---
Hello everyone! Sunday means it’s time for Mind Over Meta! We hope you are all having a happy holiday season. Accordingly, it sees like the Project M community got an amazing Christmas present a few days ago: an official PM Underground Tier List! So this seems like an appropriate time to talk about the thing that encapsulates the whole meta itself, a thing that dozens of people spend hours talking about, and a thing that is almost always subject to contention and misunderstanding. This week, let’s talk about tier lists.
The Sacred List
For those who might be confused, tier lists in games, usually fighting games, are just an ordered list of characters in the game, organized by competitive strength or viability at the theoretical topmost levels of competition. How straightforward!
So why do simple tier lists tend to draw such hot controversy, even knee jerk reactions? To understand this fact, we need to discuss some facets of a tier list that go into the final result.
To start, tier lists are made by someone. Usually, they’re put together through discussion and/or voting among a panel, whether the panel is a small as one or two people or as large as a whole community. Hence, it inherently takes in the biases of list makers. These biases range in size and scope, and can come a lot of sources, like from grudges against particularly tough matchups for particular players or from the performances of tyrannically dominant local players. Therefore tier lists between people, and even over time, are subject to variation. Even if some absolute metric is used to create a tier list, like tournament results and only tournament results, that still represents a bias in the choice to rank characters according to the people who play them indirectly.
That said, these biases do not invalidate tier lists as a concept. Theoretically, there is an objectively correct list somewhere in the fog, and by refining and balancing our subjective opinions between tournament results, matchup information, and other opinions, we can successively, maybe asymptotically, approach that correct list.
The recent PM Underground tier list was created through collaboration among an international (but mainly USA-focused) panel of analysts and opinions. Each participant ranked all of the 41 characters in the game independently, and the results were combined to give an aggregate rank for each character. Why go to all this trouble making a tier list? Is it even worthwhile?
Some More Equal Than Others
Project M’s biggest selling point as a Smash title has, for a very long time, been its incredible balance. All characters are specifically designed to potentially to excel in 1-on-1 bouts on most of the front-page stages of the stage select screen. In every other Smash title aside from Smash 64, certainly less than 15 characters are considered even viable for tournament play (and even in Smash 64, some characters still suffer tremendously!). Only a masochist would pick Roy in Melee, or Zelda in Brawl, or Jigglypuff in Smash 4 during a tournament. Contrast this with Project M, where not a single character is said to be impossible to perform well with in general.
But if Project M’s character list is perfectly balanced, is a tier list useless? Probably. But the unfortunate reality (from some perspectives) is that PM’s character balance is not perfect. Several characters, like Bowser or Dedede, are commonly said to suffer tragically from glaring flaws. Meanwhile other characters, like Fox or ROB, are believed to be exceptionally good, and consequently enjoy a dominant position in the meta. Matchups play a huge part in determining the relative viabilities of characters. That said, the balance in Project M is still much closer to that of other Smash games; Bowser can perfectly well pick a fight against the top characters and isn’t effectively doomed at the outset, unlike in Melee or Brawl. To gauge exactly how difficult these certain matchups really are, a tier list comes in handy as a summarizing tool.
Then what factors are important to consider when building a tier list? Let’s consult Bowser wizard and community contributor Odds, from a post some weeks ago:
“[Broad matchup skew] should be the single most important factor [in my opinion].”
Broad matchup skew (i.e., the percentage of favorable matchups, and by how much, across the entire cast of characters) is the paramount consideration in tier lists because tier lists are meant as a summary of viability against the cast. On the other hand, certain characters may have particularly good matchups, but not all characters are equally popular; conversely, other characters may suffer against extremely common characters. Does this factor into tier lists? Odds has us covered:
“If a character has one or two very bad matchups but they're extremely rare or bad characters, that's not such an awful situation- but if those one or two terrible matchups are extremely common threats, they become a much more significant factor (IMO) in determining a character's relative power level. Melee Jigglypuff has pretty good MUs against the entire cast except Fox - but that single matchup, by virtue of being so extremely awful and common (Fox players make up nearly half of all Melee players iirc) plummets her power level.”
The presence or dormancy of serious threats against one’s particular character, threats that could even force one to switch to a secondary in tournament brackets, are a large factor in determining viability of individual characters. For example, Olimar allegedly wins out against Captain Falcon, but most Captain Falcon players aren’t worried; Olimar is somewhat rare to see in tournaments to begin with.
