Official BBR Tier List v5

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Yes, it was at Mr.0
I am trying to convey that evidence needs to be used wherever possible. Tournament results have been that one piece of evidence that helps. There will always be other factors you cannot really proof (MUs are reasoned not proven, yes), but when you have something like tournament results that so many things can be inferred from as proof, you should use it.

Edit: Tournament results reflect that a character has poor traits against others o.0

 

[MKOwnage]

I still think Jigglypuff is capable of making at least bottom of E tier.
But i just simply want to know your opinion.

 

[Mr.-0]

Yet, while tounrament results are "evidence" I do not believe they are evidence for how good a character is. I've already said why.

 

[Jimmyfosho]

I still think Jigglypuff is capable of making at least bottom of E tier.
But i just simply want to know your opinion.

needs moar evidence not potential

 

[Mr.-0]

I don't think Jigglypuff has anythign going for her enough to make her E tier. Terrible priority, low range, yadayada... all she has is a decent aerial game, and is a slight counter to Diddy. Big deal.

 

[Savon]

Yet, while tounrament results are "evidence" I do not believe they are evidence for how good a character is. I've already said why.

You can't spend all of your time speaking hypothetically though. You need to see it in action as well.

 

[Mr.-0]

Yet a tier list is a ranking of each character's potetnial to win tournies at the HIGHEST possible human level in the current metagame, all we can do id hypothesize, to an extent. Showing videos and the like of matchups and tournies can prvodie us with information, but, say, M2K wins a tourny against Ally, and we see the video, all it could mean is that Ally had an off day. Yet we've clearly seen what Snake can do, yet I want him to drop because we've seen bits of and have hypothesized, basedoff of analysis of the characters, that falco, diddy, olimar, and pikachu should be above Snake, even though they've never performed that well in tournaments, they have potential, and we have seen some of it, but only some.

 

[Steam]

we should use this kind of brain power to develop our own character's metagames or improve ourselves rather than arguing over a list which doesn't really matter at all.

 

[Mr.-0]

Lol, what brian peppers power, I'm as dead as a rock?

Wait, let me try that again:

Lol, what brain power, I'm as dumb as a rock!

 

[infiniteV115]

Yet a tier list is a ranking of each character's potetnial to win tournies at the HIGHEST possible human level in the current metagame, all we can do id hypothesize, to an extent. Showing videos and the like of matchups and tournies can prvodie us with information, but, say, M2K wins a tourny against Ally, and we see the video, all it could mean is that Ally had an off day. Yet we've clearly seen what Snake can do, yet I want him to drop because we've seen bits of and have hypothesized, basedoff of analysis of the characters, that falco, diddy, olimar, and pikachu should be above Snake, even though they've never performed that well in tournaments, they have potential, and we have seen some of it, but only some.

There's no such thing as "highest possible human level in the current metagame". The way people play competitively DEFINES what the metagame is. Highest possible human level isn't decided by the metagame, the metagame is decided by the highest possible known human level.

Stop using that definition. A tier list is the EXPECTED performance of each individual character when placed in tournament situations, BASED ON knowledge of the metagame, AND tournament results. That's why the tier list changes, because the metagame evolves. We cannot accurately and objectively measure a character's potential, and that's not what the tier list is trying to do.

This tier list is made by the BBR, which as far as I know is an exclusive group of people who have shown that they have a deep knowledge and understanding of the smash metagames. I may be off here, and I don't like speaking for other people, but I'm pretty sure that they used tournament results because they wanted to remain as objective as possible when creating the tier lists. It would be a useless tier list if it was based on their mains, their friends' mains, etc. Tournament results isn't the perfect representation of which characters are better than others, but it's the best option we have.

We should not hypothesize when creating tier lists, because no matter how hard we try, our hypothesis is subjective. That's why we run experiments (tournaments) and draw conclusions (tier lists, match-ups) from the results (parentheses) of those experiments (again, tournaments).

Falco, Diddy, Olimar and Pikachu have never performed well in tournaments? Why do you think they're all high-tier characters?!

And we don't KNOW how much potential they have, we can only predict. And what makes you think Snake has no potential left? Even I think that Snake is worse than those 4, but I'm not going to agree with that reasoning.

 

[Mr.-0]

I meant they haven't played as well in tournaments as Snake has , and while the metagame is based off of the way people play, there is still such a thing as the highest possible human play. When I refered to the current metagame, I meant playing as bets as humanly possible with the AT's known, with the current knowledge on MU's, and how those MU's are played. So, I'm going to keep on using that definition. And, a tier list is to be based off of the highest possible human level in the current metagame, not the highest known human level. While the latter, along with MU's and the discovery of AT's does create the current metagame, a tier list is to be decided from the highest possible human level of play, not the highest known. And, we should hypothesize when creating tier lists, because a tier list is not a bunch of frame data or a tounrament rankings list, it is exactly what I said it was before: A ranking of the characters in the game that predicts how well they will do in tournies, based on how good thise characters are in the current metagame, and being played at the top of humanly possible performance. Even if our opinion is subjective, that is why there is a BBR, to hypothesize as fairly as possible. If tier list were just tournament rankings, we'd only need Ankoko or whoever made/makes that in the BBR, so it wouldn't even be that. And, again, of course we don't know how much potential the characters have, because the tier list changes. If we knew, the metagame wouldn't change, the iter list wouldn't change, the MU's wouldn't change, etc. We hypothesize from the data given to us (moveset analysis, theorycraft, AT's, MU's) and tournament results, imo, are not or should not be a part of that data.


