How are tier lists actually determined?

[Hax]

i was thinking about jigglypuff's rise in tiers recently and it made me wonder how tiers are truly determined. smash is different than any other fighting game due to its items and stage diversity. while i definitely agree that items turn smash into a completely different game with a completely different tierlist that i don't think anyone's willing to explore, some of you are forgetting that some of the rules we've implemented and have been made standard are the way they are because of certain characters being able to abuse characteristics of the game otherwise. i feel like that should attest to the character's tier placement, which a lot of you are forgetting.

smash has 2 different games: smash with items and smash without items. the former is extremely luck-based and as i said, i don't think anyone is willing to analyze each character's ability to utilize each and every item and develop a tier list for smash with items, but smash without items (which we've been playing all these years) has many overlooked rules and conditions to consider when designing a tier list, for example...

22 banned stages

this one stands out the most. this is also the reason, imo, that fox should be the undisputed best character in melee. literally ~10 stages are banned because fox is ridiculous on them.

no stalling/planking rule

this one should give jigglypuff a significant boost as she has the safest stalling tactics in the game. these rules are pretty much solely because of her

my conclusion is that every tier list should begin with its god tier as follows: Fox, Falco, Jigglypuff. these are the definite top 3. Falco's/Jigglypuff's placements are more interchangeable than Fox who is definitely the best character. i side with Falco over Jigglypuff because of all the stages banned due to excessive camping possibilities on them in which Falco is just broken.

if the smash tier list is what it's supposed to be; a representation of each character's potential under the current official ruleset then rules established to make certain characters less broken should take precedence before anything. how can Falco or Jigglypuff even be considered better than a character that has 10+ stages banned just because of him? how can Jigglypuff be considered better than Falco, who (along with Fox) has had numerous stages banned because of him? how can any character other than these 3 be considered in the ranks of these 3, who have almost single-handedly been the reason for the aforementioned rules?

tl;dr, God Tier is Fox, then Falco, then Jigglypuff

just making sure nobody forgets these things when envisioning the tier list

 

[Smash G 0 D]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't the tier list be based off of the game created after those restrictions have been put in place? That's what we've been doing all these years with the "No Items" rule, so why should it be any different for the stages banned?

I mean, I see what you're saying, they're so good that they CREATED the game that we have now, and I'm not disagreeing with them being way high on the tier list. But I wouldn't put them that high on the tier list because of things that are banned. I'd put them there because they're good in the game we've created based off of the restrictions in place.
Unless you're talking about how they're on such a level above everyone else that we've restricted them to the point where it's "fair," but they're still the best.

I'm just trying to see the point in all of that, besides it being an interesting point to think about (which it is!).

 

[AXE 09]

I feel like a noob for asking this, but... Pretty much the same question in the thread title: How are tier lists actually determined?

I've heard that the characters are ranked based on tournament placings, and I've also heard that they're based on character vs character matchup ratios. Well... what exactly is it?

 

[Smash G 0 D]

Definition from smashwiki: A tier list is a ranking of each character's metagame, based on tournament settings. It indicates how professional smashers expect each character to be able to perform under tournament conditions. Tiers thus measure the potential of each character based on all currently known techniques and strategies that have been shown to be useful in tournaments. Tier lists are common in fighting games as well as many other competitive games involving a large selection of characters, such as Pokémon.


Although I question it... due to the fact that it says "except" instead of "accept."

I'm pretty sure it's based off of how well characters would do in a tournament at the top/current of their metagame, theoretically. It isn't based off of tournament placings because then there wouldn't be any discussion to begin with - placings are facts.

This sounds better: "a character's competitive value in the current metagame"

 

[AXE 09]

Although I question it... due to the fact that it says "except" instead of "accept."

Just wanted to point out that it says "expect" not "except"

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I'm still a little confused, but I don't think there can be a more accurate description than the one you posted from the wikki

 

[Smash G 0 D]

LOL thanks, I CLEARLY can't read.

Sorry, it's been a long day. >__<

 

[Deleted member]

Tiers are generally determined when we take recent, relevant tournament placements and mix our own input as to how those characters will perform in the near future. Then we simply arrange them into a list. A tier list is, in essence, a "prediction" list as to how any given character will fare in a competitive setting. We naturally assume top level of play.

