Matchup Chart/Tier List Discussion

Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#1
Major topics of discussion

Incorporation of Stage Strikes? or Split List? (Hyrule/Dreamland-style) Consensus appears to be 2-list
Kirby > Fox?
Fox in SS or S? Consensus is S
Link/Luigi positioning?
Ness/Jiggs positioning?

Current Tier List (inclusive of all stages)


SS Tier
(1)Pikachu

S Tier
(2)Fox
(3)Kirby


A Tier
(4)Falcon
(5)Mario


B Tier
(6)Yoshi
(7)DK
(8)Ness
(9)Jigglypuff


C Tier
(10)Link
(11)Luigi
(12)Samus

i swear, teh icy does not know how to format efficiently
 

SuPeRbOoM

Smash Master
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
4,509
Location
Edmonton, Alberta
#2
I think we really need to redo samus matchups. I feel that she is underrated on dreamland/congo. Setups and spacing becomes a ton easier due to opponents being trapped into risky situations much more often than Hyrule.

But I guess that's for when we get to Samus.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#3
can i assume that you would prefer a 2-list format

it's pretty odd to do tier lists by stage, don't think any competitive fighter/pseudo-fighter has ever done it before, but it makes a lot of sense here and we can afford it
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
5,534
Location
disproving determinism
#4
can i assume that you would prefer a 2-list format

it's pretty odd to do tier lists by stage, don't think any competitive fighter/pseudo-fighter has ever done it before, but it makes a lot of sense here and we can afford it
Uh, that's because no other fighter has stages besides the other smash bros games ...

Can anybody justify to me why Mario is better than Falcon? That seems so wrong to me.
Mario is good on Dreamland because recovery is really important there. He can gimp Fox/Falcon all day in particular. He's probably not as good as they are at pwning low tiers though.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
9,681
#5
can i assume that you would prefer a 2-list format

it's pretty odd to do tier lists by stage, don't think any competitive fighter/pseudo-fighter has ever done it before, but it makes a lot of sense here and we can afford it
Meh

Let's just make a normal tier list, where it takes all legal stages into account.

Mario is good on Dreamland because recovery is really important there. He can gimp Fox/Falcon all day in particular. He's probably not as good as they are at pwning low tiers though.
Falcon is better on Dreamland. Falcon can gimp too.

That's not nearly enough for me.
 

Mahie

Smash Lord
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
1,067
Location
Lille, France
#6
Falcon is better on Dreamland. Falcon can gimp too.
Mario > Falcon and Fox on DL, and does much better than Falcon against Kirby there.
They both can handle mid and lows pretty well, they're kind of evened out when it comes to that.
Therefore I think Mario is better than Falcon on DL.

I'm really not sure about Fox and Kirby. They deserve their own tiers, but who's above the other is not quite clear to me. Something in me wants to say Kirby should be higher than Fox but... I don't know.

EDIT: Oh and by the way, having one match-up Chart for each stage is better than having multiple tiers lists. We should only have one.
 

SilentSlayers

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
328
#7
I'm OK with Mario being above Falcon to be honest. As for kirby versus fox, holy crap it's close. I'm kind of leaning on fox. Also Mario can gimp via edgeguard very well, falcon can gimp via combos very well. Mario's grab on DL is so good for easy edgeguard. Also I agree with boom's initial post, especially with regards to dreamland. You might not like this example, but Jousuke (Samus) against... was it tatuman's Kirby? Pretty strong samus showings there. Getting a bair on DL is just so strong, and Samus' recovery is pretty dang good on DL against many characters.
 

dandan

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
1,373
#8
i also tend to agree to the mario>falcon notion. more-so because of his projectiles. and effective mario using his fireballs can close out so much space and:
a) make easy approaches (fireball jab grab on dreamland is a killer)
b) force the fight to be were he wants

falcon has no such tools and sometimes is forced to fight at the wrong places for him. this is a bit negated on dreamland, just because falcon is so good there and pretty much the whole stage is good for him, but can be seen more clearly on hyrule imo.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
5,024
Location
San Francisco
#9
I'm just wondering 2 things.

1. Doesn't it make more sense to create a tier list based off of the matchup chart we are working on? It seems like a much more concrete basis for it.