Odds also comments on the level of commitment a character requires for good play, and how that affects viability:
“[Technical ceiling is] not nearly as important as technical floor. I'm with Zero in that I think it's much more important to practice things that you know you can get consistently, 99+% of the time, rather than extremely technical stuff that may give you a slight edge but has a higher probability of messing you up. Pikachu is a great example of this: 20XX Pikachu is a completely insane character, but playing him to that level requires the Pika player to regularly, consistently risk death by betting on his ability to consistently nail extremely precise inputs. It's not worth it; so I try to evaluate Pikachu at a level slightly below that.”
The amount of work required to control a character ends up making a character hard, or inaccessible, to new players. The more moving parts your character requires in the form of technical precision and high-octane inputs, the more liable you are to messing up in tournament. Melee legend C9|Mang0 understands this phenomenon well, once referring to Fox and Falco as “the rockstars who overdose and ruin themselves.” Sheik, Marth, and Captain Falcon are generally considered far more manageable characters to control effectively in Melee. Hence, characters with huge potential but a challenging skill floor to play competitively in brackets may simply not have been developed as of yet to the level of sheer consistency required to reach the top echelon of play. Odds’s insight here is incisive.
However, Odds makes an interesting comment further on regarding how tournament results ought to play into tier lists:
“[Tournament results are] Irrelevant, or should be. Tournament results are a great metric to determine who's currently winning at the game, but everyone is so ****ing bad at it right now that I don't think these are particularly meaningful in and of themselves.”
I think this could be a somewhat controversial claim. I believe Odds’s intention here is to say that an absolute tier list should be independent of what kinds of performances people have at just this point in time, and should instead reflect a permanent, objective list of viabilities.
Here, I think I can understand this sentiment and disagree with it. While pursuit of the “true” tier list is the ultimate goal in generating tier lists now, we are not yet able to discover it by virtue of not yet developing the metagame fully in tournaments, and we haven’t explored the complete theoretical potential of different characters. It is difficult to base a tier list purely off of theory, because matchups are not yet explored enough to have developed a solid theory behind them. Tournament results confirm or challenge the current theory behind our matchups, and hence require some consideration in tier lists.
At the same time, however, to centralize tier lists on tournament results is absolutely folly. As Odds notes, players and the metagame are not at a stable point; we have just barely begun exploring the game, especially with the gold version of Project M having only existed for a short time so far. What players could potentially do, even in this metagame, is independent of what they actually achieve in brackets. Tournament results are more likely to reflect character popularity than real potential, as the sheer volume of e.g. Roy and Falco players might cause results to over- or under-rate the characters’ actual potential.
Whatever way tier lists may develop, they are influential. Characters labeled “low tier” are often doomed to mediocrity forever in most Smash games. As players enter the game, they focus on characters near the top; they have to to stay competitive. Consequently, the characters at the top receive elaborate metagame development while the others putter around in the Pools sections of tournament brackets. Who even remembers that Kirby is a character in Melee? I think that one inevitable consequence of developing a tier list is that characters already considered great will continue to gain popularity and become further fleshed out. On the other hand, it’s entirely probable for so-called “low-tier heroes” to brave the storm and find glory in turning heads with a character that is generally considered bad! In Melee, aMSa and Eddy Mexico have already accomplished this, to name just a few, and have inspired others to follow.
My point in discussing all this hoopla is that while tier lists are a very simple concept, it is deceptively complex to actually compose one accurately. Expressing your disagreement with tier lists that you see for the Project M meta is appropriate and encouraged. But disagreers are expected to be respectful and aware of the considerations that go into a tier list, and points ought to be backed up with something. Then, once the inner machinery of the tier list is understood, it is easier to extract and extrapolate meaning or points of contention from the list.
Anatomy of a Tier List
With PMU’s official tier list newly available, I think it may be timely to point out some general trends and features visible in it, particularly for the benefit of players that are newer to the Project M scene and not as familiar with its cast. I won’t detail every character, or contest the list in any way, but I want to try to characterize tiers in terms of broad generalizations, to help give you a sense of what these tiers indicate and what they may mean for the metagame.
