Fox now has his own Tier.Does he need it?What are your opinions of having the SS tier in Melee?

[Iceballz]

The new 2015 Super Smash Bros Melee Official Tier list came out.There were a few obvious changes and the first one most people noticed was the fact Fox now belongs in the SS tier.Now do you think that's necessary?Does Fox deserve his own tier?Fox is great, but he certainly isn't broken like Brawl Meta Knight.Fox has obvious Pros and Cons.Anyway what do you think?Should Fox be in the SS tier?Is the SS tier necessary in Melee?Should someone else be in the SS tier or should someone else be replacing Fox in the SS tier?Let's start a bit of a discussion.I want to hear your opinions.

 

[Archelon]

I think this makes sense. I like the idea of splitting the S tier into 3/4 because I think that fox is clearly the best, then for the next 3 (Marth, Falco, Sheik), there can be a lot of debate, and they are definitely above Peach and Jigglypuff... but I think it would have made more sense to split it into, say S+, S and S-.

 

[TheJolteon]

In my opinion I don't think Fox should be in his own tier. Meta Knight in Brawl was in SS tier and using that logic its basically saying Fox is as good as Meta Knight. Which isn't true. I feel Marth, Falco, and Sheik can all compete with Fox to stay in the same tier.

 

[Archelon]

In my opinion I don't think Fox should be in his own tier. Meta Knight in Brawl was in SS tier and using that logic its basically saying Fox is as good as Meta Knight. Which isn't true. I feel Marth, Falco, and Sheik can all compete with Fox to stay in the same tier.

I feel like they should split a tier with +s and -since within characters who many feel should be in the same tier, there are some gaps larger than others.

 

[Iceballz]

I agree Archelon .But there isn't much we can do to change that.

 

[Archelon]

I agree Archelon .But there isn't much we can do to change that.

Yeah... I really think it helps say "the rankings of characters in this subtier could go either way: I personally think Marth is second best, but many will say Falco and some will say Sheik.

 

[Jenna Zant]

It's not uneeded, but it shouldn't be called SS. Fox isn't broken like Meta Knight was, so he shouldn't be in SS. He should be in his own tier, S+.

 

[Flippy Flippersen]

Fox is #1 anything s tiered can be solo mained. Him being ss rather than s or s+ matter very little. It doesn't change his or the s tiers viability and is only an honorary mention for him being #1.

 

[Squirrell]

It's ridiculous honestly. Unless you can look me in the eye and tell me Fox is as braindead broken as Meta Knight, he shouldn't be SS.

In my opinion SS should mean Super **** and it should be the tier where Roy and Kirby hang out.

 

[Top Boss]

I don't see how fox is good enough to be in his own tier, personally

 

[-ACE-]

The key is that they didn't actually decide that Fox was that much better. So many people voted Fox first that they put him in his own tier. It's just weird that although everyone agrees fox is the best, most of us know that it isn't by much at all. Two characters being on different tiers implies a gap in results or potential, and there just isn't a big gap between Fox and the other 3 characters in question.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

There is unanimous agreement that fox is #1, but there is argument over 2-4. I dont see how thats different from 1. Fox 2. Falco/Marth/Sheik. Its the definition of a tier gap.

 

[Archelon]

There is unanimous agreement that fox is #1, but there is argument over 2-4. I dont see how thats different from 1. Fox 2. Falco/Marth/Sheik. Its the definition of a tier gap.

I think that what a lot of people have been saying is that +'s and -'s could have been used, like on Brawl's tier lists.

 

[TastyCarcass]

I think it should be more obvious that Fox is at that spot because he does at least evenly with all characters, not because he dominates every matchup in 1v1.

For example, there is good reason to believe that Falco beats him slightly, same with PAL Marth

 

[Archelon]

I think it should be more obvious that Fox is at that spot because he does at least evenly with all characters, not because he dominates every matchup in 1v1.

For example, there is good reason to believe that Falco beats him slightly, same with PAL Marth

And NTSC Marth

 

[-ACE-]

There is unanimous agreement that fox is #1, but there is argument over 2-4. I dont see how thats different from 1. Fox 2. Falco/Marth/Sheik. Its the definition of a tier gap.

Everyone would also vote unanimously that 10 is more than 9.8. The decision of whether or not a tier gap should be present should be separate. As is, the tiers are based solely on voting trends instead of results or theory/potential.

