• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

A few Notes About Tiers

Zekersaurus

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
205
Location
Vineland, New Jersey
Switch FC
SW 2027 5431 0731
There are a lot of issues and misconceptions revolving around tiers. I’ve been getting annoyed with some of these arguments to say the least and I know I’m not alone. I’m not trying to startup the inevitable skill vs character debate. This thread has little or nothing to do with that. I just felt that there are a few things that need to be said. I focus on Melee in this thread, but this can apply to other Smash games as well.


1. Some people say things like “Melee is broken. There are only like 5 good characters in the game”.

· This is false. There are currently 8 characters in top tier, not that it matters because actual “TIERS” are what matters. The tier list can change and may not be 100% accurate but the characters themselves do not change. Instead of using the tier list a guideline and applying your own common sense to figure the rest out, some people follow it blindly.

· Balance is an issue with almost every fighting game. Don’t keep picking on melee.

2. Melee is one of if not the deepest fighting game ever, but some people look at the game way to linearly.

· First off, the tier list does not consist of Top Tier and GARBADGE. Putting a high tier character in the same category as a low, mid, or bottom is incorrect. Difficult matches and near impossible matches or terrible matchups and average matchups are all different extremes.

· Also, these are characters, not numbers. We should treat them as such. For example, just because 10 is better than 15 on the tier list doesn’t mean that 15 can’t beat 5 just because 10 can’t. Characters in this game play very differently from each other, even clones. They all have their pros, cons, counters, and good and bad match ups. Some characters are undoubtedly better than others but you’re playing with apples and oranges.

3. “Only the top tier characters are viable”?

· This is not true. More than 8 characters in melee can be competitive, if only a few more. Now, I could give examples by throwing around a bunch of names but it won’t necessarily prove anything because you still have to take into account the skill of the individual and the fact that the majority of the best players play top tier characters anyway.

· Tiers only matter significantly when you’re playing at really high levels of play and/or you know a certain matchup EXTREMELY well. Other than that, almost if not any match can be won with skill, even when playing with bottom tier characters.

4. The main reasons people play low tiers.

· They don’t realize how bad there character is.

o Then they should definitely be informed.

· They want to prove their character can be competitive.

o They are just making it harder on themselves.

· They play just play who they like playing.

o It’s a good reason! You want to enjoy the game, if not why play?

Honestly though, I think a lot of smashers fall into a trap, where they put way to much focus into playing the character and not playing the game. To be successful you need to make sure that your skills as a PLAYER advance. The character is just a tool. By all means, main who you want but when you’re in a tournament match make sure you’re playing a character you know you can win with. That’s what it comes down to.

In closing, that’s how I feel this topic. Tiers are always a very touchy subject but I think the most important thing in any discussion is to just respect one another. We are all entitled to our opinions, it’s ok to be wrong, and disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean that your response has to be an insult.

Later Days!
 

Zodiac

Smash Master
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
3,557
Fox/Falco/Sheik/Marth/Falcon/Peach/Doc/Ice climbers/ Puff/Samus are viable , thats more than most fighting games.
 

Zekersaurus

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
205
Location
Vineland, New Jersey
Switch FC
SW 2027 5431 0731
Poach "Zodiac, post: 16149673, member: 21400"]Fox/Falco/Sheik/Marth/Falcon/Peach/Doc/Ice climbers/ Puff/Samus are viable , thats more than most fighting games.[/quote]
Pikachu too. Even if there's only one or a few note worthy players of a certain character no matter how skilled the individual is I consider the character viable if you can win or place high in tournaments and perform well at the height of competitive play.
 

Zhea

Smash Ace
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
962
Location
San Antonio Texas
Considering this is game is from the early 2000's, even if you only count the top 5, that's actually pretty good. Fighting games from that era had very similar if not worse ratios in character tiers.

Also, GimpyFish made a post about playing a low tier way back, and one of the reasons is for the fame. It's easier to get recognition(Not necessarily Results) by being good/the best at a low tier. He also, from personal experience, is not the only one. This isn't a bad thing, but I hate the idea that playing a low tier is some how inherently Noble.
 

