i'm not directly disagreeing with you, pof, since i firmly believe there is plenty of room in the tier list for things to change around. i'm just kind of perusing your argument that you've presented here.
tbh falcon-falco is a tough matchup for falcon. just saying. i haven't read mogwai's posts but if that's his argument it suuuure is a flimsy one.
this is kind of a hard assumption to go by since m2k is really the only good marth player and his entire playstyle is sort of limited by what he understands. if he can't practice against it. he has trouble understanding how to beat it. not knocking all the other good marths, he's pretty much the only one who can compete at top level.
wait this sort of contradicts above statement what
this doesn't really make sense. it's also fairly common knowledge that falco has trouble vs those characters. whiiich makes him not the best character in the game if he has matchups that aren't always in his favor. marth has... one matchup that isn't in his favor. wouldn't that put him above falco? oh wait, there are "other things" i need to factor in first. ok.
i'm not sure where to put this one. also, IT'S TWO PLAYERS OMG. should have brought up zhu. he switches to fox. i think the only exception to switching is lambchops but he hasn't been performing well so i guess it's irrelevant.
the tier whores thing is irrelevant. what does pc switching to fox have to do with anything? maybe he just liked fox more?
maybe because fox's metagame is highly advanced and he can do cool combos, more people are attracted to him. abundance is not indicative of a tier placing. perhaps if you had mentioned that cactuar switched mains from marth to fox (and started performing better) it would have been a more solid argument. also m2k is kind of iffy since he uses three characters.
i will agree that falco was fairly underrepresented at pound.
2nd one is probably just based on your personal experience.
from my experience:
"everyone i know in GA complains about falco omg more people complain about falco"
unnecessary and irrelevant.
is every fox matchup the exact same thing? no. you don't play fox and i'm assuming this is an uneducated statement that comes from your lack of understanding of fox's nuances. i certainly don't understand fox, but i can understand enough to tell that this is clearly just wrong.
ex) "omg every marth matchup is exactly the same dd camp for grab then just fair a bunch"
uneducated and wrong, but it sure sounds like a good basic summary for someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.
i really don't understand what you're getting at. you seem to have a fluid definition of how tiers are created that changes in accordance with your argument. top tiers are at first, tournament based. then they are "based on other factors" and now you seem to only have one factor - ease of use to win with? that's not how tier lists are made and it's also a flawed argument.
yes, all those characters are hard at top levels of play. even sagat mcbrokenpants, as evidenced by him... oh, i dunno, not winning every single tournament.. as you mentioned? shouldn't he be mid or high tier at best? no wait, you said it's purely based on ease of use.. so, if sagat is so easy to win with, he should be winning every tournament... but wait...
this definition of how tiers are made is very confusing.
you kind of have a good point but the way you chose to represent it is flawed and confusing. especially since it rides really hard on the assumption that X character isn't "hard" to use.
which is biased. and wrong.
how do you judge rate of learning? how well someone performs after picking up a character? "fox is an easier character to learn than falco" is really just stating your opinion.
"Marth is an easier character to learn than falco."
my evidence? i main falco and i was able to successfully pick up marth and perform fairly well with him much more quickly than i was able to learn falco!
this of course is disregarding my learning of the game's mechanics and technical requirements through falco. i mean, marth must be easier to learn since i was able to learn faster after i became experienced and understood the game!
it's opinions like this that strengthen the existence of the melee back room and why they pick people with histories of intelligent posts and high levels of skill to decide things like the tier list.
reliance on connecting hits? say it isn't so! no character in melee should be concerned with landing successive strings of moves, especially those that are guaranteed!
isn't fox dead offstage anyway?
yes, we are all laughing and trying to sound cool.
this reminds me of that pokemon news reporter thing where you pick a phrase to be cool and it's instantly cool. someone i know chose "tight rear" lo--
wait nvm pokemon isn't cool fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
. I do bring up the fact that semi-unknown Falcos beat Falcon more frequently than semi-unknown Foxes when talking about how I think Falco is worse for CF than Fox, but it's far from the backbone of my argument.
