Since when did having to discuss tier lists= actual character analysis? I can't go at least 1 page without having to sift through people's slight alteration and people arguing about where their character ranks. At this point, I say it's extremely trivial as we kmow that DLC/possible patches are going to be happening monthly ( from August I believe there will be one and then in October we see the character ballots come in).
I normally don't dislike tier lists, but given how patches come and go along with having to different people come and say I don't think Luigi is spot 7, but is spot 3; etc. At this point, I would say who and what dictates the meta's tier lists are what the top player is doing.
If ZeRo were to pick Luigi up and completely dump Sheik right now and have the same results as he does now, people would argue that Luigi is the best even with the flaws he has. He would become number 1 in tier lists and people would say "Yeah he has flaws but ZeRo tho" or something along those lines.
This is why I would wish instead of having the go to easy copout answer in the form of tier lists with bare bone analysis, I wish we go in deep, so that average or casual player can come here and leave with an understanding a character's flaws and strengths and possible ways to circumvent or otherwise not be bogged down by them so much so it becomes a delibating issue.
I know that character boards exist but they are so wrapped up in themselves and possibly have warped visions of what characters can do to them and what THEIR character can do with them ( I remember the early days of Ganon Wii U where the MU said we even with Mario, Yoshi and Luigi while the Pacs are a whole new monster breed). If we simply melded all of the analysis we had of each character ( of course your character of expertise) we wouldn't have to say, "Well my character has X so that counters Y, thus thoroughly denying your claims."