Official 4BR Tier List v1.0 - Competitive Impressions

[Cereal Bawks]

Isn't Villager seen as a high tier usually?

 

[meticulousboy]

Isn't Villager seen as a high tier usually?

In Japan's meta, yes.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Too many -2s for ? Who? -2 is a strong disadvantage almost to the point of being borderline unwinnable if they know the match up. That's pretty much and some people would argue or (I personally think but not a lot of Wii Fit players agree with me). -1s I'd personally give to with 100% certainty with most match ups being slight disadvantage, equal, or slight advantage.

Cereal Bawks : Yes but I'd argue that people still underrate the character and it is commonly left out of discussions about high tier characters.

 

[Amadeus9]

In Japan's meta, yes.

Look dude, I'm not a mod but your 5 word sentences you constantly post here are beginning to become a bit grating on my patience.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

-2 is a strong disadvantage almost to the point of being borderline unwinnable if they know the match up

what???? What's a -1 then? Do you use decimals?

 

[TDK]

But then there are so many other factors in what makes a character good. Toon Link has mobility, safety, good projectile game and definitely some decent kill power and combo ability, but he also lacks ways to get out of combos or juggles, his recovery move itself sucks (although his recovery is great) and Toon Link doesn't have the range that Link has.

Any of the "flaws" you mentioned about TL are the same for link, but made worse by his sluggish set of mobility specs and moves.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Oh geeze... back to semantics... Here's how I've always seen it (if your opponent knows the match up):

-3: Impossible to win.
-2: Strong disadvantage.
-1: Disadvantage.
-.5: Slight disadvantage.
0: Equal.
+.5: Slight advantage.
+1: Advantage.
+2: Strong Advantage.
+3: Impossible to lose.

I'd argue most of Wii Fits match ups fall between +.5 and -.5. Can't really think of any +2s for her either.

-2 and +2 are basically the worst and best that this game has.

 

[Illuminose]

+/- .5 matchups are kinda silly imo. Just use integers it's not that complex.

 

[Pancracio17]

lets just use 50/50 ok? far easier to understand
pretty sure -4 is near unwinnablle not -3

 

[Fatmanonice]

I'm just using measurements I've used since the Brawl days. I don't think it's that esoteric honestly.

 

[Nobie]

I was thinking of something @Thinkaman said, which was that Jigglypuff is undertuned but not flawed. I believe he's right, but I also think he's working from a game designer's definition of "not flawed," as opposed to the player's limited definition.

The way the typical player sees it, there's only two flaws to care about: characters not winning enough, or winning too much.

The idea that Jigglypuff has all the right tools but that the rate at which it can successfully take down the opponent is slower than other characters fades to the background when all people see is "Jigglypuff bottom tier."

The notion of a character that is properly constructed but still maybe the worst in the game seems contradictory at first glance, but it doesn't have to be.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

It's just that people use different Notations and what not. As long as we give a source to what we mean, it's alright.

 

[Yikarur]

-2 and +2 are basically the worst and best that this game has.

People are just not lenient enough in using ratios. -2 is put as something far worse than it is.
if -1 is a small disadvantage than -2 is just a clear disadvantage and not "close to unwinnable".
+3 is like "should not lose the MU if both play it correctly" and +4 is "even a monkey could win the MU" (like Dedede vs. Donkey Kong in Brawl)

 

[C0rvus]

Too many -2s for ? Who? -2 is a strong disadvantage almost to the point of being borderline unwinnable if they know the match up. That's pretty much and some people would argue or (I personally think but not a lot of Wii Fit players agree with me). -1s I'd personally give to with 100% certainty with most match ups being slight disadvantage, equal, or slight advantage.

Cereal Bawks : Yes but I'd argue that people still underrate the character and it is commonly left out of discussions about high tier characters.

Well, you answered the question yourself. 3-4 -2's is a non trivial amount, especially with all the -1's and lack of winning MUs against relevant characters. Not to say Wii Fit is bad, but strictly speaking her MU spread is not that of a high tier. Not even close, really.