2. Why are the tiers SS, S, A, B, C instead of S, A, B, C, D?
 

Mahie

Smash Lord
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
1,067
Location
Lille, France
#10
Because it makes it feel like the characters in SS are really strong, instead of the characters in D being very weak, which is kind of the case.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
9,681
#11
Mario > Falcon and Fox on DL, and does much better than Falcon against Kirby there.
They both can handle mid and lows pretty well, they're kind of evened out when it comes to that.
Therefore I think Mario is better than Falcon on DL.
Falcon goes evenish against Mario on DL IMO. I think Mario is quite overrated in that match-up in general. I don't think Mario does that much better than Falcon does against Fox on DL. I definitely agree that Mario handles Kirby better.

You're ignoring an extremely important match-up: Pikachu. Falcon has possibly the closest-to-even overall match-up against Pikachu, while Mario gets beaten quite badly IMO.
 

KoRoBeNiKi

Smash Hero
Writing Team
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
5,950
Location
Northern NJ, 15 minutes from the GW or Manhattan
#13
I would personally group the S and A tier together to form a high tier as I believe that these 4 characters are at a level significantly higher than the next group.

Maybe its bias, but in my opinion, Luigi might be worse than Samus in SSB. I also believe possibly (for maybe a similar bias) that Jigglypuff due to bad matchups is more of a C tier character and Link might be better (as in switching 9/10 and 11/12)
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
5,534
Location
disproving determinism
#14
Surprised you all think Fox is better against Mario than against Falcon on DL ... it's so easy to gimp and combo Falcon. Mario gimps Fox really well on DL so his punishment is almost as good as Falcon.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
5,024
Location
San Francisco
#15
I think this discussion is extremely silly. As I said before, we should stop using qualitative arguments and let the matchup chart speak for itself. Use the formula used by Icy or make a new one, I don't care, but you need some kind of mathematical basis or else it is impossible to justify the accuracy of a tier list.

And I do think that tiers should be S, A, B, C, D. Yes, D implies a character is weak, but they ARE weak compared to the S and A tier. Using SS, S, A, B, C is just inflating the strength of all characters.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
2,366
Location
Northern VA, USA
#16
I think this discussion is extremely silly. As I said before, we should stop using qualitative arguments and let the matchup chart speak for itself. Use the formula used by Icy or make a new one, I don't care, but you need some kind of mathematical basis or else it is impossible to justify the accuracy of a tier list.

And I do think that tiers should be S, A, B, C, D. Yes, D implies a character is weak, but they ARE weak compared to the S and A tier. Using SS, S, A, B, C is just inflating the strength of all characters.
Everything he said.

Icy's methodology was just fine. The only thing that may need to be altered is how we rank specific match-ups, which is exactly what's being discussed in other threads.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
5,534
Location
disproving determinism
#17
I think this discussion is extremely silly. As I said before, we should stop using qualitative arguments and let the matchup chart speak for itself. Use the formula used by Icy or make a new one, I don't care, but you need some kind of mathematical basis or else it is impossible to justify the accuracy of a tier list.

And I do think that tiers should be S, A, B, C, D. Yes, D implies a character is weak, but they ARE weak compared to the S and A tier. Using SS, S, A, B, C is just inflating the strength of all characters.
Uh, but the matchup chart is determined by qualitative arguments ...

Not saying it's a bad idea, just pointing that out.


The other problem with a matchup chart is stage variation ... it will take a while to do a chart for Hyrule/DL/Congo
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
5,024
Location
San Francisco
#18
That is true, but it's better than what we have going on here with people saying character A should be higher than character B because of xyz matchup. If the matchup actually makes the difference in the rankings the formula will tell us.

I also think that we should consider all matchups as a whole rather than dividing them up by stage.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
5,534
Location
disproving determinism
#19
But what about a matchup like (IMO) Fox vs Mario:

I'd put it at 60:40 Fox on Hyrule and 60:40 Mario on DL. So should this be 50:50 in the Matchup Chart? What about Congo?

If you ask me what I think about this matchup, I'll ask you what stage. How can I give a verdict without knowing that piece of info?
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
5,024
Location
San Francisco
#22
For a matchup like that you have to think about how the set will play out. Mario will strike Hyrule so game 1 will be on a small stage. Personally I believe Fox vs. Mario is even on small stages but that's besides the point. Anyway, if Fox loses, he will pick Hyrule. Then if Mario loses, he gets to pick something bad for Fox like Peach's Castle. Even on Dreamland, Fox advantage on Hyrule, and Mario advantage on Peach's Castle (or any other counterpick) makes it a pretty even match overall.