Zekersaurus

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
205
Location
Vineland, New Jersey
Switch FC
SW 2027 5431 0731
Considering this is game is from the early 2000's, even if you only count the top 5, that's actually pretty good. Fighting games from that era had very similar if not worse ratios in character tiers.

Also, GimpyFish made a post about playing a low tier way back, and one of the reasons is for the fame. It's easier to get recognition(Not necessarily Results) by being good/the best at a low tier. He also, from personal experience, is not the only one. This isn't a bad thing, but I hate the idea that playing a low tier is some how inherently Noble.
True, true. So far I'm agreeing with you. Balance is a hard thing to achieve in any fighting game, especially one like this where the characters play so differently from one another. I think people should take pride in their own skills not the character they play.
 

Varist

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
1,603
Location
Austin
melee is great everyone knows this it's why i play

im proud to be a straightmer

get the *****

twenny fordeen
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
Since the discussion is on tier lists, I honestly think that we haven't made out tier lists correctly imo. I honestly think tier lists should only be a summation of tournament results that are updated at a yearly or bi-yearly rate.

I love smash theory. I theorise all the time and put my theories to practice. Whether it be character specific, universal (such as stage control), or things that aren't a part of melee but yet are (such as training methods, mindset, etc). I think that theory is not given enough credit, and that more players would benefit from taking part in it and looking at the game from that lens. That said, I don't think it has any weight or bearing on tier lists.

I say that because, throughout the history of melee tiers, there has been much debate and theory as to placing characters higher or lower than their respective tournament representation. I think this is beyond the scope of what a tier list should be. I think it would make things a lot simpler if we just let the data speak for itself. We would not have to worry about lengthy threads of debating theory prior to the creation of the list, and it would be fairly easy to update. While I do think that the current list is fairly accurate, it is still very much out of date. I would like the tier list to be a snap shot of what the current meta actually looks like when it comes to character representation.
 

Zekersaurus

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
205
Location
Vineland, New Jersey
Switch FC
SW 2027 5431 0731
Since the discussion is on tier lists, I honestly think that we haven't made out tier lists correctly imo. I honestly think tier lists should only be a summation of tournament results that are updated at a yearly or bi-yearly rate.

I love smash theory. I theorise all the time and put my theories to practice. Whether it be character specific, universal (such as stage control), or things that aren't a part of melee but yet are (such as training methods, mindset, etc). I think that theory is not given enough credit, and that more players would benefit from taking part in it and looking at the game from that lens. That said, I don't think it has any weight or bearing on tier lists.

I say that because, throughout the history of melee tiers, there has been much debate and theory as to placing characters higher or lower than their respective tournament representation. I think this is beyond the scope of what a tier list should be. I think it would make things a lot simpler if we just let the data speak for itself. We would not have to worry about lengthy threads of debating theory prior to the creation of the list, and it would be fairly easy to update. While I do think that the current list is fairly accurate, it is still very much out of date. I would like the tier list to be a snap shot of what the current meta actually looks like when it comes to character representation.
Good response. You said a lot more than I did in like half words. I think I agree with more or less.

Also,What's up? Long time no see... Lol, I've never interacted with you before but this is the first time I'm seeing you since 2006 or 7 back when I used to ninja the boards. Though, I've only started coming back on recently myself.
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
I've been active again since the end of last year. Since this is off-topic, I sent you a PM going into the details.

Also, to my knowledge this is what the earliest fighting game tier lists actually were in Japan. Their goal/intent had nothing to do with determining the best characters in the game, it was merely stating that these are the characters that are currently being represented well at this current time. I think it was when early FGCs in the US decided to make tier lists that they became more about actual character ranking. Take this all with a grain of salt though, as I have not verified it and it is a fairly old memory.
 

Zylo

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
433
Location
Tuscaloosa, Alabama
The top 10 contains 9 different mains. There are a lot of spacies out there for sure, but saying that there are only 5 viable characters is just ignorant. I don't think a pichu is going to take a national anytime soon, but there's certainly character diversity.
 
Top Bottom