Character skill vs Player Skill: A Graphical Relationship

[BentoBox]

Sakurai is not working on TMNT.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

It would appear that you have to include graphs into your threads for them to get attention...
Why didn't I think of this before! *goes to modify all the crap he's made*

Ehem

To summarize things - Peach is good, but when push comes to shove, she just isn't good enough
Sorry Peach mains but she isn't. I've said this lots of times and I can easily give reasons as to why. If you can go out there and prove that she is viable by winning/doing very very well in major tourneys then go for it. I highly encourage it and I would love to be proved wrong. Currently, I personally don't think that Peach is good enough to win the fancy big tourneys with all them fancy players out there. Time will tell though



What's with all this Peach debate all of a sudden anyway...?

 

[Tien2500]

It would appear that you have to include graphs into your threads for them to get attention...
Why didn't I think of this before! *goes to modify all the crap he's made*

Ehem

To summarize things - Peach is good, but when push comes to shove, she just isn't good enough
Sorry Peach mains but she isn't. I've said this lots of times and I can easily give reasons as to why. If you can go out there and prove that she is viable by winning/doing very very well in major tourneys then go for it. I highly encourage it and I would love to be proved wrong. Currently, I personally don't think that Peach is good enough to win the fancy big tourneys with all them fancy players out there. Time will tell though



What's with all this Peach debate all of a sudden anyway...?

Because Peach has her own section on the graph which seems to imply that once mastered Peach is the second best character in the game.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

^ Peach doesn't have any 7:3s against her favor. So your definition isn't totally accurate. And what about olioli?

You forgot 35/65 match-up's...and at least G&W has such an advantage over Peach, correct?
And what about "olioli"? I never mentioned him at all.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

Because Peach has her own section on the graph which seems to imply that once mastered Peach is the second best character in the game.

Hmmm

Well if anyone does master her, we'll see xD
I don't really have any strong feelings on the graph but the moment I saw it I thought 'Yikes, that might cause some controversy D:'

You forgot 35/65 match-up's...and at least G&W has such an advantage over Peach, correct?
And what about "olioli"? I never mentioned him at all.

35-65 match ups are not 30-70


/obvioussillyremark

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Halloween Captain, then go out there and prove Diddy Kong is not viable.

And big whoop. Yuna will admit he was wrong. Will you?

Also, the bold has no relation. "I admit I mess up, but you mess up more than me, especially when it comes to X. This is all based on you miscounting MK's jumps by ONE."

The fact remains, you mess up.

Everyone messes up. I admit I messed up my matchup opinions - however, they are only opinions, not facts.

Besides, proof doesn't work like that. It is a logical impossibility to prove a negative, so the burden of proof is always placed upon the affirmative. Yuna asserted that Azen was the only person who could use Lucario, and that Diddy Kong was more viable. I present my proof of other good Lucario players by naming a few, now he needs to prove there are good Diddy Kong players other than Ninja Link after making such an assertion.

 

[BentoBox]

You forgot 35/65 match-up's...and at least G&W has such an advantage over Peach, correct?
And what about "olioli"? I never mentioned him at all.

You have kirby and Zss in there so I was wondering why you skipped out on oliloli

 

[Sky`]

Hive, you are way too touchy-feely. Yuna knows what the hell he is talking about. But you didn't believe him until Sky came along and just said something without providing any more proof than what Yuna was providing.

The difference?

Sky mains Peach.

Sky spoke in even a tone that was similar to Yuna's; a very I'm-right-you're-wrong tone. I have seen you talk about competitive Brawl Hive. You follow the crowd way too much. If you truly believed Peach was viable, you would be disagreeing with Sky. You went to some pretty great lengths to disagree with Yuna, insofar as to post a detailed record of tournament attendance.

That takes a lot of snooping around to find, I know this from my experiences with data compliation. It's not a quick process, and you only do it if you have a really good reason to do. Agreeing with Sky just like that when is a very weak move on your part.

Hive, the worst part is when you said you thought Peach was viable because there were so many good Peach players. You changed your mind because someone who knew more than you said a baseless statement (Sky, you backed it up, and you're 100% correct, but Hive took what you said at face value). This proves you had no idea what the hell you were talking about. You knew nothing about Peach's flaws, and if you did you sure as hell didn't elaborate on why they don't bring her down.

Please, please, PLEASE. Learn up on what you're talking about before talking about it.

Natch.

Lay off. That was rude and uncalled for.

 

[Yuna]

Not only that, but I seem to recall you adamently telling me that MK had 4 midair jumps some time ago.

Oh no! I miscounted MK's jumps by one back when the game was, what, 2 months old and I had barely played it and had barely ever played MK anyway. I had a off day and misremembered. Woe is me.

Meanwhile, there is absolutely no defense for you claiming:
1) Captain Falcon is as viable as any other character!
2) Pokémon Trainer stands the greatest chance of becoming an MK counter because he has 3 movesets (despite one jillion people telling you all those movesets are subpar)!

