local tournaments occasionally.Nightgengale (talk) 22:42, 22 August 2016 (EDT))

Still, can I talk to you for a little while? I'm not as active as I was before in the wiki because of school, so much I don't even check my watchlist. But if I can make an observation, this is the right time: on Kirby's page, I can see you say he was clearly nerfed. I cannot fully agree there, mainly because he did got very good buffs. It's just veterans have also got buffed to many degrees: Mario, Luigi, Falcon, DK, Sonic, Yoshi, Ness, SHEIK. They were noticeably buffed (including updates) compared to Kirby (who was nerfed from Brawl). I'd still like your opinion on this tho -- BeepYou (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2016 (EDT)

According to the tier list, he got nerfed. I play kirby quite a bit (big kirby fan, especially tripe deluxe) but my personal feelings won't stop me from honestly seeing if a character was buffed or nerfed. Keep in mind that Rage, and Edge Trumping both do overall hurt kirby as a character. He was hands down one of the best edgeguarders in Brawl. Even in Melee, he was a good edgeguarder. His loss of range also hurts his approach options, giving him overall one of the worst approaches in the game.Nightgengale (talk) 22:27, 9 October 2016 (EDT)

kk, I can definitely agree there, though I do not think his approach is one of the worst. It is indeed bad, but not one of the worst. Anyway, thx. -- BeepYou (talk) 22:56, 9 October 2016 (EDT)

As a Kirby main, I feel Kirby has bad approach too, poor range and mobility (especially in the air) don't go well, which is why I've been playing Sonic more often, though I try to keep Kirby as my first main since it's been that way for so long. Smash Master 23:45, 9 October 2016 (EDT)