 

[Cactuar]

Tier lists are based on three factors.

Tournament performance, human potential vs current metagame, and unlimited potential.

They aren't balanced equally though. Tournament performance and current metagame are far more important in a tier list reflecting the characters as they stand now. Unlimited potential is important in a theorysmash tier list. (Fox is #1 bc of ubershinespam, current metagame is not at that point and likely won't be for a long while)

Basically what mow said. Lol.

 

[Hax]

the thing with items though is that they are a universal ban. they're banned because they're dumb and make the game less competitive for all characters alike, thus they cannot be applied to the tier list. on the other hand many stages which otherwise are not considered universally stupid (i.e. peach's castle) have been banned solely because of fox's wall infinites. corneria was banned because of fox/falco. fox/falco are broken on RC and it should be banned imo, just like pokefloats was. mute city was banned because of jiggs/peach. brinstar is probably gonna be banned because of jiggs/peach. these are examples that pertain to specific characters, which should say a lot about their tier placements.

the point of this topic is that people are overlooking stage bans, many of which are actually limitations placed on certain characters. that's why i hate to see people disregard this when writing up tier lists

 

[Cactuar]

I don't see why this would directly affect the tier list argument really... indirectly, it can affect tournament outcomes due to characters not having autowin stages and some tos not using our stage list, but we are basing the argument on how well they perform on the stages they have to play on, not how many stages are banned because of them.

 

[TheZhuKeeper]

I don't see why this would directly affect the tier list argument really... indirectly, it can affect tournament outcomes due to characters not having autowin stages and some tos not using our stage list, but we are basing the argument on how well they perform on the stages they have to play on, not how many stages are banned because of them.

Hax and I had a long conversation about tiers and stuff and that's basically the conclusion I came up with.


And now looking at my sig, I nominate ICG for backroom!

 

[Fly_Amanita]

The tier list should reflect the "game" we actually play, which doesn't include any of the stages that are banned because of Fox shenanigans. That Fox is ridiculous on Hyrule or whatever has no influence on his viability in the currently used rulesets.

 

[AXE 09]

*looks at Zhu's sig*
LOL!!! What!? I don't even understand what the... I don't... lol idk! ICG is so weird haha.

*ahem* Anyways, to sum it up, this is pretty much exactly what I think:

...We are basing the argument on how well they perform on the stages they have to play on, not how many stages are banned because of them.

 

[pockyD]

The tier list should reflect the "game" we actually play, which doesn't include any of the stages that are banned because of Fox shenanigans. That Fox is ridiculous on Hyrule or whatever has no influence on his viability in the currently used rulesets.

yep !

 

[Dogysamich]

Wow this topic again.

I keep tellin' people around here, I can't wait until pikas start winning tournaments and the tierlist has to change to put pika top tier.

Because that's how it's done around here.

 

[Skler]

Pika should be top tier anyways. I've had physical contact with N64 on more than one occasion. It's pretty obvious once you've done that.

 

[Dogysamich]

I mean there you go.

Pikas start winning tournaments, and it doesn't matter if the character gets chaingrabbed by a good bit of the game.

b.throw -> double agility gimps reign supreme.

 

[Zankoku]

Well, how often does Pikachu get chaingrabbed? How often do people get gimped by Pikachu? Since both lead to a stock, the comparison of those two numbers will show which one is a more dominant occurence.

 

[AXE 09]

So... If Mango wins Apex with Mario, does that mean that Mario will get boosted in tiers?

 

[Zankoku]

So... if M2K wins Apex, does that mean M2K's best in the world again?

 

[AXE 09]

You could've just given me a direct answer -_-

 

[Dogysamich]

So... If Mango wins Apex with Mario, does that mean that Mario will get boosted in tiers?

by the way tiers are made around here, either it'll be the start or the criteria is magically going to change. (cause i hope it's not THAT drastic of a change. I'd start flying around slapping people over that.)

It won't be

"mango's good with a mediocre character"

or

"mango's good at bad matchups"

no, it'd have to be

"mario is good character because we see a person winning tournaments with him." Cause honestly, you can't even say Mario is starting to win tournaments. That happens down here, it's called Green Mario. But there aren't 3 youtube channels, 5 threads, and a stream of people calling bs about it, so "it don't exist."