I could drag up even stupider things if I sat down and tried to remember every little thing you've said. Oh no, Sir.

This was while MK was one of twelve characters you claimed to main at some level in your old sig.

Simple math must elude you since my sig has never had more than ten characters. Also, plain English obviously eludes you as well since my sig clearly states (though that part has been obscured since a few weeks back) that Meta Knight is a tertiary of mine, more specifically, my least used tertiary, my 8th "most used" character (which means "not used at all, almost).

Do you even know what "tertiary" means.

I admit I change my opinion on matchups a little too frequently, but the uncontroversal "facts" you present are often wrong, especially those concerning gameplay mechanics.

Please specify what other uncontroversial facts I've presented that were flawed. Apparently I present them all the time, so you should be able to compile a Top 10 list pretty easily (just look at my recent posting history!).

This was a minor fact that wasn't even relevant to the discussion. IIRC, you just randomly mentioned how he had 5 midair jumps in order to prove how broken he was and I, the human that I am, misremembered the number and stated that it was 4. I did not have Brawl at hand to double-check, but seeing as you in that same debate had stated some very non-intelligent things, I assumed you were making stuff up yet again.

My mistake. But hardly a big one or one that even really matters in the big picture. At the end of the day, even if I'm wrong on some minor and highly insightficant to the debate at hand facts, the vast majority of what I've said still stands, my main point and my most important facts still stand.

Sure, sometimes, you might win minor battles, no scuffles. But I will always win the war.

Please define major tournaments. How many entrants does that represent?

Number of entrants is irrelevant. A great number of entrants does not guarantee a high concentration of skill. Otakon always has 128 entrants in its Smash tournaments and that's only because its tourney is capped at 128. At Otakon 2006, there were, what, 4 entrants who knew how to play "properly", me, Oro, Inui and Ricky (the Link player).

"Major tournaments" = Tournaments with high concentration of skill with the implied meaning: tournaments with high concentrations of some of the best players in the nation.

Sure, some characters can do quite well or even win tournaments with relatively high levels of skills with many players on X-level. But what about tournaments with many players on the same level as M2K, Azen, Ally and Ninjalink (and the likes)? That level is all that matters when it comes to viability.

natch, sarcasm and hyperbole don't work on the internet. people take them literally, especially when you seem to validate it "Even Sakurai cannot make a truly garbage character simply because the smash team has been making this game for awhile and knows the basic forumla pretty well."

But you see, according to an interview, Sakurai had a hand in every single decision made when balancing Brawl. I'm sure he listened to other people but the final decisions were all his to make. Why does Captain Falcon suck so much? Sakurai. Tripping? Sakurai. Why was DeDeDe's downthrow designed that way? Sakurai.

It's all Sakurai (and the nincompomps working for him who didn't discover all of the BS and alert him to it).

Everyone messes up. I admit I messed up my matchup opinions - however, they are only opinions, not facts.

You mess up on facts all the time. Time and again you claim things like "The tournament results indicate" and "This and that are like this and that". I'm just not always there to call you on it.

Please compile a Top 5 of my supposed heinous crimes against facts. You claim I make such errors "way too often". Considering how I average quite a high number of posts per day, "way too often" should mean, what, at least twice a week or something?

Compiling a Top 5 or even a Top 10 should be quite a breeze.

Besides, proof doesn't work like that. It is a logical impossibility to prove a negative, so the burden of proof is always placed upon the affirmative.

No it's not. Certain things can be proven impossible. Humans cannot fly on their own. You cannot cut off your head and live to tell the tale. It is impossible to naturally regrow limbs.

Yuna asserted that Azen was the only person who could use Lucario

No I didn't. I specifically stated that as far as I knew, there exist no players who are coming even close to taking Lucario as far as Azen is taking him.

This is quite different from what you just claimed I said. And it would constitute a factual mistake on your part.

Fact: "Yuna said something."
Not-fact/Factual mistake/BS: "The Halloween Captain's bovine manure hallucination of what Yuna said."

Who's your pristine porcelain teapot, pot?! Who's your pristine porcelain teapot?! I see English reading comprehension of plain English still eludes you.

I present my proof of other good Lucario players by naming a few

You presented no actual proof. You just named a few Lucario players who, if you remember correctly, are doing kinda well. You mentioned Lee. Fine, show us those tournament results. Also, show us the many tournaments where Lee and others are doing as well (or coming close to doing so) as Azen, that is, place Top 5 at major tournaments... consistently!

now he needs to prove there are good Diddy Kong players other than Ninja Link after making such an assertion.

Why? Because you totally misunderstood what I said, misrepresented it and then named a few names without presenting any real evidence?

THC, how many times have we butted heads here on SWF? You should know better by now than to present me with flimsy arguments such as these.

Natch.

Lay off. That was rude and uncalled for.

