2013 Community Tier List

[BTmoney]

And people are so caught up on the choice of letters because?

 

[MaJiK]

S - Top Tier
A - Mid Tier
B - Low Tier
F - Bottom Tier


That clear things up for people?

Again I understand WHY there are only 4 tiers. But that is not what those letters MEAN.

 

[Divinokage]

Again I understand WHY there are only 4 tiers. But that is not what those letters MEAN.

Umm.. who are you to say? Just because you've been conditioned to see letters a certain way doesn't mean the definition of what you think letters should be is right. They are just letters, he already explained the definition. Why are you trying to go beyond that?

 

[AlienAllen]

I think one reason Sheik doesn't have the tournament results that Fox and Falco do is because fewer people play her. Fox and Falco are considered more fun to play by the majority of people and some people considered Sheik a lame character. Because of this, Sheik doesn't have as many players to advance her game.

I put Sheik at 1 on my tier list followed by Falco and Fox, so that's my reasoning for it. I think she has fewer weaknesses than spacies and overall better matchups.

EDIT: Are you going to post the list with ALL the votes counted? I think that would be really interesting to see.

 

[knightpraetor]

on a tier list with fox at the top..marth deserves that spot, so at least this tier list is internally logically consistent...it would bother me if fox were top and marth were placed 6th, or if they placed fox 3-4th and then they left marth where he is...that would just be irrational since most of the reason marth is considered so good is because of his matchup on fox.

it turned out roughly what i expected though. the list appears to match the average viewpoint I had read on smashboards pretty well. Anyway I have long since given up on ordering 2-5 because their abilities and matchup spread are too close, so tier lists are whatever..at least y link is above link like he should be. My only real issue with the tier list is G&W..what the hell is he doing so high???

no out of shield or defensive options that are worth **** against any decent player..bowser and ness should be above him at the very least..

I thought that people were right when they said no one cares how bad the worthless characters are in this game..but this is ridiculous and my mind just can't comprehend how people would vote g&w that high...I have learned to accept pretty much any variation of the top six (as long as falco is in the top two) as at least reasonable...but this flies in the face of all logic

we cannot be misinforming new players like this..think of the endless hours they could waste on G&W thinking that he has doable matchups

 

[QERB]

he does have doable matchups.

 

[hungrybox]

Just realized Pikachu was better than Samus

shwhoa

 

[AlienAllen]

G&W has way better movement options than bowser. You can't just look at one aspect of the game when comparing characters.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Community Results​

Voters: see 2nd post...

 

[Divinokage]

on a tier list with fox at the top..marth deserves that spot, so at least this tier list is internally logically consistent...it would bother me if fox were top and marth were placed 6th, or if they placed fox 3-4th and then they left marth where he is...that would just be irrational since most of the reason marth is considered so good is because of his matchup on fox.

it turned out roughly what i expected though. the list appears to match the average viewpoint I had read on smashboards pretty well. Anyway I have long since given up on ordering 2-5 because their abilities and matchup spread are too close, so tier lists are whatever..at least y link is above link like he should be. My only real issue with the tier list is G&W..what the hell is he doing so high???

no out of shield or defensive options that are worth **** against any decent player..bowser and ness should be above him at the very least..

I thought that people were right when they said no one cares how bad the worthless characters are in this game..but this is ridiculous and my mind just can't comprehend how people would vote g&w that high...I have learned to accept pretty much any variation of the top six (as long as falco is in the top two) as at least reasonable...but this flies in the face of all logic

we cannot be misinforming new players like this..think of the endless hours they could waste on G&W thinking that he has doable matchups

His moves themselves are actually pretty decent. Good range, good power on some of them.. he can also move pretty fast. Sure he has barely any shield game but he's certainly better than the bottom tier characters.

However, my mind can comprehend how good he can be by facing a really good G&W, he can be pretty deceptive due how crazy his move hitboxes are. He has good tools, just really **** defense.

 

[AlienAllen]

The lists look the same except Mewtwo is switched with Roy and Kirby is switched with Pichu. Interesting...I like it.

 

[AppleAppleAZ]

I think G&W has the potential to go higher. Roy is balls, how is he not in F tier?

 

[knightpraetor]

His moves themselves are actually pretty decent. Good range, good power on some of them.. he can also move pretty fast. Sure he has barely any shield game but he's certainly better than the bottom tier characters.