 

[Zankoku]

"mario is good character because we see a person winning tournaments with him." Cause honestly, you can't even say Mario is starting to win tournaments. That happens down here, it's called Green Mario. But there aren't 3 youtube channels, 5 threads, and a stream of people calling bs about it, so "it don't exist."

Tournament. As in singular. We didn't raise Jigglypuff in the tier list the first time Mango won a national, either.

 

[SwiftBass]

The tier list should reflect the "game" we actually play, which doesn't include any of the stages that are banned because of Fox shenanigans. That Fox is ridiculous on Hyrule or whatever has no influence on his viability in the currently used rulesets.

well put.


I'd also like to know of the stages that were banned on account of falco.

So... If Mango wins Apex with Mario, does that mean that Mario will get boosted in tiers?

good question. Probly not but will ppl start questioning mario's viability? hell yes. Even if he goes rly far, which I think theres a chance of it happening. I am more of a fan of "this guy is a good player" as opposed to "this guy found out something about the matchups lets rehash our view of the tier list" in this case because mango is no longer a "breakthrough" player its obvious that his skill level is far above the vast majority. Now if he was even remotely close to even with anyone else then I'd be more convinced of a statement like "this guy found out something about the matchups lets rehash our view of the tier list".

 

[Dogysamich]

Tournament. As in singular. We didn't raise Jigglypuff in the tier list the first time Mango won a national, either.

That's fine.

I'm still waiting to see all these other jiggs players that place well because this character is so good. I'm still waiting to see all the people who have a "pocket jiggs" cause the character is so easy~~ HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE WORDS POCKET JIGGS BEFORE?

I'm not trying to step on anybody's toes with this, it's just that it's literally "ok, two guys are doing good, there are a few more IN THE ENTIRE NATION who do above average. Character's got to be better than we think." For whatever reason, it can't be that this group of guys are good with medicore character.

I mean, you got one guy who's good with ganon, and plenty of other people who do good with ganon. Why isn't anybody screaming to move him? It's not like these ganons do bad.

good question. Probly not but will ppl start questioning mario's viability? hell yes. Even if he goes rly far, which I think theres a chance of it happening. I am more of a fan of "this guy is a good player" as opposed to "this guy found out something about the matchups lets rehash our view of the tier list" in this case because mango is no longer a "breakthrough" player its obvious that his skill level is far above the vast majority. Now if he was even remotely close to even with anyone else then I'd be more convinced of a statement like "this guy found out something about the matchups lets rehash our view of the tier list".

Yeah that's how it should be.

But lets be real for a second. If mango somehow pulls a favor from God himself and goes through an entire "WORLDWIDE TOURNAMENT" and wins WITH MARIO, people are going to believe that he somehow knows more than the likes of green mario, DJN, shroomed, dp's mario, etc etc. *refuses to make other game references*

And it's like, you can't FAULT people for wanting to believe that. As much as I want to, I can't fault people for it. It just makes no sense how many people look at it like that as opposed to "well maybe he's just that good."

...*rolls eyes* I dunno where I'm going with that, cause that's kinda going into another topic of "character validity", which is a hell of a lot more wide open than people tend to think in this game.

 

[Zankoku]

...Are you talking about the opinion of people back here, or the opinion of the community as a whole? I can't really tell any more, but last I checked I don't think the community as a whole writes the official tier list.

 

[Dogysamich]

Whichever one works for you.

Aren't the people back here part of the community?

 

[Zankoku]

Yeah, but we're the part that makes the tier list.

 

[Pink Reaper]

Isnt this just the theory vs results debate all over again?

Also didnt we decide a long time ago that Mango is an outlier player?

 

[Dogysamich]

Hmm. So a select group of individuals is superior to the collective whole?

Ok.

Isnt this just the theory vs results debate all over again?

Yeah we did. We not alot to debate a topic again?

 

[Zankoku]

Are you trying to misconstrue everything said to you on purpose, or is my English simply confusing to you?

No matter how much the masses might suddenly call for Mario being top tier if Mango somehow won Apex going only Mario, the masses aren't the ones with the direct say in how the direction of the tier list goes. It doesn't particularly matter whether the select group of individuals is "superior" or not (though in terms of making decisions I sure hope we are), and the audience's opinions may certainly influence ours, but there is absolutely no disputing that we are the only ones that are able to directly control which direction the tier list takes.