At this rate, however, it's turning into "Should a tier list have moveset analysis or tournaments results in it's data pool, and which one should weigh more?" debate, so after a few more posts I'm going to agree to disagree.

 

[-Mars-]

WOw this thread went to **** overnight. I blame Mr. O and the American Government.

 

[infiniteV115]

"We hypothesize from the data given to us (moveset analysis, theorycraft, AT's, MU's) and tournament results, imo, are not or should not be a part of that data."

Tourney results are necessary because they give us an idea of how effective those data (moveset analysis, theorycraft, AT's, MU's) are when placed in tournament conditions, their relative significance and also represent data which we can't measure and analyse (mindgames, consistency, reading, etc). Tier lists are meant to give an idea of how good each character is in tourney situations. How good a character is depends on how we can play them (metagame). Mindgames, consistency, reading etc cannot be accurately measured without seeing how we play, thus tournaments are necessary.

"because a tier list ... is exactly what I said it was before: A ranking of the characters in the game that predicts how well they will do in tournies..."

Anyone would be a fool to predict how well a character would do in tournaments without looking at their previous performance in tournaments. That's like trying to predict how Michael Phelps would do in the next olympic games without at all considering the fact that he has won 16 medals in 2 Olympic venues, 14 of which were gold. Most people hadn't even heard of him until the Beijing olympics, so their predictions would be MUCH different from those that had.Why is it so important to consider performance record? TRENDS! Good characters will do well more often, bad characters will perform poorly more often. Of course, there are exceptions, BUT THERE IS STILL A STRONG TRENDLINE. And (of course) it's reasonable to say that Phelps will do well in his next Olympic games.

I did not say the tier list was based solely on tournament results, but they do play a large part. Outlier tournaments exist, and I'm sure the BBR is aware of them, so they definitely do not base the tier list ONLY on tournaments.

It wouldn't make sense for a tier list to be based on the "highest possible level of human play" given a current metagame, because even with complete knowledge of the current metagame you cannot measure the highest possible level of human play. Human play involves the immeasurable aspects I mentioned before, as well as creativity. You cannot measure creativity.

 

[Steam]

oh my god this is stupid

 

[Mr.-0]

But, you see, in smash, theres players, and characters. Soo ur analogy sucks. And, yeah, I've made this thread terrible, so, I"m gonna drop this topic.

 

[infiniteV115]

Alright, new topic.

On a scale of 1-10, how much do you like blueberry muffins?

 

[Savon]

I prefer banana nut muffins to be honest, but I will give blueberry muffins a solid 8 out of 10.

 

[Chuee]

0
Now stop talking about things nobody cares about.

 

[Orion*]

its been a while but Ive played them both. maybe you should get up to date and stop riding the ally hype train when the last stop on that bad boy was like 3 months ago.

theres no way that i could elaborate this without insulting fatal, and hes a cool person and a great player.

however two things

1) i dont Ever ride hype trains. infact im usually the person insulting them unless ive had a long standing belief of something (in which case im insulting you for being late)

2) the fact that i even stood a chance against fatal and have taken sets from him before in tournament considering my current level at the time shows that while fatal can beat people m2k can, he will lose to people that ally wouldnt.
im super inconsistent vs snake and at the time i housed ally and couldnt even beat his sandbagging aggro snake in multiple friendly sets... **** even his marth was wrecking me LOL

^ also if you want to use the argument about not using how people do vs you as an example, im really not going into detail because its

A) not worth it
B) insulting to fatal, and i like him

edit: i dont see how people think snake is better than diddy.... in any way. you have to be ******** LOL

 

[infiniteV115]

I agree that Diddy is better than Snake. Hell, I'd even say Diddy can compete well with MK for 1st.

 

[Jimmyfosho]

I agree that Diddy is better than Snake. Hell, I'd even say Diddy can compete well with MK for 1st.

You're kidding me right?

 

[Nitrix]

Blueberry muffins are okay......I've never had really good blueberry muffins -_-


What do you guys think of Pit?

 

[Spelt]

I think pit is a lot like a blueberry muffin.

 

[Mr.-0]

I WANT THAT NASTY THAT GUSHY STUFF!

Let's go back to a serious topic: Where should snake be on the next tier list? We haven't really finished this topic, in fact, we haven't really done anything.

 

[Spelt]

b tier.
along with falco and ice climbers.