However, my mind can comprehend how good he can be by facing a really good G&W, he can be pretty deceptive due how crazy his move hitboxes are. He has good tools, just really **** defense.

his dair has a crazy deceptive hitbox, but if you compare him to bowser, that is the only one aerial with a better hitbox..and bowser has a good oos game, which is why we have sets of foxes losing to good bowsers, but never g&w beating fox. a fox or falco can spam shield pressure without thinking and still beat g&w. I just don't see how g&w can be good with no defense. every top level match has dozens of places where a player is forced to shield..g&w just eats 40 every time he tries..and his roll/spotdodge will not get him out.

also, i don't think it's coincidence that no G&W anywhere has ever taken a notable set (not sure if that's true, but i certainly never heard of it)....at least taj and djnintendo showed that m2k and bowser could sometimes do decently...but G&W only works if the opponent is not fast enough to make you shield..

I could see G&w working ok against slow chars or ones that don't have massive hitboxes to force you to sheild..but against actual top 15 chars..i would vastly prefer to play bowser than to try to attempt to play without a shield versus opponents anywhere near my level.

i can see there being some debate about ness being better or worse than G&W (though since I play peach I think that DJC is better than the entirety of G&W's char), but bowser will do better in every matchup in the top 8 except jiggs and maybe ICs.

are they just measuring the bottom tier by how they do relative to each other? because i could see g&w winning the head to head with bowser, but he doesn't really have the tools necessary to even be playable against the top 8.

edit:
I guess G&W's aerial priority on fair might be better tahn bowser's too? i don't know..i just have a hard time respecting someone when everytime i have ever played against..the game lasts about 8 sec..g&w is forced to shield..he then goes down to zero options..uses his ****ty roll or tries to waveland a platform and then gets comboed to death...

I think jiggs has one of the worst matchups vs ganon in the top tier..and you can still shield poke him to death with bair or uptilt him into rest on command (played this like 6 hrs total with mahone. just don't ask)

i think people are vastly underrating bowser. it's not coincidence that has made him take sets and important matches in tourneys where G&W has not.

also the advantage of G&W's movement is extended reach on his fair and the ability to pick up grabs..but his fair is not particularly better than bowser's, while picking up one grab doesn't seem like it would make up for the amount of space he has to relinquish on stage constantly due to having a bad shield.

I may be biased of course since obviously G&W cannot even move against a disjointed hitbox char like marth..but he also can't move vs fox or falco, or avoid having to use his bad shield when playing someone as fast as falcon... i really feel like G&W's placement only makes sense if they only considered head to head matchups in the bottom tier..but if that's the case then G&W probably beats mewtwo as well in the head to head.

I just think that the tier list should reflect the actual chances of doing well in tourney, which for G&W is basically zero. I can't even remember the last time i played a G&W in tourney because I wasn't look at the screen while i was winning. at least i keep my eyes on the screen while i'm playing against bowser so that i don't just autopilot my way into a million up Bs

 

[jayeldeee]

I don't know why, the more I look at this and other tier lists, it makes me want to play as Pichu more, LOL. I mean come on, he's cute. A little suicidal, but hey, he's cute, right? HE'S CUTE, RIGHT?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

I just found out ICG's new ult

 

[Blistering Speed]

Yoshi should be ~11th, Ice Climbers are better than Falcon and the spacies deserve their own tier until Sheik, Marth and Puff can prove that they can capitalise on human capabilities enough to put themselves on a similar plain.

 

[pokemongeof]

I like this tier list! I just think Luigi should be at least higher than Ganon.

Glad that Weegee is higher than Mario, though

 

[phish-it]

So is this the 2013 tier list yet?

 

[knightpraetor]

yeah, as much as I may have a couple issues with this tier list, it much more closely reflects the current metagame than the earlier one, so we should just update it already. At least this one shows that doc and pikachu have demonstrated a lot of potential lately.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Falco still < Fox!?
Why? I didn't even know there were people who considered Fox to be better at this point in time.
Overall, very pleased. Except that Pichu is still lower than Bowser.

 

[Senortesta]

Falco still < Fox!?
Why? I didn't even know there were people who considered Fox to be better at this point in time.
Overall, very pleased. Except that Pichu is still lower than Bowser.

Fox and Falco play the neutral ver similarly except that falco can laser camp but fox is faster, better at gimping, and has a better recovery. That along with better match ups overall make Fox the better character.

 

[Jiv]

S tier should just be spacie tier IMO

I mean they're never not gonna be 1 and 2

 

[john!]