 

[Das Koopa]

This has been on my mind for awhile but quick shoutout to Das Koopa for regularly posting tournament results. It really helps with the discussions we have around here so thanks for doing it so often.

Thanks! I don't have the time/means to go to Plano for weeklies, but I love this game anyway and love to contribute to stuff.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Well, you answered the question yourself. 3-4 -2's is a non trivial amount, especially with all the -1's and lack of winning MUs against relevant characters. Not to say Wii Fit is bad, but strictly speaking her MU spread is not that of a high tier. Not even close, really.

For Wii Fit, the match up is the only one that is unanimously agreed to be -2. Like I said, the others are strongly debated and most people disagree with me about . Moving past that, what the heck are Villager and Ness with their number of -2 and -1s then? I don't see how people can argue that DK and Ike could be high tier then. Yoshi and Falcon's match up spreads aren't exactly standing ovation worthy either. Couple of weeks ago people were arguing that high tier for this game could be as big as 25 characters based on results so are we suddenly back at a 10-15 character cut off or what? That's fine but what's the cut off? People have made arguments for so it's not like I've raised Wii Fit to some impossible standard because, as you can see, the "borderline tier" is huge.

 

[Man Li Gi]

This thread could be name FE impressions thread. I swear, there have been more posts about it now more than when they did April Fool's when everyone was an avatar of some sort (I got Camilla for use reason).

 

[Das Koopa]

Updated region map after seeing enough posts/looking at smash.gg enough

-Removed "Rocky Mountain" region since it really doesn't exist Smash region-wise.
-Added Idaho to Pacific Northwest. Sanctum didn't get any notable OOS players, but it got OOS players from the PNW nonetheless.
-Utah added to Southwest.
-Added "West North Central Dead Zone". Originally included Idaho and South Dakota. This was revised to just Wyoming, North Dakota, and Montana.
-Connecticut added to Atlantic Northeast instead of Tristate.
-Delaware added to MD/VA instead of Tristate.
-Added "Alaska & Territories" as Region 11. I have no regional system for Canada, but this would tentatively include Yukon, though I doubt that has a scene.

 

[Pyr]

+3 is like "should not lose the MU if both play it correctly" and +4 is "even a monkey could win the MU" (like Dedede vs. Donkey Kong in Brawl)

To clarify for anyone who doesn't already know, the monkey does not win the matchup, but a monkey playing the penguin can.

 

[TriTails]

lets just use 50/50 ok? far easier to understand
pretty sure -4 is near unwinnablle not -3

It's actually more complicated when people decide to use some **** like 52/48.

-----

I've always thought that -1 means a MU that is relatively close to even, but the winning side has an advantage in their kit that is small enough not to raise to 'clear advantage' but big enough to not be omitted in MU discussions.

-2 means one side has the clear advantage, but it's still doable for the losing side to win, they just have to work more.

-3 means the winning side has a HUGE advantage. The losing side better pick a secondary and/or be much better than the opposition or risk getting bopped in pools or something.

-4 is obvious.

 

[conTAgi0n]

Hmmmm.

Maybe Sheik? But I don't think the match is terrible. Bowser actually does well. I legit think Cloud might lose now that I think about it. I think CF does ok. People are saying Megaman but I'm not so sure. He def has an easier time breaking MM's zone then alot of other chars thanks to that dair and that insane dash attack.

Can you explain why you think Bowser vs Cloud is even/advantageous for Bowser? My impression is that Cloud is one of Bowser's worst matchups.

Recovering against Bowser is pretty rough for Cloud, but it is not easy for Bowser to put Cloud in that situation given how badly he loses the neutral. Plus Bowser has almost as much trouble recovering against Cloud as vice versa.

