Official 2010-2011 Super Smash Bros. Melee MBR Tier List

[otg]

This thread continues to go downhill.

 

[TheGoat]

The only logical way to have a match up chart is to do it based on opinion.

Anyways I think MBR is just trolling us.

 

[Strong Badam]

I've never seen an accurate tier list nor a legitimate explanation of every single placing. I personally don't give a **** what the MBR say. Anyone who matters has their own views of the complex competitive game that is Melee. People who take the MBR tier list as fact are admitting to themselves that SOMEHOW the characters have actually changed on the game disc since 2008, and are thus idiots.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

they havent changed on the disc, but the metagame doesn't exist on the disc.

 

[KAOSTAR]

I've never seen an accurate tier list nor a legitimate explanation of every single placing. I personally don't give a **** what the MBR say. Anyone who matters has their own views of the complex competitive game that is Melee. People who take the MBR tier list as fact are admitting to themselves that SOMEHOW the characters have actually changed on the game disc since 2008, and are thus idiots.

thats dumb.

it only means x person admits to having less valuable overall knowledge of the current metà game then a "consensus" of top players/posters.

or, that x person has very similar opinions for the tier list of the CURRENT metà game.

we would need to have had an undisputedly accurate tier list(not from current metà but complete metà) in order for ppl to now say the characters on disk have changed.

 

[n1000]

Strong_bad's post is totally sound. The tier list isn't fact, it's just a predictive model (therefore inherently flawed) of a very specific aspect of melee: tournament success.

@n1000

i see what you're trying to do here, but what you're saying boils down to is the fact that the MBR has randomly and without good reason decided to change what is typically supposed to be meant to represent a "Tier List", into a "ranking of characters based strickyl on them winning tournaments"

Granted, theres nothing inherently wrong with creating a list that shows strictly characters performance/representation in tournaments, but what most people are getting hung up on is you're still trying to call it a "Tier list" which to he rest of us, (and eveyone involved in fighting game communites), thats is NOT what a tierlist is.

Which means The MBR we either have to change what we are calling this list, or The MBR we are basically just going to say "**** it" to tradition/nomenclature/common sense, and just name it a "tier list" despite that not being what it actually is.

Underlined points addressed.

Perhaps the original rendering of the MBR Tier List was a sort of arbitrary shift from fighting game conventions. I agree with you that this is unfortunate, but now we have the Match-Up Chart which will order the characters into tiers in the same way that other fighting games' communities do.

Maybe once the MU chart is completed the MBR will choose to change the Tier List to represent that information (mimicking other fighting games) and what we have here will be called a "competitive viability list" or something.

Who knows. At this point I've laid out the facts and pointed to existing alternatives for people who aren't satisfied by Umbreon's definition. The only possible exceptions are semantics issues, "I like this list but it isn't a tier list," or qualms with the MBR's methods.

 

[Merkuri]

Anyways I think MBR is just trolling us.

I don't see any other logical way. The immediate obvious response is to base the tier list based on the match up chart. But those matches would have to be weighted for it to be meaningful and they can't be weighted sensibly without a tier list.

 

[MikeHaggarTHAKJB]

R000FO what a shrirtty tier list altho its kijdna good LL TIER listys suck lol **** u all all americans ie all that post on swf are all so ****ing stupud and ******** lol why isnt even armad ain bacjrooom **** u all flopmericans LOLOLOL

 

[Jim Morrison]

R000FO what a shrirtty tier list altho its kijdna good LL TIER listys suck lol **** u all all americans ie all that post on swf are all so ****ing stupud and ******** lol why isnt even armad ain bacjrooom **** u all flopmericans LOLOLOL

 

[n1000]

Check the weighting system used on the SSB MU Chart, Merkuri. I'd be interested in any flaws you find with t3h icy's system

 

[Sraigux]

Personally I'm not a marth fan. But I still think he should be top tier.

 

[takoyaki]

i don't approve of this list. i think it should be Fox top tier and then sheik, falco and math tied...then jiggz etc jiggz is actually pretty balanced if you think about. you lot need to stop johning because you can't beat a jiggz player and "it's the characters fault rather than my own ability"

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

The thing about jigs that i think makes her quite formidable is the fact that in situations where every other character is trapped, she has literally no additional risk(back to the edge). As long as the puff has good DI on whatever hits her, she can't really die until well over 100%. And remember, that is chip damage cause you can't combo her.