Voting variance isn't the most important thing when determining a tier division. The top 8 characters haven't been in danger of moving below the top 8 since before brawl was released. A sub-tier could be made for ICs and Falcon alone, but that would necessarily lead to other minor divisions (such as fox/falco tier) which is not very helpful information. Higher level players are welcome to talk about the game in terms of smaller tiers, but this list is primarily for newer players to see quickly and decisively which characters are viable and which aren't.

is there any particular reason why minor divisions are a bad thing? what you said really isn't true; they are neither less quick nor less decisive than a bunch of moderately-sized tiers. they are just meant to show large gaps in tournament viability. i believe a tier list is supposed to be as accurate as possible, and if that means that falcon and IC's have nobody else with similar strength, or that two characters are far above the rest, then so be it.

in fact, depending on how you make a tier list, the tiers should theoretically be SMALLER as you approach the top, because top tier characters have metagames that have been fleshed out more, and we know far more about where they stand in relation to characters of similar strength (as opposed to, say, kirby and pichu... nobody knows which of the two is better at top level play due to lack of information).

the space animals are 1.75 points above the rest of the cast. this is a larger gap than 2/3 of the actual tier divisions. just because you're uncomfortable with the space animals receiving their own tier doesn't mean that it's not a statistical reality. i believe that the tier list should reflect reality, which i think isn't too much to ask for.

oh and i know i've been super critical of some of your ideas lately joe, but that's just what happens when you take the initiative for big things like this that i'm interested in i just want to see it turn out well.

btw, did we ever hear how the voters for the first list were chosen?

 

[FourStar]

honestly the tier list for me is just fun to look at but not an accurate representation of anything as tournaments go

 

[BTmoney]

ugh I want to kill myself after every ~3rd post I see here

 

[Bones0]

S - Top Tier
A - Mid Tier
B - Low Tier
F - Bottom Tier


That clear things up for people?

And people are so caught up on the choice of letters because?

Umm.. who are you to say? Just because you've been conditioned to see letters a certain way doesn't mean the definition of what you think letters should be is right. They are just letters, he already explained the definition. Why are you trying to go beyond that?

The letters don't just mean whatever you want. When you see Top, middle, lower, and bottom, that implies an even distribution of "goodness" amongst each tier. When you say S, A, B, and F, it sounds like S tier characters are way better than A and B tiers, A and B tier characters are evenly matched, and F tier characters can't compete with A or B tiers at all. That obviously isn't the case, and it wasn't reflected in the poll. There was no magnitude of "goodness" being applied to each tier, so to just slap on your own perceptions of how good each tier is relative to the others is misleading. Melee's cast has a very gradual decline. Characters on the edge of S and F could easily be moved into A and B respectively without there being too much disagreement, but the way the tiers are named implies a huge gap between the two tiers. What is so bad about just naming tiers A, B, C, and D? Adding in random S and F tiers comes with all this baggage and misleading connotations for no benefit.

the space animals are 1.75 points above the rest of the cast. this is a larger gap than 2/3 of the actual tier divisions. just because you're uncomfortable with the space animals receiving their own tier doesn't mean that it's not a statistical reality. i believe that the tier list should reflect reality, which i think isn't too much to ask for.

Just because most people are in agreement about spacies being the best doesn't mean they should be ranked higher in their own tier. I don't think anyone put spacies in their own tier in their own lists, so it wouldn't make sense to do that on the actual list. Maybe everyone just happens to agree that spacies are just barely better than the other characters? The whole issue with you thinking it is a statistical reality is you don't realize what the numbers mean. The numbers are the average rank in the tier list, not a measurement of their relative skill.

If Sveet had asked people to rank the overall skill of the characters 1-100 with 100 being banworthy and 1 being useless, then we could draw some conclusions about how to separate the tiers. If everyone put spacies at only a few points above the other top tiers (whether it is 98 vs. 96 or 83 vs. 80), you would be able to see quite clearly that they don't need their own tier even if they are largely considered favorites as the best characters.

 

[john!]

Just because most people are in agreement about spacies being the best doesn't mean they should be ranked higher in their own tier. I don't think anyone put spacies in their own tier in their own lists, so it wouldn't make sense to do that on the actual list. Maybe everyone just happens to agree that spacies are just barely better than the other characters? The whole issue with you thinking it is a statistical reality is you don't realize what the numbers mean. The numbers are the average rank in the tier list, not a measurement of their relative skill.