Rude? Yes. Uncalled for? No. Trust me, I know Hive's posting history. I've seen it firsthand. It's chronic.

 

[swordgard]

Stuff

Yuna, i love your awesome posts lol. You spell out the truth.

 

[TKD+ITA+Mar=]

The most important things taught on smashboards:

1) MetaKnight is top tier

2) Don't argue with Yuna

 

[Hive]

like the last three pages yuna has been talking in

@yuna- let me put it this way-> this should have ended pages ago, why do you keep insisting on insulting my intelligence? i don't care if my grammar is bad , its intentionally careless. why? because its semantically irrelevant.. i could take out ever emote and bad period in this, but it wouldn't change the fact that you know exactly what i am saying (which is really the point of language) its just an internet forum.

peach is a good character imo, but i don't think anymore that she will win a major
tournament. why did i change my mind? because i trust sky's as well as other peach's experiences, and experience does matter in debate. if you have the opportunity to argue with a physicist about general relativity or something, of course it makes sense to take into account his opinions over your own prejudices. they are more specialized to know that info. I don't know the full reasons why peach doesn't win, but i can admit that peach mains probably have a better understanding than me, or you for that matter.

debates should matter on logic and facts, you are correct, but you're also missing the point that logic and facts are both based on observation. and there is a limit to how much conjecturing about about limited tourney results leads to substantial claims.
lol and sure your opinions might have been "based on fact and logic", but so were mine. that doesn't make them anything other than opinions though ^^ at least not here.
also, "viable" can really be taken into many lights....

it wasn't your "remarkable wit" that won me over lol ^^, i would stop claiming this... that's not to say that you aren't intelligent (maybe u r?idk u irl). but even if maybe you are you don't need to openly declare it constantly. and if i am as idiotic as you make me out to be you should take no pride in slamming my arguments (i'm not). It was even fun arguing for awhile though you know? i WILL get mad when you start to insult me though. (try to be more courteous... this isn't the first time either, you always do this in debates <.<.) i shouldn't have said your arguments were stupid either... its not that i disagreed with you, i guess more than anything i was just angry with what you said. some of your arguments were legit in my opinion, but that's not to say that i thought they were genius either... just small arguments really. constantly talking crap to everyone in tactical threads just makes you sound like an ******* though.
either way in terms of efficiency this kind of stuff is unproductive to the debate.

my reasons for arguing the tourney stats wasn't a "stupid" response though. you hadn't presented enough counterevidence to convince me otherwise... i know peach hasn't won any major tournies, but i still thought that she had the capacity to over enough time due to her having reasonably good all around matchups (though improbable when taken in light of a single tourney).
maybe that's wrong, but it was still a legitimate arguement, and i didn't really see any reason to think otherwise til i got actual insight with someone who plays her.

i noticed you posted earlier that i should be ashamed lol. i'm not, i said my mind and was corrected, no harm in that, that is the point of any debate.
if two drunk guys are fighting in a bar or something over politics it doesn't really matter who was right in the long run if none of them has the capacity to change anything about it lol.
look, yuna, i really want to get past this, please lay off, and i will too.
all of this in the long run
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(arrows)
is meaningless anyways

edit also "bovine manure" lol? nope. nice try. trust me, there is no intelligent way to say "cow ****" lol

 

[Eddie G]

Yuna, i love your awesome posts lol. You spell out the truth.

Is there such a thing as a real "truth", or is this "truth" he spells out merely that which has been established by man as "truth"? Come now, logic, "educated arguments", all mere tools for one to squabble on with throughout life. Yuna is good at explaining his cases, but are they really this "truth" that is really "true", or nothing more than what has widely been established as such? My same questions apply to "facts" as well.

Is uncertainty not the only certainty?

@ Thread- I agree with Hive on a certain point. Yuna, you display intelligence that is rarely seen on these boards, but my suggestion to you is to continue to display that intelligence within your arguments, not to continuously showcase it outside of the squabble.

 

[Rickerdy-doo-da-day]

*flings fancy words around*

Look at me, I'm winning this debate! I want some love too! D:




On topic -

Erm...
Actually, this thread has gone pretty far off topic

Maybe the graph should have had the new letter format for the tier list instead of the old one?

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Yuna, the reason why you needed to actually name a few good Diddy Kong users that are not Ninja Link is because I knew that you couldn't. Frankly, I know that you know very little about competitve Brawl, and so you strawman your way through debates. I know you didn't know the MK jump thing, you had four different tiers of mains, you talk about tournament results when you have absolutely no idea what is actually happening in the tournament scene, you still don't understand the true severity of the DK D3 matchup, and when you argued Ivysaur's move range and priority with me, you were wrong with conviction. You claimed that people other than Ninja Link are taking Diddy to that level of the metagame when you contrasted Diddy with Lucario. It should have been easy for you to at least name a couple of good Diddy users.