 

[takoyaki]

in terms of DI you can say that with every character..."she can't really die until well over 100%" i don't agree

 

[JFXSora]

O_O Surprising ,but it's nice to see meh fox and falco :3.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Except every other character can be edge guarded. Puff cannot be.

 

[TheGoat]

I don't see any other logical way. The immediate obvious response is to base the tier list based on the match up chart. But those matches would have to be weighted for it to be meaningful and they can't be weighted sensibly without a tier list.

The opinions thing doesn't work because so many people will insist on what they believe is correct, without having legitimate reasoning and/or a sufficient understanding of the metagame. The tier list should be based upon physical evidence and research, and most of the smash community form their opinions without much/any of this.

 

[P. O. F.]

Merkuri, clonehat, and jpobs seem to know what they are talking about.

Once again, its not a bad idea to use tournament results at all but to heavily base it for a tier list is stupid and lazy of this community.

 

[Jim Morrison]

The opinions thing doesn't work because so many people will insist on what they believe is correct, without having legitimate reasoning and/or a sufficient understanding of the metagame. The tier list should be based upon physical evidence and research, and most of the smash community form their opinions without much/any of this.

The best character is obviously the character that keeps winning everything at the moment. Then some time later people might improve other characters and find a way to have their characters be better.

 

[takoyaki]

no other "top tier" character can be killed off the top as easily as jiggz. It's all about balance; Jiggz can't be easily edguarded but then she can be killed easily off the top. Sure rest is an instakill but other than gimping jiggz finds it hard to K.O. If we compare to say sheik who has a multitude of killing capabilty i can't see how you can place jiggz higher than sheik.

 

[Jim Morrison]

no other "top tier" character can be killed off the top as easily as jiggz. It's all about balance; Jiggz can't be easily edguarded but then she can be killed easily off the top. Sure rest is an instakill but other than gimping jiggz finds it hard to K.O. If we compare to say sheik who has a multitude of killing capabilty i can't see how you can place jiggz higher than sheik.

Because Sheik hasn't shown anything that backs up your claims that Jigglypuff isn't as capable as Sheik.

 

[n1000]

Once again, its not a bad idea to use tournament results at all but to heavily base it for a tier list is stupid and lazy of this community.

Speaking of "stupid and lazy"

He replies to the first line of my post with:

I stopped reading right there.

Before he wrote that he posted:

Thanks for conveying my point of how immature this community is. Something is too long so you don't read it? You must love reading books.

P.O.F. your hypocrisy is documented.

 

[RyeJew]

Checked smash wiki, and saw this changed, and I jizzed.. in my pants

 

[JPOBS]

now that we've established that tourny results are the only thing this list is based off i have two questions

1. why doesnt jiggs have her own god tier? (or atleast #1) she wins EVERYTHING
2 . Peach should be 4th AT WORST. peach has placed 2nd, 4th, and 2nd in the 3 biggest tournies of the last 2 years.

inconsistent tierlist is inconsistent.

 

[P. O. F.]

N1000- what flaws are in the icys system? Are you serious?


How about that it is made with a +1 +2 +3 0 -1 -2 -3 for the match up? Tell me a system or chart that has ever done that?

Its a nice "quick reference guide" but that's all it is. Marth loses to falcon? Talk to a falcon about marth and then you tell me what you've gathered.




Also, this is geared toward everyone: wtf is up w 45/55 match up ratio bs? I hate when people say that. No one says this.

 

[Deleted member]

n1000: I don't fully agree with your posts, but I love that critical posting style. Seriously, keep it up.

as per my definition conflicting with that of the MBR, as former leader of the MBR my definition was a quick summary of an older one voted on by the other members. If there's a discrepancy, it's unintentional and "my" definition is that of the MBR as a whole. I could see some communication error since we've added a handful of new ctive members that don't know too much about how the MBR works yet (sleepy K, hungrybox, druggedfox, among others). I also haven't been following the MBR too closely for the past few weeks. But yeah, the definition should be about the same.

 

[n1000]

The (-3, +3) system is inadequate for melee so he's now using a 0-100 "likelihood of winning" scale which is similar to how every Street Fighter tier list is made. Every single matchup is being reevaluated because the current topic is...well... a cluster****.

The characters are ordered by weighted match up scores (i.e. an advantage against Sheik is worth more than an advantage against Roy) using a formula almost identical to every SSF4 tier list on shoryuken.

If you don't believe that CF has a slight advantage vs Marth then go into either characters' board and argue your case. I've spoken to Falcon players who claim to have an advantage against Marth.