If Sveet had asked people to rank the overall skill of the characters 1-100 with 100 being banworthy and 1 being useless, then we could draw some conclusions about how to separate the tiers. If everyone put spacies at only a few points above the other top tiers (whether it is 98 vs. 96 or 83 vs. 80), you would be able to see quite clearly that they don't need their own tier even if they are largely considered favorites as the best characters.

what you described is extremely unlikely. overall, there is a correlation between the number of people that believe a proposition and the likelihood of it being true (the tier list isn't a deductive proof, so the ad populum fallacy doesn't apply here). if more people believe that fox and falco are above the rest than believe that (for example) IC's are more viable than doc, then that signifies that the former gap in power is probably larger than the latter gap in power.

look at the spacies' numbers one more time. if every voter had put them in the top two, their average placements would sum to 3. currently they sum to 3.07. this signifies an OVERWHELMING majority of people that put them as their top two. to give an example, suppose only 90% of people put them as their top two, and the other 10% put them as numbers 1 and 3 (which would help lower the average ranking as much as possible without being top two). this would still give them an average of 3.1, which is STILL higher than what it turned out to be. and if one of those voters didn't put spacies at numbers 1 and 3, then the percentage of those who put them as top two would be even HIGHER. i would wager that all but two of the 30-ish voters put spacies in the top two, and that's being generous.

given the large variation of positions that the space animals could occupy on this list, your claim that most people believe they occupy the small window of "better than everyone else, BUT JUST BARELY" is very unlikely, given that other top characters probably occupied all spots in the 3-6 range with some frequency, whereas spacies barely ever went below spot 2. you're baselessly assuming that the variation of people's opinions about the spacies is far lower than the variation of their opinions about every other character because of pure coincidence instead of empirical evidence. it's perfectly reasonable to believe the gap between spacies and the rest is so large, because the consensus that it exists is so overwhelming. it's completely unreasonable to believe the gap is so small because you are a space animal main and you want to believe that you have to try as hard as the rest of the cast does to win at melee.

 

[Hax]

( falcon is broken all the falcons just suck LMAOOO except s2j <3 )

deepthroat

 

[DtJ SmithZzz]

well I just read every post in this thread and I realized a lot of people have opinions, and Blacktician has been on nearly every page complaining but not contributing


uhhh I really like Young Link and 15th.

 

[Bones0]

you're baselessly assuming that the variation of people's opinions about the spacies is far lower than the variation of their opinions about every other character because of pure coincidence instead of empirical evidence. it's perfectly reasonable to believe the gap between spacies and the rest is so large, because the consensus that it exists is so overwhelming. it's completely unreasonable to believe the gap is so small because you are a space animal main and you want to believe that you have to try as hard as the rest of the cast does to win at melee.

I'm not assuming anything. All I said was characters being ranked consistently doesn't necessarily mean they are higher. You are the one drawing conclusions based on statistical probabilities which completely ignore all of the human elements coming into play, the primary one being that there are inevitably people putting spacies at the top of their lists because the majority of other people do it. People use the status quo as a mental tie breaker all the time. If they can't decide who is better, they are likely to just go with the group. I'm not saying this is definitely what is happening since I have no proof, but the ridiculous consistency of most tier lists is convincing evidence that is happening to at least some degree. You'd think tier lists would have less similarities among worse players, but it seems that new posters or players of lower skill have lists largely resembling the old tier list.

 

[Funkermonster]

Personally, I kinda liked the list better the way it was previously. Top Tier and Low Tier are WAY too big with a lot of characters placed in them, with Middle Tier being too small. I only think Bottom Tier is right.

Also, lower than and ? Wut?

 

[Divinokage]

The letters don't just mean whatever you want. When you see Top, middle, lower, and bottom, that implies an even distribution of "goodness" amongst each tier. When you say S, A, B, and F, it sounds like S tier characters are way better than A and B tiers, A and B tier characters are evenly matched, and F tier characters can't compete with A or B tiers at all. That obviously isn't the case, and it wasn't reflected in the poll. There was no magnitude of "goodness" being applied to each tier, so to just slap on your own perceptions of how good each tier is relative to the others is misleading. Melee's cast has a very gradual decline. Characters on the edge of S and F could easily be moved into A and B respectively without there being too much disagreement, but the way the tiers are named implies a huge gap between the two tiers. What is so bad about just naming tiers A, B, C, and D? Adding in random S and F tiers comes with all this baggage and misleading connotations for no benefit.