The problem I have with separate lists per stage is only one variable really changes, which is the character's ability to recover and/or avoid getting gimped. Nothing else significant changes in most cases. Sets will always feature matches on good and bad stages for a particular character.

Furthermore, I think that some people have a flawed view of what a "fair" stage actually is. If anything, Hyrule's size is an outlier in the set of SSB 64 stages. The fact that so many stages in the legal list are small actually makes them normal and fair imo. Thus the fact that Fox becomes worse on small stages should be factored into the tier list.

And I still refuse to use matchup ratios.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
5,534
Location
disproving determinism
#24
I don't see what your point is, ballin. What's wrong with saying the match-up is 50:50?
I can't just instantly judge the matchup at 50:50. My first thought when you ask me: "what's the Fox Mario matchup?" is "well, it depends on stage". Then, if I have to figure out that it's 60/40 on one and 40/60 on the other, it loses info to say that it's just 50/50. You might as well make separate charts at that point.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#25
the matchup discussions seem to be giving separate ratio/advantage judgements based on stage

and it seems to be working

matchup charts for different stages can eventually be converted to tier lists for different stages, then you can have an overall tier list with averages (stress that it's less informative than the individual stage lists together)
 

Mahie

Smash Lord
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
1,067
Location
Lille, France
#26
I have one question regarding the Matchup threads. Is the goal just to give a ratio for each matchup, or are we supposed to make sorts of mini guides on how to approach the matchup ? It'd be much faster if all that was needed was ratios. We could then release one " Match-up" guide every once in a while, maybe on a weekly basis or something.
 

KoRoBeNiKi

Smash Hero
Writing Team
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
5,950
Location
Northern NJ, 15 minutes from the GW or Manhattan
#28
the matchup discussions seem to be giving separate ratio/advantage judgements based on stage

and it seems to be working

matchup charts for different stages can eventually be converted to tier lists for different stages, then you can have an overall tier list with averages (stress that it's less informative than the individual stage lists together)
Before I begin this post, I think our main issue will be discussing Congo jungle as it seems no one plays there. But anyway:

I find this idea would be the best idea as I find that the stage list changes (at least in some characters, i.e. Fox) matchups a lot. Let's discuss three separate tier lists based on the three neutrals based on matchup ratios. Once all three of them are made, a final tier list can be made overall:

This is how I would calculate each of them:
Make matchup ratios be equal to an amount.
70-30 is 7
65-35 is 6.5
60-40 is 6
and etc.

Add these numbers together at the end per character, divide by 11 (as we don't discuss dittos in matchup ratios so the amount of characters -1). This is the ratio per stage. Once all 3 stages are found, add the final averages divide by 3 (as there are 3 neutrals and 3 final ratios). This is the final matchup average and the final tier list value.
 

King Funk

Int. Croc. Alligator
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,972
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
#29
I have one question regarding the Matchup threads. Is the goal just to give a ratio for each matchup, or are we supposed to make sorts of mini guides on how to approach the matchup ? It'd be much faster if all that was needed was ratios. We could then release one " Match-up" guide every once in a while, maybe on a weekly basis or something.
What is underlined yes.

We're supposed to make sorts of mini guides on how to approach each and every single matchup in the game. That was the initial plan. I hope we don't distort that into something as meaningless as a matchup chart.

Here's what we offer to the community with each:
- mini guides on matchups -> tips for novice and intermediate players on how to play a matchup in all aspects, approach, move choice, combos, edgeguarding, recovering, stage use, etc.
- matchup chart -> "yo samus mains the matchup vs fox on hyrule is 20-80 glhf"

Think of what would help the community more please.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
9,681
#30
What else then ?
Before I begin this post, I think our main issue will be discussing Congo jungle as it seems no one plays there. But anyway:

I find this idea would be the best idea as I find that the stage list changes (at least in some characters, i.e. Fox) matchups a lot. Let's discuss three separate tier lists based on the three neutrals based on matchup ratios. Once all three of them are made, a final tier list can be made overall:

This is how I would calculate each of them:
Make matchup ratios be equal to an amount.
70-30 is 7
65-35 is 6.5
60-40 is 6
and etc.