 

[BentoBox]

Number of entrants is irrelevant. A great number of entrants does not guarantee a high concentration of skill. Otakon always has 128 entrants in its Smash tournaments and that's only because its tourney is capped at 128. At Otakon 2006, there were, what, 4 entrants who knew how to play "properly", me, Oro, Inui and Ricky (the Link player).

"Major tournaments" = Tournaments with high concentration of skill with the implied meaning: tournaments with high concentrations of some of the best players in the nation.

Sure, some characters can do quite well or even win tournaments with relatively high levels of skills with many players on X-level. But what about tournaments with many players on the same level as M2K, Azen, Ally and Ninjalink (and the likes)? That level is all that matters when it comes to viability.

Like CoT4? LeeM got 5th (/289) with Lucario while you brushed the character off just a few weeks ago because Azen apparently skews results. Vex made it to 9th place with Bowser knocking azen into losers, iirc. I doubt he went Bowser all the way as he does have a D3 in his pocket, but what does this really say about viable characters in general? Is it that a character that is viable must not ever be forced in a position to counterpick as another? And again, how many major Brawl tournaments can you name? Because you have D/E/F tiers placing REALLY well in tournaments with high concentrations of skill (neo, chu, azen, forte, etc) but I have a feeling you'd brush these examples off.

 

[RATED]

i played the best peach from puerto rico at FAST1 and ive seen first hand what a perfect peach can do. his peach owned every snake in my bracket and that he played.

I play Excel zero ( the peach from PR) since I am from Puerto rico too. and yeah peach is a awesome character in great hands of a very skilled smasher. but this only indicates peach and generalizes the other except for MK and snake , but I would like to see the same of peach but for Lucario , olimar or wario , characters like that.

 

[Natch]

natch, sarcasm and hyperbole don't work on the internet. people take them literally, especially when you seem to validate it "Even Sakurai cannot make a truly garbage character simply because the smash team has been making this game for awhile and knows the basic forumla pretty well."

i suppose sakurai = good should always be read as sarcastic; i wonder is sakuria could manage to redeem himself, that trailer for TMNT doesn't look all that good for a game due in 7 more months.

Sakurai is developing a TMNT game?

Great, more broken turtles. Just what we need.

Natch.

Lay off. That was rude and uncalled for.

Got it. I've debated Hive in the past, it was on a "Ban DDD's Infinite at this tournament?" topic. I was frustrated by Hive's lack of knowledge on the subject. She just hasn't grasped the nature of competitive fighting games yet.

We were never uncool to begin with. Trust me, you will know when someone is not cool to Sliq (Crimson King is a good example).

Too cool, too cool.

Sliq is too cool, too pro.

 

[Natch]

Double post ignore plox.

 

[ExCeL 52]

Oh my sweet Jesus... This is still going on?
*PalmFace*
I have not went to any tournaments yet..
But when I do I sware I will shoot myself if I dont place 3+ In all of them with Peach just to prove Yuna wrong.

 

[Col. Stauffenberg]

Oh my sweet Jesus... This is still going on?
*PalmFace*
I have not went to any tournaments yet..
But when I do I sware I will shoot myself if I dont place 3+ In all of them with Peach just to prove Yuna wrong.

You're going to want to write that will up now, then.

 

[Natch]

Oh my sweet Jesus... This is still going on?
*PalmFace*
I have not went to any tournaments yet..
But when I do I sware I will shoot myself if I dont place 3+ In all of them with Peach just to prove Yuna wrong.

If you shoot yourself in the foot you can't put it back in your mouth.

Especially with you head so far up your ***.

edit also "bovine manure" lol? nope. nice try. trust me, there is no intelligent way to say "cow ****" lol

Wow, just wow.

Bull ****. Not cow ****. Wow, just wow. You don't even get that little gem of syntax manipulation.

Also, Yuna is still going to argue. Yuna does not stop until you KNOW you are completly 100% wrong. There is no lee-way room.

 

[ExCeL 52]

You're going to want to write that will up now, then.

Wait .. edit that.. If I get less then third I will shoot Yuna in the face.. Then me.

And can ya'll *****z take a joke? Seriously... If you think I suck so much why don't you guys play me?

 

[BentoBox]

Have fun playing Lee.

 

[Gishnak]

(doesn't read thread)

LOL at a low tier playing PERFECTLY still losing to a snake PLAYING BADLY.

 

[ExCeL 52]

(doesn't read thread)

LOL at a low tier playing PERFECTLY still losing to a snake PLAYING BADLY.

Good thing you didn't bother scrolling through the next 17 pages..
It makes your eyes turn red and bleed green.

 

[salaboB]

Also, Yuna is still going to argue. Yuna does not stop until you KNOW you are completly 100% wrong. There is no lee-way room.

You know, while I'm sure he appreciates how you've got his back -- you're just wrong.