Following Mango's logic, if the S tier characters can all do equally good as long as the player doesn't suck ass then the D tier will get ****ed in the ass by those top tiers. For me, anyway, it's pretty clear no low tier main would be able to touch top players currently.

 

[john!]

I'm not assuming anything. All I said was characters being ranked consistently doesn't necessarily mean they are higher. You are the one drawing conclusions based on statistical probabilities which completely ignore all of the human elements coming into play, the primary one being that there are inevitably people putting spacies at the top of their lists because the majority of other people do it. People use the status quo as a mental tie breaker all the time. If they can't decide who is better, they are likely to just go with the group. I'm not saying this is definitely what is happening since I have no proof, but the ridiculous consistency of most tier lists is convincing evidence that is happening to at least some degree. You'd think tier lists would have less similarities among worse players, but it seems that new posters or players of lower skill have lists largely resembling the old tier list.

but you're still faced with the problem of why far more people put space animals on top than, say, put kirby on the bottom. the gap between the bottom two characters is .18, about ONE-TENTH of the gap between the second and third characters. why are people not jumping onto the "kirby is the worst character" bandwagon? why is the "mario is better than young link" bandwagon so huge? you call people sheep, yet you have no explanation for why they follow the crowd sometimes and ignore it other times. your "human elements" are far less influential than you think. you just use them when you feel it is convenient in order to ignore more rational explanations for people's character placement.

by the way, not only am i not even talking about new players (the players who were chosen as voters are all experienced melee players) but i'd say it's perfectly reasonable for new players to base their lists heavily on existing information, because they aren't experienced enough to make many new insights into the game, and most of them aren't arrogant enough to believe that they can do so.

 

[Zhea]

Doesn't the ranking mean more than the tier? You can put the colorful lines anywhere you want, but ultimately we are saying these guys are ordered by power. I'm not even sure why we break it into tiers.

 

[Zhea]

deepthroat

Didn't Mango make S2J quit playing? Or is that just a rumor? I know he beat him really bad and something to that affect was said.

 

[Bones0]

Following Mango's logic, if the S tier characters can all do equally good as long as the player doesn't suck *** then the D tier will get ****ed in the *** by those top tiers. For me, anyway, it's pretty clear no low tier main would be able to touch top players currently.

Of course top tiers will destroy low tiers, but a simple A, B, C, D also indicates that A chars will destroy D chars so I don't see the issue. The top tiers just don't demonstrate such significant dominance over the higher tiered characters outside of S. They are not so far above Doc, Pikachu, Samus, Ganon, and Luigi that they don't stand a chance. This is even evident when you look at players like Shroomed, Axe, and yourself who have placed in the top ranks solely with your mains. It's entirely possible that a top tier may drop down to the second tier or vice versa, so the tier list is obviously exaggerating the gap between top and upper characters by saying one is A and the other is S. S has always been reserved for broken, ban-worthy characters, so it makes no sense to use that notation when A and B is much more representative of how good the top tiers are compared to the upper tier.

but you're still faced with the problem of why far more people put space animals on top than, say, put kirby on the bottom. the gap between the bottom two characters is .18, about ONE-TENTH of the gap between the second and third characters. why are people not jumping onto the "kirby is the worst character" bandwagon? why is the "mario is better than young link" bandwagon so huge? you call people sheep, yet you have no explanation for why they follow the crowd sometimes and ignore it other times. your "human elements" are far less influential than you think. you just use them when you feel it is convenient in order to ignore more rational explanations for people's character placement.

by the way, not only am i not even talking about new players (the players who were chosen as voters are all experienced melee players) but i'd say it's perfectly reasonable for new players to base their lists heavily on existing information, because they aren't experienced enough to make many new insights into the game, and most of them aren't arrogant enough to believe that they can do so.

Are you seriously wondering why the "spacies are broken" bandwagon is more common than the "Kirby sucks" bandwagon? No one cares about low tiers on the tier list. What exactly is the more rational explanation for the ridiculous consistency of peoples' tier lists in a game that sees such incredible diversity? You even admit in the second paragraph that you think it's okay to devise your tier list based on other peoples' opinions, so I'm not sure I can take your criticisms seriously.

Doesn't the ranking mean more than the tier? You can put the colorful lines anywhere you want, but ultimately we are saying these guys are ordered by power. I'm not even sure why we break it into tiers.