Bowser in disadvantage state in general gets wrecked pretty bad by Cloud. In particular, Cloud exploits Bowser's landing troubles and susceptibility to juggling like no other. In fact, I would say that Cloud's throw is actually pretty threatening in this matchup because uthrow -> juggle situation is so dangerous. Cloud also has no issues killing Bowser.

Maybe you are right and I am wrong and just approaching this matchup the wrong way, but I definitely don't see it yet if that's the case.

 

[Das Koopa]

I prefer a matchup scale of

+5 Hungrybox Popoff
+4 Shouldn't be losing
+3 Significant Advantage
+2 Advantage
+1 Slight advantage
0 Even
-1 Slight Disadvantage
-2 Disadvantage
-3 Significant Disadvantage
-4 Shouldn't be winning
-5 cry

I don't think anybody in this game goes 5 in either direction but it's there I guess

 

[Krysco]

I find the whole 'best FE character' thing kinda odd. We had a similar case a few months ago with Pokemon since Mewtwo and Greninja got buffs, Pika wasn't doing much and then Lucario, Zard and Puff just kinda sat idly by. I can get 'who's better between Corrin, Ike and Marth' leaving the others out since they are generally agreed to be less viable and they all happen to be from the same series but with the 'competition', you'd think they're all right next to each other in people's minds. And maybe they are! But there are enough characters in that same range of good but not top-tier amazing that I find the distinction of 'best fe' or 'best Pokemon' or best anything odd and kinda pointless. By specifying the series, you're failing to mention nearby characters who could separate them and adding pointless characters to the idea.

And with the whole 'low tiers being constantly bashed and misinformation spreading and lol this thread' thing, I recall when I asked why there's so much hate towards Pika, one of the answers I got was that none of the regulars here main the character or have a strong understanding of the character. That goes for other characters too like Roy and Puff. Yeah, they're deemed low tier or bottom or whatever because they lack many results and their theory doesn't add up. But that's coming from people who likely don't main them. If you see misinformation being spread or you know something the majority of others don't then why not correct/say it? This is a place to learn and debate. If Puff isn't the worst then explain why! Use tournament matches, results and videos showing combos or tech or whatever to prove your point and if you can't then show raw numbers that can't be refuted! That's how the whole rar thunder thing got resolved. If you come in here, see misinformation on a character you know a damn lot about and you just laugh and leave, you're not helping the case for your character at all. No lurker will know whatever nuggets of info you're hiding and likely won't even try whatever you have to show for your character because the common consensus is that they're low tier and have no redeeming qualities when they may very well! No one in this game is Brawl Ganon or Melee Kirby levels of bad. We don't even need patches to change anything for this to happen. Look at Brawl Olimar and Sonic and how high they rose from where they started.

Speaking of low tiers, and I guess this goes for the tops and highs too but mostly lows, what does it matter who's the worst or top 5 or 10 or whatever arbitrary number? We can't even agree on a top so what does the bottom matter? If there's a single character with no positive mus then they are likely the worst as Melee and Brawl showed but that would be a question to ask low tier mains. You may be able to gauge how effective YOUR character(s) do against every and any low tier but can you gauge those low tiers vs 57 mus? Unlikely. And from there, the low tier mains could debate it out and we could possibly get a better understanding of them. If every character has at least 1 positive mu than I'd say go with the example Gheb gave earlier with categories. Knowing which specific character is the absolute worst doesn't matter as much as knowing what group of characters are the most unlikely to get anywhere in a tournament without patch help or new stuff being discovered.

Tl;dr best character in a series doesn't matter and leaves out nearby characters of similar viability, misinformation should be corrected and video evidence or raw data can help eliminate any misconceptions and top x worst doesn't matter much. Example: Fox is in the top 57 worst characters in this game.

I know this post was long and all over the place and for that, I apologize. Yay for work making me unable to make long posts without forgetting what was on my mind. Also, props to the derailing fe discussion. It doesn't belong here obviously but it was one of the more entertaining derails I've seen in this thread.