I think those of us that are back here are level-headed enough to not make swings in judgment based on single isolated events.

 

[KishPrime]

Dogy has a point. I think there is some overreaction surrounding the Jigglypuff and Marth tier placements, especially.

Ken and Azen leave Smash. Marth the character plummets in many people's minds from best character in the game to not even top tier.

Mango enters Smash and wins tournament with Jigglypuff. Jigglypuff the character skyrockets in many people's minds from second tier to best in the game.

We had high-placing Jigglypuffs for a long time. KillaOR, King, Zulu and myself all placed Top 20 at national tournaments, with the occasional regional tournament victory. I'm sure there are Marth players with the same kind of record now despite his drop in some players' minds. The key with tier lists is to accurately evaluate the character's potential separate from the players. Did Mango and Ken make paradigm shifts in their character metagames, or were they just exceptional players?

Well, the truth is probably that there was a little of both. Before Mango, no one had proven that Jigglypuff had the skillset and options necessary to win tournaments. When I watch Mango play, I don't see him doing much different from the stuff we used to do, but I see him doing it better. There's nothing wrong with that, and it still represents a change in the character's potential.

I guess the lesson I'm trying to communicate is to not go crazy based on one or two people carrying the water for a character. Just because Chu Dat got second at every national tournament for a year (I think he won one too) didn't make us put Ice Climbers in second place on the tier list, even though there were several IC players in the 25-50 range at nationals. Just because some players are exceptionally good at using what their character brings to the table, doesn't always change what the characters are actually bringing to the table.

Ken, Azen, and Mango were all game-changers. They were elite to the point where they redefined the potential of the game for one or two characters, and all could win tournaments using multiple characters. There are less than 10 players I could rattle off in that category in the history of the game.

I do think Jigglypuff in top tier is justified, by the way, because she moved into the "national tournament winner" class of character. The potential rose. I just think it's silly for people to assume she's the best in the game simply because one person is winning tournaments with her. Look at the Evo results and see how few champions actually play the best characters in their game. I'm curious what will happen to Zangief in the tiers for HDRemix, since he was at the bottom and just won Evo. I have a feeling he won't be automatically promoted to the top.

 

[pockyD]

i think hungrybox has had a far bigger impact on public perception on jigglypuff than mango has

 

[KishPrime]

Well that's fine. That's just my disconnectedness talking. My point relative to the topic title still stands - don't take players who would still be elite playing other characters and apply their talent to the character when making tier evaluations. And then, when they retire, don't automatically devalue the character.

 

[Dogysamich]

Are you trying to misconstrue everything said to you on purpose, or is my English simply confusing to you?

I think those of us that are back here are level-headed enough to not make swings in judgment based on single isolated events.

Wait what.

You're english confusing me?

How bout i requote you quoting me, and see how you drop letters, shove words down my mouth, and try to make me sound like I've got no **** sense.

Tournament. As in singular. We didn't raise Jigglypuff in the tier list the first time Mango won a national, either.

"mario is good character because we see a person winning tournaments with him." Cause honestly, you can't even say Mario is starting to win tournaments. That happens down here, it's called Green Mario. But there aren't 3 youtube channels, 5 threads, and a stream of people calling bs about it, so "it don't exist."

I was nice enough to let it slide, but I mean you keep taking shots at me when you straight up QUOTED ME and then wanna twist it around.

I mean, if you take that part like you did, I guess you could pin that on me, but if you'd READ THE WHOLE POST, WHERE I OPENED WITH IT WILL BE THE START, THEN I DON'T THINK I SHOULD HAVE TO GO ANY LOWER THAN THAT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT IM TALKING PLURAL, FUTURE, AS IN NOT APEX.

I'm sorry I didn't correct that immediately in the "room of intelligent posters." That's my fault. Next time I'll just continue to keep my non-gang-mentality opinion to myself. Inspite of the fact that somebody ALWAYS gets what I'm talking about, even if somebody else CLEARLY MISSES THE POINT.

I mean there you go.