No, the tiers are what should actually matter the most. We should just group all the characters within a certain range of goodness and establish that as a tier. Does it really matter if you play Fox or Falco? I can't imagine anyone actually believing that maining either character will increase your chances of being a successful player than if you had mained the other. I don't think other games even try to list characters in a specific order or at least don't care as much as the Smash community. Instead of bickering about whether Fox or Falco is the best, we should just accept that there is a consensus that both are really good and leave them in the same tier. That's sort of the whole difference between a list and a tier list. You separate the chars into larger sub-sections instead of trying to be very specific when you will inevitably just introduce more bias.

 

[BTmoney]

well I just read every post in this thread and I realized a lot of people have opinions, and Blacktician has been on nearly every page complaining but not contributing


uhhh I really like Young Link and 15th.

[collapse="Lack of contribution 1 (last page)"]

Well that's implying that the 2010 or this tier list isn't anymore "true" than the first.



I agree with the notion that just because Mango has been playing more Fox recently doesn't suddenly make Fox a better or more viable character.

But at everyone else, I don't see why people are freaking out about this. If you know what a tier list is then there is nothing to be mad at or not understand. I think we just need to redefine and emphasize the purpose of a tier list so that way as long as you know what words mean there can be no controversey other than slight disagreements on placement. Objectively a tier can't be useless or meaningless.

Tier lists are for people that like dissecting the game (or want quick information at an entry level), if you don't like doing it, well don't no one is making you. At the most basic level a tier list is just an extrapolation. It should reflect how good characters are when compared to each other and held against the current meta. A tier list is not telling you how top players are going to do in the head-to-head but it is far from useless. It's more like a suggestion or an outline than a rule.

The best characters in the game are clearly Fox, Falco, Sheik, Marth, Puff Peach.

If you wanted to add separations/classes I'd say:
Fox/Falco (no order)
Sheik
Marth/Puff/Peach (no order, but I like Marth as #4)

Falcon and ICs clearly are not as solid as those 6 but they can do just fine. The top 6 can all place high/win anywhere pretty regularly but lower than that I think it's been proven or at least the trend has been that Falcon/ICs and lower have consistency issues because some of their MUs ask a lot from them.

[/collapse]
[collapse="Lack of Contribution 2 (last page)"]

pivot fsmashing, i've said it like 4 times on this thread and I'm tired of looking at my own text but there you go =] since you mentioned it
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuCCmymFpMU

I partially/mostly agree with Mango's sentiment just because his Falcon is ridiculous vs Falco. That's probably the most ******** MU in the game but he makes it look so doable. And it's not like Westballz is a free Falco lol.

The top 6 are all good enough at a high level to where the better player wins usually and you shouldn't lose just based on the MU. I don't include Falcon or ICs in that category though since some of their MUs you have to outplay your opponent to win and even then you can still lose.

That being said, some characters are still clearly better than others so I have no issue with a tier list but the top 6 are all fine. The top 8 are almost fine. And 9 and lower are not.

[/collapse]
Lack of Contribution 3

I didn't feel like going through anymore of the thread but I am assuming 2 or so posts were enough to upset you and invalidate everything I've said.
You'd be wrong to say that I've contributed nothing. Especially when in the same breath when you chose to point that out you contributed nothing. It's great that you like YL there. Actually I literally don't think you added anything to this thread.

I don't know why you take issue with me when there are people like FourStar who are still grasping at thin air in search of a first insightful or at least cohesive post or people saying things like "I like this list" and posting with no reason and etc. If you don't want to pretend to be thoughtful when you/anyone posts that's fine, no one is making you. But when your name doesn't speak for itself you should put some effort into what you're saying which is generally what I try to do.

It's just frustrating because it's almost as if people don't read or think and I will take it a step further and flat out say some people are flat out wrong or at least they have alternative options (that even at first glance seem incorrect or shallow) but they choose not to offer any sort of explanation or reason. Conversing with people that post like that gets frustrating and old fast. I am not calling my tier list "correct, accurate, or the best" but if you look at how much thought I put into it you should see how I can get frustrated with some of the posts in this thread. Someone, like you, told me to stop complaining about Falcon/people's posts and then I wrote THIS. Turns out when I'm "complaining on every page" about something it's generally because I have fairly strong reasons to, they're not all that controversial, and they are pretty justified. I'm pretty aware of how I come off. But I feel like when it comes to discussions that I post in I generally care or am willing to put more thought into the discussion than other people and that get's frustrating.