Yuna doesn't stop as long as someone will argue against him, but there's an awfully lot of points he makes where he's just dead wrong but never holds to one point long enough to have to address it. (Now I wait for his response of "Show me these", which I won't do simply because no matter how many mistakes, misreadings, or errors I find for him he blows it off and claims I make more -- somehow that removes him making them?)

 

[Natch]

Like CoT4? LeeM got 5th (/289) with Lucario while you brushed the character off just a few weeks ago because Azen apparently skews results. Vex made it to 9th place with Bowser knocking azen into losers, iirc. I doubt he went Bowser all the way as he does have a D3 in his pocket, but what does this really say about viable characters in general? Is it that a character that is viable must not ever be forced in a position to counterpick as another? And again, how many major Brawl tournaments can you name? Because you have D/E/F tiers placing REALLY well in tournaments with high concentrations of skill (neo, chu, azen, forte, etc) but I have a feeling you'd brush these examples off.

Yuna did not know about the tourney results of COT4, which just finished like what? Yestardy? This morning? He's not going to know those results that fast.

Vex having a secondary still proves Yuna right. Peach cannot compete by HERSELF. Bowser cannot compete by HIMSELF. And DDD is A Tier to boot. Besides that, he only placed 9th(Not even in the top 8!) and I'm willing to bet Azen still placed higher in the end. Furthermore, this was only one tournament. Sure, it looks promising, but given the shamble that was COT4, I doubt that everyone there was playing at their 100% best.

You know, while I'm sure he appreciates how you've got his back -- you're just wrong.

Yuna doesn't stop as long as someone will argue against him, but there's an awfully lot of points he makes where he's just dead wrong but never holds to one point long enough to have to address it. (Now I wait for his response of "Show me these", which I won't do simply because no matter how many mistakes, misreadings, or errors I find for him he blows it off and claims I make more -- somehow that removes him making them?)

SalaboB, you have to play the same game as Yuna if you want to win. Yuna DOES concede when he's wrong, but when he says that those minor mistakes don't make him wrong in the end...you have to disagree. Say they DO matter. If you're going to argue against Yuna, you have to sound like you're 100% correct, and stick with it.

I know I used to agree with you and disagree with Yuna, but now I see where he comes from. It's not as bad as it looks, trust me. It's not even bad. It's good.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

You presented no actual proof. You just named a few Lucario players who, if you remember correctly, are doing kinda well. You mentioned Lee. Fine, show us those tournament results. Also, show us the many tournaments where Lee and others are doing as well (or coming close to doing so) as Azen, that is, place Top 5 at major tournaments... consistently!

Which Lee has done.

Bloodhawk and Milln are also notable names, however I'm not entirely familiar with how well these two have been doing.

 

[BentoBox]

Yuna did not know about the tourney results of COT4, which just finished like what? Yestardy? This morning? He's not going to know those results that fast.

If he's to be as informed as he asserts to be, taking a minute of his day to check the results wouldn't have killed him. I managed just fine ^_^.

Vex having a secondary still proves Yuna right. Peach cannot compete by HERSELF. Bowser cannot compete by HIMSELF. And DDD is A Tier to boot.

Hence why I followed that by asking Yuna if what he considered viable are characters that have no solid counters (maps or character wise)~ I can't even recall the last Falco placing really well in a tournament.

Besides that, he only placed 9th(Not even in the top 8!) and I'm willing to bet Azen still placed higher in the end. Furthermore, this was only one tournament. Sure, it looks promising, but given the shamble that was COT4, I doubt that everyone there was playing at their 100% best.

No, Azen did not make top 8. And 9th over 280 entrants is nothing to brush off, kthx. And no johns.

 

[Sky`]

Wait .. edit that.. If I get less then third I will shoot Yuna in the face.. Then me.

And can ya'll *****z take a joke? Seriously... If you think I suck so much why don't you guys play me?

I like you.
Because you like the boondocks.

and the Themesong of the Boondocks, is what drove me to place high with Peach. =]

 

[Hive]

Got it. I've debated Hive in the past, it was on a "Ban DDD's Infinite at this tournament?" topic. I was frustrated by Hive's lack of knowledge on the subject. She just hasn't grasped the nature of competitive fighting games yet.
.

@natch- look i haven't provoked you at all, you're being a jerk. even if you don't like me this isn't an appropriate place to say it. as for the ddd infinite thing, yea, we debated and I was very close to conceding your point because of the data you provided from bobson, however, the assumptions that the data drew were false (even though bobson did a great job on it ^^). it didn't compenesate for the fact that the normal person can only press 6-7 buttons plus the control stick max on the controller at a time, it didn't compensate for human thresholds (the original assumption being that a normal person could press all the buttons on the controller and return to the original position every two frames. it assumed that 200% was a likely human threshold, however there wasn't any actual data to back that up), it didn't compensate for the fact that ddd doesn't have to pummel until 33% and 4% from the pummel, and it didn't compensate for the control stick hitting the frame when the buttons were fully released (since its not released). when i redid the data and got info from ref and suggestions from bobson and adumbrodeus, it just turned out you were mistaken. I was even disappointed that i was right, bc i wanted to stop arguing the subject with you since you seemed like a kwl person. but i had to verify the data before i conceded, and the info that you yourself gave me was wrong... I am not ignorant on the subject (hell, at this point i probably know it better than you do, no offense ^^). and if you want to keep arguing this pm me. i'm tired of trading unproductive insults with people.
you seem to keep implying that my small mind can't possibly grasp the nature of fighting games, and keep trying to tell me what the difference between a good and bad character is, but the truth is I have just as much knowledge of this game as you do! qft.