Pikas start winning tournaments, and it doesn't matter if the character gets chaingrabbed by a good bit of the game.

b.throw -> double agility gimps reign supreme.

So if you want to throw that "intelligence" out the window and take straight shots at me cause I don't agree with you, you might want to double check and make you can atleast QUOTE ME, AND THEN ATTACK ME PROPERLY.

I can safely say I didn't get accepted in here because I roll over and agree with what people say and do for no reason.
​

 

[Zankoku]

Sorry for missing **** to the point that you'd throw everything I wronged you in at me. On the bright side, now I know.

I was nice enough to let it slide, but I mean you keep taking shots at me when you straight up QUOTED ME and then wanna twist it around.

I do not "take shots" at people I don't know. I'm not really familiar with you, except for being "that guy with the green text who isn't Omni." Admittedly my tone's rather dry and I might sound absurdly rude, but unless I explicitly hate you rest assured that I'm not actually trying to mess with ya. I was, however, wondering where the hell you were getting at with your point, since it didn't seem quite right to me.

Next time I'll just continue to keep my non-gang-mentality opinion to myself.

Seriously? I'm sure all of us, or at least a lot of us, are with you on the hopes that we don't all just bend to the whims of the masses when building a tier list proper. I'm not trying to attack you on that, but rather your seeming implication that we would, in fact, just raise Mario 'cause the community said he should go up. If that's not a point you were trying to make, then sorry, I misread something and it snowballed from there.

Wait what.

You're english confusing me?

How bout i requote you quoting me, and see how you drop letters, shove words down my mouth, and try to make me sound like I've got no **** sense.

My English can be confusing. I sometimes write things more complicated than they have to be 'cause I like typing. And not revising. That said, I made that post because I felt we were either not on the same page or you were trolling me hard.

 

[Dogysamich]

*handshake*

That's all my fault, then. We weren't on the same page and I took it the wrong way.

I read that as you trying me I do tend to not agree with stuff.

My bad.

 

[Tero.]

Dogy has a point. I think there is some overreaction surrounding the Jigglypuff and Marth tier placements, especially.

Ken and Azen leave Smash. Marth the character plummets in many people's minds from best character in the game to not even top tier.

Mango enters Smash and wins tournament with Jigglypuff. Jigglypuff the character skyrockets in many people's minds from second tier to best in the game.

We had high-placing Jigglypuffs for a long time. KillaOR, King, Zulu and myself all placed Top 20 at national tournaments, with the occasional regional tournament victory. I'm sure there are Marth players with the same kind of record now despite his drop in some players' minds. The key with tier lists is to accurately evaluate the character's potential separate from the players. Did Mango and Ken make paradigm shifts in their character metagames, or were they just exceptional players?

Well, the truth is probably that there was a little of both. Before Mango, no one had proven that Jigglypuff had the skillset and options necessary to win tournaments. When I watch Mango play, I don't see him doing much different from the stuff we used to do, but I see him doing it better. There's nothing wrong with that, and it still represents a change in the character's potential.

I guess the lesson I'm trying to communicate is to not go crazy based on one or two people carrying the water for a character. Just because Chu Dat got second at every national tournament for a year (I think he won one too) didn't make us put Ice Climbers in second place on the tier list, even though there were several IC players in the 25-50 range at nationals. Just because some players are exceptionally good at using what their character brings to the table, doesn't always change what the characters are actually bringing to the table.

Ken, Azen, and Mango were all game-changers. They were elite to the point where they redefined the potential of the game for one or two characters, and all could win tournaments using multiple characters. There are less than 10 players I could rattle off in that category in the history of the game.

I do think Jigglypuff in top tier is justified, by the way, because she moved into the "national tournament winner" class of character. The potential rose. I just think it's silly for people to assume she's the best in the game simply because one person is winning tournaments with her. Look at the Evo results and see how few champions actually play the best characters in their game. I'm curious what will happen to Zangief in the tiers for HDRemix, since he was at the bottom and just won Evo. I have a feeling he won't be automatically promoted to the top.

I haven't read such a good post on smashboards in a very long time.
GG, sir.
GG.

 

[g-regulate]

Yea nice post KP, lots of good posts in this thread (except ankoku and Dogy...... and this one)

 

[KishPrime]

Nice post, G-reg.

Man, I miss Smashers.