 

[Fatmanonice]

It's actually more complicated when people decide to use some **** like 52/48.

-----

Okay, see? THIS is convoluted as all hell.

In regards to best FE character, I think it's really close when it comes to . The only thing that genuinely impresses me about is how I personally think she's one of worst match ups. I absolutely hate fighting her as but I honestly have no idea how most Mario players see this match up because, if my posts didn't give it away, I'm more of a lobbyist for and then anyone else in the cast. Only other top/high tier character I've seen her fight on a regular basis is , to be honest, so my perspective is kind of limited.

I'm personally more impressed by how well does against and, tying or some bold souls argue winning the match ups. I think this impresses me just because of how damn lofty the both of them feel right now. Not exactly prepatch Bayo or Sheik but just good enough that people still argue if somethings about them are too good. In the same breath, I know Ike has some pitfalls match up wise but, like I said in my last post, we have characters like in the same boat. Still, tough call.

 

[FeelMeUp]

imo, the notable matchups I see as 8:2 are:
Cloud vs Wario
prepatch Bayo vs all Superheavies
prepatch Sheik vs Ganon
etc
8:2 MUs definitely exist, but for some reason the community wanted to preach good balance so badly and insist this game didn't have MUs as bad as the ones in Melee/Brawl.

 

[Blobface]

I hate matchup numbers. They lend a false air of objectivity to extremely subjective matters and are too frequently used as a substitute for actual matchup discussion.

Talk about how the tools of the characters interact with each other. It's not like Ryu has an advantage vs Ganon because of his ability to throw numbers at him.

 

[Das Koopa]

when you think about it coding is numbers and hadoken is code so ryu IS throwing numbers at Ganondorf ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

 

[Blobface]

when you think about it coding is numbers and hadoken is code so ryu IS throwing numbers at Ganondorf ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Nothin' gets the hype flowing like Ryu bustin' out his advanced algorithms.

 

[dakotaisgreat]

So it's been a few weeks. As a person who doesn't own Bayonetta and has never played her a single time, how did that end up working out?

 

[Nah]

I almost thought I was in the Corrin social for a bit there with all the FE talk lol

The only thing that genuinely impresses me about is how I personally think she's one of worst match ups. I absolutely hate fighting her as

If one of his worst is like -1 or 55:45 or whatever ****ing number floats people's boats for slight advantage then I'd agree. That's kinda what I think the MU is right now. But for all I know it could better or worse than that for Corrin. Does he lose to anyone harder than that though?

whatever the hell it is tho I'll take it cuz it's way better than trying to fight Mario with , that MU is aiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiids

 

[Samuelwisebaggins]

-3: Impossible to win.
-2: Strong disadvantage.
-1: Disadvantage.
-.5: Slight disadvantage.
0: Equal.
+.5: Slight advantage.
+1: Advantage.
+2: Strong Advantage.
+3: Impossible to lose.

I'd argue most of Wii Fits match ups fall between +.5 and -.5. Can't really think of any +2s for her either.

-2 and +2 are basically the worst and best that this game has.

People are just not lenient enough in using ratios. -2 is put as something far worse than it is.
if -1 is a small disadvantage than -2 is just a clear disadvantage and not "close to unwinnable".
+3 is like "should not lose the MU if both play it correctly" and +4 is "even a monkey could win the MU" (like Dedede vs. Donkey Kong in Brawl)

I've always thought that -1 means a MU that is relatively close to even, but the winning side has an advantage in their kit that is small enough not to raise to 'clear advantage' but big enough to not be omitted in MU discussions.

-2 means one side has the clear advantage, but it's still doable for the losing side to win, they just have to work more.

-3 means the winning side has a HUGE advantage. The losing side better pick a secondary and/or be much better than the opposition or risk getting bopped in pools or something.

-4 is obvious.