 

[BentoBox]

I should start QFTing my own posts lol.

 

[salaboB]

I should start QFTing my own posts lol.

QFT

Spoiler

10truths

 

[PK-ow!]

Yes I did overestimate Peach. Because I don't have time to write the equation of a line that perfectly depicts where I think she would go, its guess and check..lol. This was all guesswork, like I said none of this is accurate, its the CONCEPT that I wanted to illustrate. I'm not saying a perfectly played low tier can't beat a sucky MK, I just didn't refine the lines to be that accurate. The idea is there for fun. I think it fosters better discussion of tiers. there was no point in trying to make it accurate because it would be based off my opinion alone anyway, which is going to be inaccurate, so there was no point in trying.

For example if a tier list is based only on both players playing perfectly at the highest level, do we ignore any tournament results of players playing at in between skill levels? If we include those tournament results where players are not playing perfectly, then we admit a lot of player skill is factored into the tier list. Just saying, it's a thought.

xDD master - that is the most amazing thing I have ever seen.

If I may, I'd like to try to address the thesis of this thread.

All this thread is saying, is that there's a difference between tournament-derived tier lists (where we have a ranking function on the basis of placements), and theoretical tier lists.

I'd like to call the second one true tier lists, or just tier lists, and the first one "tournament rankings." I think this is a given, since our concept of tier list is supposed to be what would go on with optimal play at the highest level. The "true" tier list is the one that is fixed by the game mechanics themselves - it's there, in the game, and we're just trying to figure out what it is.
I'd like 'tier list' or 'tier lists' to mean any creation of a person or persons which is an attempt to approximate the true tier list. Tier list refers to the way it is constructed - something has to be mostly theorycraft to be a 'tier list' in this sense, since we, sorry, don't have perfect play in actual tournaments, or if there is perfect play, it would be such a small portion of the tournament audience, that trying to get at it by applying a ranking function to a picky subset would just get really noisy, statistically-garbage data.


What your chart, Edrees - or something like it (if someone spent, y'know, more than "5 minutes" on it - is trying to do, is to begin to explain the deviation of tier lists, from tournament rankings.

As a theoretical enterprise, the production of tier lists is trying to take on the responsibility not just of description of the game, but also explanation of what happens in actual competition. To do this though, the game theorists (SBR? or some emergent collective "game theorising mind"*) have created a division of labour. What has happened is the problem of explanation has been cut into (a) trying to understand what the "ideal" stuff, the 'principles', the 'possibilities' are on the one hand (like general physical laws); and (b) somewhere else you have "lab conditions" stuff, the messy stuff, the stuff that isn't allowed to assume point masses, no air friction, and a stationary system.

What you're saying Edrees is that (b) has fallen to the side very much. Far from equal effort is given to do the job of (b) properly as (a). What I'd say is because of that, because the bridge isn't being made, you don't have much 'explanation' of tournament results at all.

An easy example. Anyone who tries to go to the tier list and say "This is why this tournament had this outcome" is going to fail. Why? We know that's because players are involved - imperfect players.
Yes, we all say tiers aren't everything. ... but maybe more can be said precisely about that.

To satisfy the imperative to scientize the game (which seems to be an imperative which is half-semi-sorta-loosely recognized here, implicitly), a self-respecting theorist is going to have to come up with another tool. A tool to complement the tier construction.

Filling in this "science gap" would be a very necessary project. Perhaps you'd like to say more about it, Edrees.

Success of the two divisions working jointly (tier lists and ... "player abilities" just to give it a name for now) would be when a person can use the two to explain the differences of tournament rankings** from tier lists. Before then, tier lists are only half of what the science should be.



*A lot of interesting stuff "emerges" on these forums actually, I've found. Proto-science, I'll call it. A proto-scientific attitude... that everyone uses to understand each other and their statements here, but isn't explicitly called out as such.
Really cool ****.

**There's also work to be done depending on the "tournament pickiness function," but I think I can safely gloss over that for now.