I asked a mod to open a sub-forum just for the discussion of this topic where you would have to apply for posting rights and our lists would be accepted/denied based on review. This way we could only have intelligent discussion but apparently not enough people wanted that. I would love to be part of a discussion that would result in a tier list that would be so logically sound or at least well argued that it would be undeniable.

Something like the discussion about the letters is pretty irritating. There is no reason to argue over it so intently especially when it's arbitrary. Let's apply common sense. Should the letters be like that? Probably not, there isn't much of an argument for it to be like that. It doesn't really make sense to use S, A, B, F. Let's also stop for a second and realize that the letters don't mean anything but the separation in tiers are more important. It would make more sense to argue about that. If you were to ask me you should just use the numerical data along with your common sense.

I find "+A" to be more appropriate since people are so sensitive about the context of the letters. So putting about 10 seconds of thought into the community results, here's what I think it should look more like. This is not absolute but I would say more people would favor this more than S, A, B, F.

A+
Fox
Falco

large numerical difference and conventional knowledge tells us spacies are the best characters. You can argue for Sheik to be 2-3 and in the "A+" tier.

A
Sheik
Marth
Puff
Peach

There is a large difference between Sheik and Marth but Sheik isn't so much better than Marth that she should be in a tier by herself. Once again you can argue she belongs in "A+" anyways.

A-
Falcon
ICs

Falcon and ICs clearly don't belong in the same tier as the first 6.

B
Doc
Pika
Samus
Ganon
Luigi
Mario

C
YL
Link
DK
Yoshi
Zelda
M2
Roy
G&W

D
Ness
Bowser
Kirby
Pichu

If you ever see a steep decline in the quality of my posts I'm either trolling or there has been a steep decline in the quality of posts around me. I don't want to be pretentious, because I'm not that way at all in actuality but you forced my hand here. This is what I think. Whether or not is right or wrong is debatable, here is another contribution. Is every post here bad? Of course not. I just get tired of repeating myself and feeling like I'm the only one who has some perspective or will acknowledge their own possible ignorance. I don't even get good responses when people actually read any post I make. lol

 

[Habefiet]

Because that's how many people were in the final 8 at Evo.

1. The order is wrong then
2. Voting took place prior to Evo
3. The same characters constitute the Top 8 on the most recent tier list, which was posted in 2010

Are you literate

Icies placements over the last two years have been notably better than the Falcon mains as well.

Pretty sure this is false

Genesis 2 S2J outplaced Wobbles, who tied with Hax. Both outplaced Fly
Apex 2012 Hax outplaced Wobbles
Apex 2013 Hax outplaced Wobbles by a fair bit (7th v. 17th I do believe)

(Fly didn't attend either Apex otherwise I'd have brought him and S2J into it again)

I can think of four not-Evo tournaments during the last two years at which an ICs has outplaced a Falcon--the KoC events, Zenith 2012, and TBH2. All of those but Zenith were missing Hax, Falcon's top representative, and TBH2 didn't have S2J either. To be fair, all of those but KoC2 were missing Wobbles as well, but then TBH2 was basically saying Fly > Scar which doesn't have much bearing on ICs > Falcon (no offense Scar but Fly is Fly). Do you have any others you can toss at me? Meanwhile there are a bundle of other events (Winter Game Fest VII, S2J outplaced both Wobbles and Fly, everything that happens in Europe, that Rule 6 that got a hundred people and S2J outplaced Fly, everything that's happened without a top level ICs in attendance such as FC-L and the ROM events, the three super-majors that weren't EVO because Hax is insane).

EVO is certainly the only super-major in that time span at which an ICs has outplaced a Falcon, and there aren't really enough ICs in general to make much of a statement about average placings of mid-level players and in any case that shouldn't really be relevant should it

 

[Bones0]

I find "+A" to be more appropriate since people are so sensitive about the context of the letters.

Obviously I don't agree with the list, but I think that's a really good method for indicating very slight differences within tiers.

 

[BTmoney]

Obviously I don't agree with the list, but I think that's a really good method for indicating very slight differences within tiers.

=]

Exactly. And especially since most people think the top 6 or the top 8 are all close or at least notably better than the rest of the cast.

Having spacies and falcon in the same tier however is obviously wrong so I see no issue with using +/- where necessary.