 

[Klemes]

I don't think fox should have his own tier. The fact that everyone agrees that he has the best MU spread vs the whole cast souldn't outwheight that he goes even with Falco and Marth (I'm not so sure Shiek is up there anymore though).

Why didn't they simply rank him 1# of S-tier ? I get that nobody argues he isn't the best, but having even one 50/50 MU should rule out any talk about the SS-tier for fox.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Everyone would also vote unanimously that 10 is more than 9.8. The decision of whether or not a tier gap should be present should be separate. As is, the tiers are based solely on voting trends instead of results or theory/potential.

Last time I made tier gaps based on discussion and agreement of "goodness", and people were upset. There was a lot of demand for analytical tier gaps. Because of this demand, I was forced to spend many hours calculating additional statistics (which you can see in the Details section of the tier list post). Using these statistics, I followed a methodology of creating tier divisions.

You cannot make an exception to the methodology just for Fox. According to the math, there is a gap between Fox and Falco. If you want to make criticisms of the method, it should be aimed towards the bottom of the list (at which point i say, does it matter?).


edit- and note that the image above isn't the officially released list. I made this graphic before the final release, so the data is from a slightly different dataset.

 

[-ACE-]

You cannot make an exception to the methodology just for Fox.

Why not? If I had a tier list generator crank out a virtually perfect list aside from one mistake, I'd just fix it before I released it lol. Not trying to sound condescending, I'm sure there's more to it. And I don't want to sound like a critic, it's a great list overall.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Subjectively choosing where to be methodical intrinsically invalidates the methodology.

"Lets use the scientific method. But where we dont like the results, lets just change them to things we'd rather see."

 

[Klemes]

Last time I made tier gaps based on discussion and agreement of "goodness", and people were upset. There was a lot of demand for analytical tier gaps. Because of this demand, I was forced to spend many hours calculating additional statistics (which you can see in the Details section of the tier list post). Using these statistics, I followed a methodology of creating tier divisions.

You cannot make an exception to the methodology just for Fox. According to the math, there is a gap between Fox and Falco. If you want to make criticisms of the method, it should be aimed towards the bottom of the list (at which point i say, does it matter?).


edit- and note that the image above isn't the officially released list. I made this graphic before the final release, so the data is from a slightly different dataset.

So the tier divisions are determined by significant gaps in the votes ? Not by a consensus of overall viability for instance. What I must see in the tier divisions is that while a character could eventually take a higher spot in it's own tier, it's however unlikely that this character moves up or down out of this tier. Am I getting this right ?

And if the gaps in the votes are what define tiers, in the next list nothing would prevent the S-tier to expand down to #5 or on the contrary to shrink up to #3 for instance ? (ex: shiek is now considered A-tier, while she stays ranked #4)

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

So the tier divisions are determined by significant gaps in the votes ? Not by a consensus of overall viability for instance. What I must see in the tier divisions is that while a character could eventually take a higher spot in it's own tier, it's however unlikely that this character moves up or down out of this tier. Am I getting this right ?

Is your confusion coming from the column labeled "P (Lower > Higher)"? It reads in English better as "the probability that the lower ranked character deserved to be ranked higher". This number represents the likelihood our current ordering was correct. Its calculated by a Normal Distribution function using the difference in means and the combined variances and as input.

Thanks to PracticalTAS for providing me with the formula!!

And if the gaps in the votes are what define tiers, in the next list nothing would prevent the S-tier to expand down to #5 or on the contrary to shrink up to #3 for instance ? (ex: shiek is now considered A-tier, while she stays ranked #4)

Yes, pretty much. It would change to represent the overall agreement of the voters.

 

[Respect38]

I think this more shows how building the tiers by the numerical gap isn't necessarily the best way to do it, even if it is a very simple and easy method to do it. [and even if it throws out something that the community disagrees with for the most part, you can always fall back on "but the algorithm!"]

At the same time, my problem with the tier list is more with labeling: it's strange to label Fox as "SS", because it pulls out the reasonable comparisons to another certain Smash game with an SS tier and an extremely overpowered character. [for which Fox is no comparison] I really don't understand why the tier wasn't S/A+/A or A+/A/A-, honestly. I feel like that either labeling is much more reasonable.