Add these numbers together at the end per character, divide by 11 (as we don't discuss dittos in matchup ratios so the amount of characters -1). This is the ratio per stage. Once all 3 stages are found, add the final averages divide by 3 (as there are 3 neutrals and 3 final ratios). This is the final matchup average and the final tier list value.
For both of you: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=12138876&postcount=41

Mostly this for Koro:
I would remove the ratios out of the definitions altogether
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
5,534
Location
disproving determinism
#31
Before I begin this post, I think our main issue will be discussing Congo jungle as it seems no one plays there. But anyway:

I find this idea would be the best idea as I find that the stage list changes (at least in some characters, i.e. Fox) matchups a lot. Let's discuss three separate tier lists based on the three neutrals based on matchup ratios. Once all three of them are made, a final tier list can be made overall:

This is how I would calculate each of them:
Make matchup ratios be equal to an amount.
70-30 is 7
65-35 is 6.5
60-40 is 6
and etc.

Add these numbers together at the end per character, divide by 11 (as we don't discuss dittos in matchup ratios so the amount of characters -1). This is the ratio per stage. Once all 3 stages are found, add the final averages divide by 3 (as there are 3 neutrals and 3 final ratios). This is the final matchup average and the final tier list value.
This doesn't weight matchups on importance though.

Being good against Pika should probably count for more than being good against Samus.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#32
It should weigh in when we look at tier list construction.

Hence, add multipliers or arbitrary values (higher for pika, etc) into the formula, just like icy did. I personally have no issues with reusing his method, tweaking it a bit because we have Weak, Moderate and Strong Advantages/Disadvantages, whereas he only had << and <.
 

SilentSlayers

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
328
#33
What is underlined yes.

We're supposed to make sorts of mini guides on how to approach each and every single matchup in the game. That was the initial plan. I hope we don't distort that into something as meaningless as a matchup chart.

Here's what we offer to the community with each:
- mini guides on matchups -> tips for novice and intermediate players on how to play a matchup in all aspects, approach, move choice, combos, edgeguarding, recovering, stage use, etc.
- matchup chart -> "yo samus mains the matchup vs fox on hyrule is 20-80 glhf"

Think of what would help the community more please.
Good point; mini-guides would be a lot more meaningful for developing players.
 

Mahie

Smash Lord
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
1,067
Location
Lille, France
#34
I also think mini guides are better, but in my opinion we should focus on one thing at a time and mini guides for each and every match up will take a long time. We might want to first complete a match-up chart, then release guides on a weekly basis or something, with links to them directly on the match-up chart picture.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#35
the pika thread is being done with mini-guides

done up to yoshi

if people want we can have an overall matchup thread where every matchup is posted first, then we debate the matchups we find questionable

this will fast-track the tier list creation process, whereas we can put the miniguides up as a side project
 

Marc

Relic of the Past
GRimer
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
16,332
Location
The Netherlands
#36
I'd personally go with S, A, B, C, D and have S and A grouped together as "Top" if you feel they need to somehow belong together. With the Brawl tier list we always have to deal with Meta Knight having his own tier (like Pikachu here) and rather than go with SS and S, we went with S and A under the "Top" label.

Example:
Top: S, A
High: B
Mid: C
Low: D

Of course, I don't know how you perceive the tiers to function exactly.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#37
The D tier characters (Link Luigi Samus) aren't unplayable and have some decent matchups - I'd skew a number of their matchups with mid-tier as neutral or even advantageous (Luigi vs Puff, Samus vs Puff) - I'd prefer labelling Pika as overly good than Link Luigi Samus as overly bad, though this is just a perspective thing. I think I brought this up before as well with the old tier list >_<
 

Marc

Relic of the Past
GRimer
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
16,332
Location
The Netherlands
#38
It's always relative. Low tiers in one game can be a lot more viable than low tiers in the next and unlike Melee/Brawl, it seems like there will be no "bottom" tier.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
9,343
Location
Sayonara Memories
#39
Do people want to do a skeleton chart (a ratio/advantage description) for all the matchups and release it to appease the masses? I think that's an alright idea, but it'll require a lot of polishing before anything happens. Personally, I think any progress is better than none.

It can go alongside the first half of the Pika miniguides.
 
Top