I prefer a matchup scale of

+5 Hungrybox Popoff
+4 Shouldn't be losing
+3 Significant Advantage
+2 Advantage
+1 Slight advantage
0 Even
-1 Slight Disadvantage
-2 Disadvantage
-3 Significant Disadvantage
-4 Shouldn't be winning
-5 cry

I don't think anybody in this game goes 5 in either direction but it's there I guess

Which one?!

 

[Patriarachnid]

So it's been a few weeks. As a person who doesn't own Bayonetta and has never played her a single time, how did that end up working out?

Mixed bag. On the hand, we don't have easy ladder kills and our neutral's still bad. On the other hand, I think she potentially has one of the most powerful mix-up games of the entire cast. Need to see more results before making any tier judgments, but she's much more fun to play IMO.

 

[Kofu]

i missed this

Sanctum (May 28th-May 29th) (Pacific Northwest) (96 Entrants) (Category 1)
1st: TSS ,
2nd: TEG| Pow
3rd: FedvsRafa ,
4th: Monster_
5th: BestNess
5th: Dank
7th: Nunu ,
7th: Justice , ,
9th: Calculus
9th: Marty-O
9th: ET ,
9th: Brosuke2
13th: Sqigly
13th: October Scream ,
13th: Marathon ,
13th: D5 Spartan

Where was this tournament? I'm not super familiar with my own scene but I'm fairly certain BestNess is Utah's #1 and, if I'm not remembering wrong, Calculus is ranked and from Utah as well.

Curious where D5 Spartan hails from, looks like I've got some regional competition for best Game & Watch or I might if I ever went to anything

I was thinking of something @Thinakaman said, which was that Jigglypuff is undertuned but not flawed. I believe he's right, but I also think he's working from a game designer's definition of "not flawed," as opposed to the player's limited definition.

The way the typical player sees it, there's only two flaws to care about: characters not winning enough, or winning too much.

The idea that Jigglypuff has all the right tools but that the rate at which it can successfully take down the opponent is slower than other characters fades to the background when all people see is "Jigglypuff bottom tier."

The notion of a character that is properly constructed but still maybe the worst in the game seems contradictory at first glance, but it doesn't have to be.

I think what makes Jigglypuff so poor in my eyes is that she's fairly easy to camp/wall out. It's less a matter of mobility (though I could see characters like ZSS or Greninja being able to run circles around her on the right stages) and more that she doesn't have enough speed or power to challenge a lot of other character's defenses. Unlike, say, Ganondorf or Dedede, she doesn't have hitbox size (disjoint too in Dedede's case) or power to make trading with her risky, and unlike Pikachu or Mario she doesn't have the advantage of raw frame data to exert consistent pressure. (Ganon and Dedede are still bad, maybe they weren't the best examples here.) To be fair, she does have decent damage per hit and can convert once she gets in, and Pound makes constant shielding unwise. It's getting in that poses a problem. The best strategy I've seen from Jigglypuff is air camping to wait for an opening, but against other characters with safer moves or projectiles to force approaches this is difficult. She wants to play lame but it feels like most of the cast can react to her and make things more difficult.

I agree that her overall design seems decent, it just lacks consistency (especially when you're the lightest character in the game).

Mixed bag. On the hand, we don't have easy ladder kills and our neutral's still bad. On the other hand, I think she potentially has one of the most powerful mix-up games of the entire cast. Need to see more results before making any tier judgments, but she's much more fun to play IMO.

This reminds me of Diddy right after the initial nerfs. He had a really good kit outside of throws and UAir/FAir, there was just little reason to optimize it when he had a far easier way to victory. Bayonetta's mixup potential was there before the nerfs (and was honestly stronger), it just needed less utilization.

 

[TDK]

If there's a single character with no positive mus then they are likely the worst as Melee and Brawl showed.

Just a correction: A character having no positive MUs isn't necessarily a bad thing provided it has a lot of +0 or -1 with the top-tiered characters, then they can still be decent. If someone has a lot of -2 or -3 MUs and no winning ones, then yes, they are bad.