 

[Wretched]

If you don't believe that CF has a slight advantage vs Marth then go into either characters' board and argue your case. I've spoken to Falcon players who claim to have an advantage against Marth.

I believe you, but in theory, shouldn't marth have the advantage? falcon is the 3~rd fastest faller (roy is higher?) in the game, and marth has created a precedent of being able to chaingrab and utilt+aerial fastfallers to death, right?

 

[OverLord]

@ Wretched:

you can't chaingrab Falcon, but yeah, you can do nice combos (like everyone) on him, BUT he can kill you, combo, and camp you like a *****. He got a slight advantage, if both knows the MU, is kinda even, but it's a hard time for Marth winning. And he can kill you from a grab.

But I don't think this is the Marth/Falcon MU thread.

/OT

As I said, I agree with Hax.

 

[Druggedfox]

Marth does fine against captain falcon. Marth's just don't know the matchup, and don't know how to DI.

Most of the major matchups were heavily argued in the matchup chart discussion thread, so for arguments related to any matchup... just search the thread.

Regardless, time to quote you Umbreon:

A tier list is a list of characters ranked best to worst in their likelihood to perform well in a tournament setting in the near future based on recent, relevant tournament results. We then separate characters at statistically significant gaps to be grouped with their relative equals, and those groupings are called "tiers". 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.

There, that's it. Even if you take out the "based on recent, relevant tournaments results", think about it. In order to reflect the current metagame, it makes sense that the tier list should be more or less a predictor of the likelihood of any given character performing well in a tournament setting. Why has marth gone down over time in the tier list since 2008? People have learned how to fight marth very well over time, and we don't have another m2k to bring him back to his glory, although most characters have that sort of "top player", marth doesn't.

Marth is still an amazing character, with better matchups among the higher tiers than sheik, for example. Despite that, sheik is higher on the tier list. If the list is to reflect the current metagame, it makes perfect sense for sheik to be higher. If you look at a matchup chart, and refer to all 26 possible matchups, sheik does better because she ***** low tiers. If you look at just the higher tiered (more important) ones, marth actually outperforms sheik overall. How do you use the matchup chart to make the tier list then? Who decides how much weight each matchup gets?

This isn't another fighting game, this is melee. In other games you rarely see 70-30 matchups, as far as I know. I might not be a top level Street Fighter player, but having some experience in 2D fighters, I can almost guarantee that if you looked up the SSF4 matchup chart, very few matchups would be that ridiculously in one character's favor. The majority of matchups are either 40:60, 45:55, or 50:50, with occasional deviations from that.

In melee, depending on your opinion, sheik has anywhere from a 60:40 to an 80:20 or more on essentially the entire low tier cast. That's just ONE character, that single handedly probably has more 70:30 matchups than the entire SSF4 cast. I won't say this for sure, but I'm sure if you looked into any other fighting game where a matchup chart decides the tiers, its also not nearly the same as melee.

Melee is unique. The game is 10 years old now. If the tier list should be based on a matchup chart ONLY, then why do we even bother making new tier lists? After 10 years the majority of major matchups have been explored in and out. We could just make a tier list using a matchup chart and it could be static forever. Sure, we don't have sufficient knowledge of a lot of low tier matchups, but this is all about high level play. Maybe then, we should just have a static tier list as far as the top tiers go, and over time squabble over whether zelda or mew2 should be above the other?

Point is, the amazing thing about melee is how the metagame changes over time. At one point it was the reign of marth, now the reign of puffs. Maybe soon enough, falco will finally get his reign? Will the best character in the game (fox) ever be the one to win international tournaments? That's what the tier list reflects, more than anything. If you want a tier list based on only a matchup chart, go to the matchup chart threads and look at that. Figure it out yourself; all the matchups are there, you just have to put them in order. Honestly, so many people are saying they want it based on that, why not just go look at it and do it yourself? Why do you wait for the official tier list if you can just go to the matchup discussions and figure it out from there? Chances are, your overall opinion about matchups are drastically different than anyone elses, so it is nigh impossible to actually get a matchup chart that everyone will agree with. Just figure out what you think the matchups are, and make your own tier list.