 

[infiniteV115]

@ Jimmyfosho

No I'm not. ADHD has shown that Diddy is underrated and has a lot of potential, and he has destroyed M2K.

And I don't think MK is as broken as most people think he is.

And Nagahari from Japan has shown that Diddy has an inescapable single naner infinite on ZSS, but it probably works on the entire cast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU1TeT04b9A

 

[Big Moose]

I WANT THAT NASTY THAT GUSHY STUFF!

Let's go back to a serious topic: Where should snake be on the next tier list? We haven't really finished this topic, in fact, we haven't really done anything.

I am just now entering the competitive scene.
I think Snake is the second best character in the game. and Diddy is third.
Snake is hard to kill, deals great amounts of damage and can afford to make mistakes without getting seriously punished. Mainly due to his weight.

 

[Spelt]

@ Jimmyfosho

No I'm not. ADHD has shown that Diddy is underrated and has a lot of potential, and he has destroyed M2K.

M2K has a hard time with diddy.

And I don't think MK is as broken as most people think he is.

of course you don't.

And Nagahari from Japan has shown that Diddy has an inescapable single naner infinite on ZSS, but it probably works on the entire cast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU1TeT04b9A

too bad the entire cast can also do it to him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc_Fn2h0YwU


get raaaaped diddy.

Snake is hard to kill, deals great amounts of damage and can afford to make mistakes without getting seriously punished. Mainly due to his weight.

Unfortunately that is not what tier lists are solely defined with.
Or else bowser would be high tier.

 

[Mr.-0]

I, actually, would agree with infinite on this one, if not for the fact that I know MK dominates the cast. MK definitely should be first, yet he is not as broken as everyone says he is, and I think Diddy wins the matchup. But overall, Diddy, imo, should be second not first. And B tier is a LITTLE extreme for Snake. Maybe 5th place, not B tier. Unless, lol, that is in B tier. And Falco lower than Snake? Nah man, Falco should be third. I say this with confidence.

 

[Nefarious B]

Most of the cast can infinite Diddy back. M2K beat ADHD pretty badly in their most recent encounter.

 

[Spelt]

Most of the cast can infinite Diddy back. M2K beat ADHD pretty badly in their most recent encounter.

Are there videos?
I would LOVE to see an intelligent banana game by M2K.

 

[Mr.-0]

I just Snake is too, whats the word, hittable? That, and his recovery, gimpability, comboability, cgability, predictability, and the fact that he just doesn't have enough good stuff to deal out makes me think he's lower than he is.

Holy crap there's a lot of people reading this now.

 

[Big Moose]

I think Snake is second, but third? I'm not sure, Falco or Diddy?

 

[Jimmyfosho]

@ Jimmyfosho

No I'm not. ADHD has shown that Diddy is underrated and has a lot of potential, and he has destroyed M2K.

And I don't think MK is as broken as most people think he is.

And Nagahari from Japan has shown that Diddy has an inescapable single naner infinite on ZSS, but it probably works on the entire cast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU1TeT04b9A

You do realize that M2K isn't the only MK out there right? Anti beats ADHD every time they play each other. He also beats practically every Diddy he plays. Also M2K has beaten ADHD in their most recent set. Though I do agree with you saying that MK isn't as "broken" as people thought he was in the past but he with no doubt the best character in the game. That thing Nagahari did.. really situational and it really won't be happening on a smart MK or player anytime soon. Though it doesn't really matter as much almost the whole cast can do it on Diddy as well.

 

[Mr.-0]

Well, I don't think anyone really deserves the boost so much as Snake deserves the drop. Saying Falco is better than Snake makes sense, but, admittedly, it does sound weird sying Falco is number 3.

 

[infiniteV115]

Bad points on my part. Though if the infinite gains popularity, a good Diddy could just bring out 1 banana. I know it's not a guaranteed solution and is still rather risky, but it could work.
And I still stand by my statement that Diddy can compete with MK for first.
And I also want to see the video of M2K wrecking ADHD.

 

[Big Moose]

Well, I don't think anyone really deserves the boost so much as Snake deserves the drop. Saying Falco is better than Snake makes sense, but, admittedly, it does sound weird sying Falco is number 3.

Snake can afford to make mistakes without being punished hard. He is heavy, racks large amounts of damage, broken tilts, amazing kill power and is hard to kill. he comes second to Meta Knight and I think he always should.

 

[Spelt]

Snake can afford to make mistakes without being punished hard. He is heavy, racks large amounts of damage, broken tilts, amazing kill power and is hard to kill. he comes second to Meta Knight and I think he always should.

Unfortunately that is not what tier lists are solely defined with.
Or else bowser would be high tier.

Reposting this because it is still not a good point.

 

[Big Moose]

Reposting this because it is still not a good point.

The responding quote was just ridiculous. Snake actually has results, he has been a top placing character for a long time now.

 

[Nefarious B]

M2K vs ADHD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gKxEjhzXnQ