 

[Mario766]

Sanctum was in Boise, Idaho.

https://smash.gg/tournament/sanctum/details

 

[blackghost]

Mixed bag. On the hand, we don't have easy ladder kills and our neutral's still bad. On the other hand, I think she potentially has one of the most powerful mix-up games of the entire cast. Need to see more results before making any tier judgments, but she's much more fun to play IMO.

agree with all of this. her future is bright but people still dont di her well at all. pink fresh will lead tbe new meta for her. it looks like a wbole bunch of resets and frame traps. the wierd thing is her mu spread got worse and better at the same time. if you could di her before congrats its niw basically free. if you are still being comboed you nees to research di for her setups. also bayo will beat any hyper aggreasive player via witch time. its less character specific and more player specific.

 

[Baby_Sneak]

Just a correction: A character having no positive MUs isn't necessarily a bad thing provided it has a lot of +0 or -1 with the top-tiered characters, then they can still be decent. If someone has a lot of -2 or -3 MUs and no winning ones, then yes, they are bad.

When does this ever happen?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

When it comes to Villager's metagame in Japan it's probably worth pointing out that a Villager main named kept has placed 5th/200 at Umebura 22 and 13th/200 at Umebura 23. Though it seems like Ranai has moved on to SFV for now - or maybe for good - Villager's results in Japan remain solid.

 

[juddy96]

Updated region map after seeing enough posts/looking at smash.gg enough

-Removed "Rocky Mountain" region since it really doesn't exist Smash region-wise.
-Added Idaho to Pacific Northwest. Sanctum didn't get any notable OOS players, but it got OOS players from the PNW nonetheless.
-Utah added to Southwest.
-Added "West North Central Dead Zone". Originally included Idaho and South Dakota. This was revised to just Wyoming, North Dakota, and Montana.
-Connecticut added to Atlantic Northeast instead of Tristate.
-Delaware added to MD/VA instead of Tristate.
-Added "Alaska & Territories" as Region 11. I have no regional system for Canada, but this would tentatively include Yukon, though I doubt that has a scene.

Montana had a 55 player tournament in April. It had an assortment of players from Montana, Northern Idaho, Eastern Washington, Wyoming, and South Dakota. http://challonge.com/SS2016SM4SH

 

[Jamurai]

I've talked about this before, but I'm pretty sure people wouldn't be annoyed at the concept of talking in matchup numbers if there was an official, standardised system. I think that's the main problem.

Having a quick-glance number to denote how a matchup goes is actually quite useful. If I was talking about a character's viability or justifying their position in a tier list, it's a LOT more concise and to-the-point to say "character X only has a few -1 MUs against top tiers and has multiple +1s against these relevant characters ABC, and even a +2 against Y", rather than having to explain multiple different matchups in detail to explain how they all go and how they in turn relate to my original point about how good they are relative to other characters.

With this in mind, if everyone were to agree on this, it's important to have a standardised system (this also applies to other concepts like legal stages but that's another story). I've seen a slightly favourable matchup described as +1, 60:40, 55:45... Sol made a tier list recently where it's described as +5. Also I think Some made one too which had another notation altogether where it was just a flat number. For this reason, no one knows for sure what anyone means. Which is obviously bad and unhelpful, and defeats the point entirely.

Personally I think +1 as slightly favourable makes the most sense... 60:40 is acceptable. 55:45 doesn't exist, if an advantage is enough to have to be noted then it is 60:40 or +1 AKA slight advantage. Then +2 is significantly favourable, +3 is very favourable, and +4 is almost unloseable. While +5 (equivalent to 100:0) would then mean "impossible to lose", these obviously do not exist.

Also, then we wouldn't get pages of arguments over semantics (I'm aware that I am contributing as well), and we'd have one less red topic here.

-----

I'm surprised Meta Knight is still top 10 in results according to Das Koopa 's research. Tyrant been pulling weight recently? More MK users at regionals than I thought? Interesting either way.