The Official PM Underground Tier List
The first feature to note is the labeling on the lefthand side. Where most tier lists in various games scale their tier labels between something like “SS” and “D” or “F”, indicating that the top most characters are extremely good while the bottom are almost unplayable, this tier list scales only from “Exceptional” to “Viable,” reflecting the relatively close balance that has gone into Project M’s development. It indicates that even the bottom-most characters, with good training and persistence, can storm tournaments with force, so don’t be discouraged or overwhelmed!
(As an aside, I propose a fun renaming of tiers because there are four of them in this PM tier list, which you’ll see below)
Ace of Diamonds
Starting at the top, Fox in the number one spot is, to almost everyone, not a surprise. With a frame-one combo-pressure move and escape tool, a long distance projectile, and a meaty combo game with multiple fast kill moves, I believe Fox has earned his spot at the head of the list. The other characters in the Exceptional tier tend to have very high mobility with great guaranteed combos as well as a generally above average neutral game. ROB, Wario, and Falcon sail through the air with ease to continue follow ups. Metaknight, Marth, and Diddy Kong play fantastic grounded games with superb dash dancing and easy capitalization on punishes, as well as superior edgeguarding abilities. Meanwhile, Lucario, Wolf, Falco, Game n Watch, and Sheik all have above average combo ability, with many guaranteed or almost guaranteed strings. The one common weakness many of these characters may share is a subpar recovery, and even then, not by much. The combination of amazing movement with great combos has landed almost the entirety of the Melee Top Tier Crew, as well as Brawl characters with a very similar design in terms of mobility and combo/edgeguard prowess, into PM’s top tier. For the most part, these folks are jacks of all trades, and can adapt very easily to most or all situations.
King of Hearts
The Significant tier largely consists of characters with more polarized weaknesses, or who rely on some particular, perhaps “gimmicky,” aspects of their game to a large degree, which can be consistently countered with proper matchup knowledge. Mewtwo likely falls short of top tier on the basis of requiring precise control and fast, technical hover-cancel tricks, abilities that players have not yet exploited to the fullest (an issue, which Odds noted earlier!). Significant tier characters all have solid combo games and/or amazing projectiles, as well as generally above average movement, and they even have generally decent recoveries on average… sans the four tether characters’ tether recoveries, which leave them vulnerable to punishment should a savvy opponent steal the ledge. The tether may even be what bars these four from top tier. Generally, the Significant tier’s incredible acrobatics and very solid combo game, reversal game, and projectiles might well secure them a spot among the top in future, if players learn to use their fundamentals and their character’s idiosyncratic strengths to buffer their character’s noticeable weaknesses.
Characters in Significant tier tend to have great mobility, or fast combos, or strong punish game, or consistent recoveries, but severely lack in one of those areas. This makes them generally more polarized or extremized than top tier. In general, combos and recoveries are simply not as consistent as most of the top tier’s, so these characters work harder for the same rewards. For example, Roy and Ike suffer from predictable recoveries, despite being high powered hitters with good mobility (in the form of dash dancing and quick draw, respectively). Mario’s overall averageness, with an OK recovery, lots of consistent guaranteed combos into kill moves, and reasonable frame data with typical weaknesses in being comboed and edgeguarded seems appropriate for Significant tier.
Queen of Spades
The Competitive tier houses many of the more extremized characters. This is where many of the most polarized characters congregate. For example, characters with huge mobility but severe weaknesses, or with a prominent technical floor live here, like Squirtle, Ness, and Ice Climbers. The technical-floor-problem that Odds pointed out becomes a very real barrier to progress in Competitive tier; the only relevant top level Ice Climbers players to my knowledge, for example, are Phresh and Hylian, and I don’t really know if Hylian still plays Ice Climbers. Competitive-tier characters usually excel at only one or two parts of the game, and about half of them have weak neutral games compared to Significant tier. Ganondorf’s punish game, for example, is often considered one of the best in the game, but his slow ground speed and reliance on capitalizing upon the opponent’s mistakes instead of forcing them himself, combined with a lackluster recovery, likely confined him low in Competitive tier.