[Also, just considering the gap between Young Link and Link or between Ness and Bowser seems to imply that if Melee had been made without Marth and without Sheik, then Fox and Falco would very likely be in their own tier. It seems peculiar to me that Fox being in his own tier is completely reliant on Marth and Sheik diluting Falco's #2 votes, "but the algorithm!", I suppose]

 

[Klemes]

"even if it is a very simple and easy method to do it" ... doesn't look that easy to me -_-
I don't know if it's the best way to make a list, but it shows some really interesting FACTS about the community we couldn't have guessed otherwise.

Amazing work Fortress | Sveet !

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

If everyone agrees that 1 group of characters is better than another group of characters, but has fighting within the groups, then that is the description of a tier gap.

If everyone agrees Fox > Falco/Marth/Sheik, then that is a tier gap.

A tier gap doesn't mean "this character is leagues better than those below", it means that there is concise agreement about the ordering.

 

[-ACE-]

Subjectively choosing where to be methodical intrinsically invalidates the methodology.

"Lets use the scientific method. But where we dont like the results, lets just change them to things we'd rather see."

The only thing is that the current science behind the tier separation is laughable. Not sure if I would compare this methodology to the scientific method, lol. I believe we're lucky that the list didn't come out worse. To say it's something "we'd rather see" is a vast oversimplification of our understanding of the viability of the top tier characters. The voters only voted fox as first. Then, it was arbitrarily determined that he needed his own tier (unanimous decision for fox means nothing). There wasn't any real methodology. If everyone had voted falco #1 he wouldn't deserve his own tier, and if Kirby was voted 26th unanimously, he wouldn't deserve his own tier at the very bottom either. The 4 top characters are, relatively speaking, very similar in viability. The difference in 1 and 2 is much, much smaller than the difference between 4 and 5 (where a tier gap actually belongs). A voting system is a good way to make something subjective more quantifiable, but drawing additional conclusions off virtually meaningless metadata (the 1.0 beside fox) doesn't lead you to the best possible final product.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

"Then, it was arbitrarily determined that he needed his own tier (unanimous decision for fox means nothing)."

I dont think you know what the words "arbitrary" and "methodology" mean.

ar·bi·trar·y
ˈärbəˌtrerē/
adjective

1. based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

Overall, it just seems you personally don't agree that Fox is #1. On the other hand, virtually everyone else in the community agrees on that point.

 

[-ACE-]

Lol, so glad you posted that. Now you can read it more easily. Based on random choice or personal whim, it was decided that a unanimous decision equates to a character having his own tier. You essentially say that this isn't arbitrary, and that it is based on the metadata of the findings. I'm saying that the metadata means nothing, lol.

Please tell me that a unanimous decision for any particular character at last place would warrant them their own bottom tier. Would it?

Overall, it just seems you personally don't agree that Fox is #1.

This conclusion is about as reasonable as the decision to give Fox his own tier.

 

[F. Stein]

lol, it's a tier list that puts fox at the top. It's nothing new. Same candy, different wrapper. Who honestly cares that much that there is an SS by fox's name? It doesn't affect anyone beyond the common symptoms of OCD or butthurtness I would imagine. I don't see a reason to dwell on it.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Lol, so glad you posted that. Now you can read it more easily. Based on random choice or personal whim, it was decided that a unanimous decision equates to a character having his own tier. You essentially say that this isn't arbitrary, and that it is based on the metadata of the findings. I'm saying that the metadata means nothing, lol.

Many members of the community have contributed to the methodology, and it has evolved over the years. Before I opened it to the general public, it was handled by the Melee Back Room.

You are asking me to disrespect and ignore the method, because you don't like one instance of the pattern. If you could make a reasonable adjustment to the method that would result in a different conclusion, then maybe you would have a valid point.

Perhaps you don't understand the definition of a tier gap. Please describe to me what you think a tier gap is

 

[-ACE-]

Fortress | Sveet I can see this is getting nowhere if you think this is about something I don't know, lmfao. What can I say? Perfect list.

Edit:

 

[MewtwoForce]

It is a fact that the SS tier for fox is ridiculous. The character does not have the facts behind him to justify his own special tier placement above everyone else. Its clearly a mistake.

 

[F. Stein]

Dude, it's a label. It changes nothing, fox is #1. Big Whoop. He can have 5 stars by his name or a presidential award, doesn't make any difference when he gets tippered by marth, spiked by falco or chain grabbed by ganon. He's the same fox that he was last year. Same candy, different wrapper.

 

[LSDX]

Fox McCloud