 

[Natch]

@natch- look i haven't provoked you at all, you're being a jerk. even if you don't like me this isn't an appropriate place to say it. as for the ddd infinite thing, yea, we debated and I was very close to conceding your point because of the data you provided from bobson, however, the assumptions that the data drew were false (even though bobson did a great job on it ^^). it didn't compenesate for the fact that the normal person can only press 6-7 buttons plus the control stick max on the controller at a time, it didn't compensate for human thresholds (the original assumption being that a normal person could press all the buttons on the controller and return to the original position every two frames. it assumed that 200% was a likely human threshold, however there wasn't any actual data to back that up), it didn't compensate for the fact that ddd doesn't have to pummel until 33% and 4% from the pummel, and it didn't compensate for the control stick hitting the frame when the buttons were fully released (since its not released). when i redid the data and got info from ref and suggestions from bobson and adumbrodeus, it just turned out you were mistaken. I was even disappointed that i was right, bc i wanted to stop arguing the subject with you since you seemed like a kwl person. but i had to verify the data before i conceded, and the info that you yourself gave me was wrong... I am not ignorant on the subject (hell, at this point i probably know it better than you do, no offense ^^). and if you want to keep arguing this pm me. i'm tired of trading unproductive insults with people.
you seem to keep implying that my small mind can't possibly grasp the nature of fighting games, and keep trying to tell me what the difference between a good and bad character is, but the truth is I have just as much knowledge of this game as you do! qft.

I was the one who originally presented you with the data-which was new to you, quite new. I did have to correct you on the numbers, but you understand basic theory.

I am simply someone who doesn't tolerate lack of knowledge(period) unless the person I am discussing it with is someone I'd like to be friends with in the future-I use more tact in this situation then. You have proven to be nice, and not a **** at heart-even when I am one. You also do know a lot about this game-it's just that I'm an elitist ****

Now, on with this debate. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me.


I shall begin once again. I can disprove all of your calculations with an observation. If a calculation states that bombs can't exist due to some chemical ratio or whatnot, but a bomb blows up, the calculaiton is wrong as bombs do indeed exist despite the evidence against them.

This is a concept illustrating that an observation is true, and always true. It is possible to repeat observations, circumstances withstanding. It must be proven. That is, if the numbers say one thing, but reality says another, the numbers are wrong.

I will try to keep this as clear and thorough as possible. I am going to state a series of "facts." These "facts" hold significance for the groundwork of my argument. If you agree with these "facts", and understand how they are linked, we are on the same page.

1. To get out of a Grab, you need to mash buttons.
2. The more buttons you mash, the shorter you are held in a grab.
3. This works the same for every character. It doesn't matter if you're grabbed and you're MK, Lucas, Samus, Peach, Bowser, etc. The mechanic is the same.

First three. I need an observation from here. As you know, if you pummel someone too much when they're being grabbed, they will get out. If you pummel with perfect rythym, you only have 0 frames of delay(maybe more, the exact number doesn't matter as long as it small) between the starting and ending animations of the pummel. If this is true, then mashing buttons would only be registered on those frames BETWEEN the pummel. This brings me to my 4th "fact".

4. Mashing buttons during the pummel works.

If you ANY issues with these 4 things, tell me. Moving on.

In this video, Reflex is grabbed by DDD. He anticapted DDD pummeling him, and breaks out after one pummel. ONE. I have video proof, at 6:20 of this video. I know this is "old", but please, please bear with me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm8z4O24CvI&feature=related

Somehow, SOMEHOW, Reflex was able to mash buttons fast enough to get out of that grabbed. We don't know how, we just know that he did. At some level of play-no matter how ridiculously skilled you have to be-it's possible to avoid that infinite. It might be "unrealistic" to expect everyone who is infinited to learn how to do that, but that is what is required of a player if they wish to not be infinited-either that or(unfortunately) you need to switch characters.

I hope this explains things clearly. Maybe Reflex has instead discovered something new, something beyond the numbers we were given. Regardless, he managed to do it, and so can anyone else.

 

[BentoBox]

I've had people escape my grabs instantaneously without much mashing... I'm not entirely convinced that it has anything to do with pressing X buttons under Y milliseconds. They would break away without me even pumelling them. So until you actually can replicate how it is done reliably, this is not a valid argument.

 

[Eddie G]

Stop meat-riding Yuna, Natch.

 

[Hive]

I was the one who originally presented you with the data-which was new to you, quite new. I did have to correct you on the numbers, but you understand basic theory.

I am simply someone who doesn't tolerate lack of knowledge(period) unless the person I am discussing it with is someone I'd like to be friends with in the future-I use more tact in this situation then. You have proven to be nice, and not a **** at heart-even when I am one. You also do know a lot about this game-it's just that I'm an elitist ****

Now, on with this debate. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me.


I shall begin once again. I can disprove all of your calculations with an observation. If a calculation states that bombs can't exist due to some chemical ratio or whatnot, but a bomb blows up, the calculaiton is wrong as bombs do indeed exist despite the evidence against them.

This is a concept illustrating that an observation is true, and always true. It is possible to repeat observations, circumstances withstanding. It must be proven. That is, if the numbers say one thing, but reality says another, the numbers are wrong.