Many of the characters in Competitive tier have incredible potential to win tournaments, but are held back by development of precision or control. In time, these restrictions will fade as players get better and push their boundaries more, particularly by utilizing the full spectrum of Project M techniques. For example, Luigi players have barely tapped the wavescuttle, a largely Luigi-specific technique that certainly takes practice and precision to master, but which could fundamentally refocus Luigi’s approaches, safety, and pressure, making him even harder to catch on the ground than he is already. Ness’s technical ceiling is not yet discovered, Ganondorf users are just beginning to push the boundaries of mobility with perfect wavelands and aerial float shifting techniques, the list goes on. Still, it is unlikely that most of Competitive tier’s characters ever rise to top tier except perhaps Squirtle (what with his immensely freeing but difficult-to-tame movement), by virtue of being sorely underwhelming in at least two or more fundamental aspects of the game.
Jack of Clubs
The Viable tier is a nest for nearly all of the “fatty” characters, save Ganondorf, Snake, and (arguably) Wario, and the average speed here is lethargic compared to the upper tiers. Characters here have still not pushed their technical boundaries to the limit, but for some of them the general realm of the boundaries looks clear; players of certain characters here know what they need to continue developing for improved success, but for the most part it focuses on depth of perfection rather than breadth of new possibilities, restricted by a closed gate of advanced techniques and some lacking frame data. Bowser, and Dedede come to mind under this description. Characters’ neutral games here are generally either average or fairly poor with only a few exceptions, meaning defensive but extensive punishments against cheeky opponents feel a greater emphasis than opening up offensive opportunities, like much of the upper tiers are accustomed to doing. For some characters like DK or Olimar, whose stupefying dash dance and devilishly deceptive range respectively give them powerful tools in the neutral game, approaching and retreating is not so trying. For slow characters like Zelda and Bowser, however, mobility and constant movement options are often a struggle, and hence they must use their amazing defensive, reactive play to a much greater degree than players up at the top.
Most of Viable tier is characterized by attacks with intimidating ranges or damage output. Jigglypuff’s and Kirby’s back-airs, Zelda’s aerials and Din’s Fire, Dedede’s and Charizard’s tilts, Yoshi’s tricky smash attacks, and Bowser’s smashes all exemplify this use of range and damage. While these are certainly boons to have, it’s usually a partial compensation for obvious weaknesses, like poor recovery, easy combo vulnerability, or light and floaty weight classes that make for early KOs. A few of the characters here have decent advantages and great potential if players can learn to control them better, much akin to heroes of Competitive tier, like Olimar and Pit. A world where Olimars can perfectly control their Pikmin and quickly overwhelm opponents is terrifying (trust me, just a taste of triple-purple destroyed me without second thought in a tournament match!)! And Pit’s nerfs from the PM Demo 3.0 era aren’t enough to hold the angel to the ground for long before players reinvent and rediscover his combos and follow ups, and exploit arrows to their fullest. I would not be surprised if these two characters, for example, rise higher over successive tier lists when their real position as competitors unfolds. Over time, I foresee a merging of the majority of Competitive tier and Viable tier when the gaps between them close. However, at this point in time, between lack of development and a largely hostile metagame among the upper tiers, the characters in Viable tier have their work sorely cut out for them to continue living up to their name. Not by any means impossible or impractical, but a challenge! Don’t take them lightly!
Driven to Tiers
The story I’ve spun here is one that is very uplifting for Fox, Diddy, and their friends, and seems pretty depressing for the likes of Bowser and Donkey Kong. Climbing a ladder so many rungs is daunting, no doubt. Conversely, the top of the ladder feels pretty cozy.
I want to emphasize, though, that the tier list is an entirely theoretical tool. Any top tier player can beat, and in turn lose against, any low tier player. The overwhelming factor in success is not what the tier list tells you, or what anyone else tells you; success is from yourself, and the tier list just gives some general guidelines. That characters can so dominantly win out in even the most lopsided tier jumps in Project M speaks to PM’s amazing attention to balance and competitive detail.
In Melee, fighting Sheik as Bowser is a 0-100 matchup; it is literally almost impossible to win. In Project M, it is said that the matchup is only, say, 30-70. Difficult, but doable. Players commonly say that 70-30 is the worst any individual matchup skew can be in Project M. Then if this matchup is winnable, any match you play is winnable from any side, with cunning and wit and proper preparation, regardless of whatever a dumb tier list says. The tier list is an estimate, not a prophecy.
We hope this week’s Mind Over Meta has been informative and helpful in understanding both what a tier list means, and what it implies for you as a player. I wish you luck in all your tournaments, whichever characters you choose to play! We’ll see you next week.
Take care,
-- The Mind Over Meta Team
---