I will try to keep this as clear and thorough as possible. I am going to state a series of "facts." These "facts" hold significance for the groundwork of my argument. If you agree with these "facts", and understand how they are linked, we are on the same page.

1. To get out of a Grab, you need to mash buttons.
2. The more buttons you mash, the shorter you are held in a grab.
3. This works the same for every character. It doesn't matter if you're grabbed and you're MK, Lucas, Samus, Peach, Bowser, etc. The mechanic is the same.

First three. I need an observation from here. As you know, if you pummel someone too much when they're being grabbed, they will get out. If you pummel with perfect rythym, you only have 0 frames of delay(maybe more, the exact number doesn't matter as long as it small) between the starting and ending animations of the pummel. If this is true, then mashing buttons would only be registered on those frames BETWEEN the pummel. This brings me to my 4th "fact".

4. Mashing buttons during the pummel works.

If you ANY issues with these 4 things, tell me. Moving on.

In this video, Reflex is grabbed by DDD. He anticapted DDD pummeling him, and breaks out after one pummel. ONE. I have video proof, at 6:20 of this video. I know this is "old", but please, please bear with me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm8z4O24CvI&feature=related

Somehow, SOMEHOW, Reflex was able to mash buttons fast enough to get out of that grabbed. We don't know how, we just know that he did. At some level of play-no matter how ridiculously skilled you have to be-it's possible to avoid that infinite. It might be "unrealistic" to expect everyone who is infinited to learn how to do that, but that is what is required of a player if they wish to not be infinited-either that or(unfortunately) you need to switch characters.

I hope this explains things clearly. Maybe Reflex has instead discovered something new, something beyond the numbers we were given. Regardless, he managed to do it, and so can anyone else.

of course i forgive you natch, ^^ ty for the apology.
the reflex thing is really interesting! i wondered about that as well, and I admit that a lot of my beliefs are based on the data, if they are wrong then i am too.

um, here are my thoughts:
1. the data that i used assumes the ddd can grab and pummel down to the frame (pefectly) all in all the pummel takes like 1/2 a second. the thing is that if the if the ddd messes up in his pummel by even a small amount say about 15 (1/4th of a second) frames between the down throw grab end to the start of the pummel combined with the end of the pummel to the throw, it changes the breakout by a big amount. for example if it takes you 7 frames to hit the buttons, and you start hitting them on the first frame it changes the infinite from being inescapable if he grabs you at 0 percent to being escapable until 75 percent. I think maybe the ddd messed up his pummel timing by a little bit and the wario was mashing out fast, but idk.
either that or
2. the data is just plain wrong somewhere. in which case i really don't know what to do except start at 0. you're right, what reflex did was interesting, i really wished we could capture the frame data to prove it! ^^

but um, we should probably talk about this outside the thread though lol ^^ sorry for being offtopic ...

 

[Natch]

I've had people escape my grabs instantaneously without much mashing... I'm not entirely convinced that it has anything to do with pressing X buttons under Y milliseconds. They would break away without me even pumelling them. So until you actually can replicate how it is done reliably, this is not a valid argument.

I know about that. That is an instantanaeous grab break. If, on the EXACT FRAME you are grabbed, you press a certain buttton, you escape from the grab immediatly and take a meager 3% damage.

What Reflex did was different, as he was pummeled before breaking out. As far as my smash knowledge goes, what he did is within the mechanics of nomral grab breaks.

Stop meat-riding Yuna, Natch.

But his meat is so fun to ride!

of course i forgive you natch, ^^ ty for the apology.
the reflex thing is really interesting! i wondered about that as well, and I admit that a lot of my beliefs are based on the data, if they are wrong then i am too.

um, here are my thoughts:
1. the data that i used assumes the ddd can grab and pummel down to the frame (pefectly) all in all the pummel takes like 1/2 a second. the thing is that if the if the ddd messes up in his pummel by even a small amount say about 15 (1/4th of a second) frames between the down throw grab end to the start of the pummel it changes the breakout by a big amount. for example if it takes you 7 frames to hit the buttons, and you start hitting them on the first frame it changes the infinite from being inescapable if he grabs you at o percent to being escapable until 75 percent. I think maybe the ddd messed up his pummel timing by a little bit and the wario was mashing out fast, but idk.
either that or
2. the data is just plain wrong somewhere. in which case i really don't know what to do except start at 0. you're right, what reflex did was interesting, i really wished we could capture the frame data to prove it! ^^

but um, we should probably talk about this outside the thread though lol ^^ sorry...

I think it's 1. See, Smash can register simaltanious button inputs on the same frame(you probably took this into account). Pressing L+A+R+Start to restart the match, for example, or even something as simple as a tilt attack.

I figure this little mechanic+buffering makes it possible. If you make a button input, smash will check for the next 5 or so frames to see if it is applicable. If you were trying to preform a series of moves and get grabbed instead, the game would read those inputs as you trying to mash out of the grab.