That's it. Nothing more to say. I'm sure people will get all mad about this post and start attempting to deconstruct it, but whatever. There's so much in it that an argument covering all of it is far too lengthy to seriously argue over the boards; alternatively, any argument covering too little is missing a lot. This post isn't really asking for a reply (unless you REALLY want to), this is just out there to think about. If it's a matchup chart you want, everyone has their own ****ed opinion, so having a standardized one won't really mean anything. I personally think marth sheik is in the realm of 55:45 sheik's favor; the majority of smashboards probably highly disagrees, and a lot of people think sheik vs marth is an autowin for sheik. I'm sure there are people who think falco vs falcon is 70:30 falco's favor, and there are others who think its 60:40. That's TEN whole points; aka, a ****ing lot. Simple discrepancies like that, with 26 characters (or even just the viable ones) would EASILY cause drastic differences in each person's tier list.

Hmm, for real this time: That's it. Nothing more to say.

 

[JPOBS]

druggedfox, i dont get how you can say "a tierlist based on matchups would be stagnant forever", then follow that up with "the great thing about melee is the metagame changes overtime" and provide examples fo different char's era's of reign.

that not the metagame changing, thats just the top players retiring or being replaced by new top players who coincedently use different chars.

if youre saying puff's "metagame" has changed but her matchups havent, i dont even know whats going on anymore.

also, peach should be higher than marth/sheik on a tourny-results based tierlist, just saying.

 

[n1000]

 

[Druggedfox]

druggedfox, i dont get how you can say "a tierlist based on matchups would be stagnant forever", then follow that up with "the great thing about melee is the metagame changes overtime" and provide examples fo different char's era's of reign.

that not the metagame changing, thats just the top players retiring or being replaced by new top players who coincedently use different chars.

if youre saying puff's "metagame" has changed but her matchups havent, i dont even know whats going on anymore.

also, peach should be higher than marth/sheik on a tourny-results based tierlist, just saying.

Matchups, technically speaking, are static forever. The characters themselves never change, just the degree to which we understand them. This game being in its 10th year, I feel like we more or less are familiar with the higher tiered matchups in and out. Thus, if we were ever to sit down and make a truly objective matchup chart, theoretically (unless something gamebreaking was discovered) it should never change.

Despite that, you can hardly deny that the metagame has changed. Marth vs fox, sheik, falco etc is something static overall. People have their different opinions, but by around '08 those 4 characters were advanced enough at a top level that our concepts of their matchups haven't changed since then. Fox and falco vs marth since that time period has pretty much always been considered more or less even (leaning towards one side or the other), and sheik has always been considered to have around a 60:40 (maybe a bit more) advantage vs marth.

Marth really hasn't changed since back in 2008, and neither have his matchups. Despite that, he went from King of melee (with m2k) to hardly ever seen anymore. That's a great example of the metagame changing without the matchups really changing at all.

 

[Strong Badam]

Would there be something wrong with a tier list based on match-ups rarely changing? That'd mean it's more accurate than the constantly changing, inaccurate method we have right now.

 

[TheGoat]

Would there be something wrong with a tier list based on match-ups rarely changing? That'd mean it's more accurate than the constantly changing, inaccurate method we have right now.

Well say for example two years from now people start exploring DK and go bananas with him, and his metagame is significantly changed; people know how to play and use him better. Let's say people are able to play him so well that he does noticeably better against say, peach, and starts pwning her. The matchup would have to change then. Matchups will always been in a state of flux, whether it be to large or small extents.

My problem with the whole matchups thing is that I see them as theorycrafting. Where exactly does it come from? Endless pages of debate. But I am one for more physical evidence, and I'd prefer seeing things in practice rather than theorycrafting.

 

[Pink Reaper]

Dk hasnt changed since 2005, my money is not on him becoming randomly better.

 

[Strong Badam]

I don't even understand how that post even responds to me lol. Theorycraft is annoying, data from tournaments and high-level players of the bad characters' opinions would be used to determine match-ups.
Theorycraft is what made KAOSTAR get Icy to make Mewtwo vs. DK in Mewtwo's favor. I mean, what?

 

[Brookman]

Dk hasnt changed since 2005, my money is not on him becoming randomly better.

who, the ****, are you?

 

[Druggedfox]

Would there be something wrong with a tier list based on match-ups rarely changing? That'd mean it's more accurate than the constantly changing, inaccurate method we have right now.

Simply that the matchups wouldn't reflect the metagame. The most important thing about a tier list in my opinion is how it reflects the changes in the metagame over time. Then the subjectivity of a matchup chart, as well as how you weight it makes it not necessarily any more accurate. I still think matchups should be the dominant role in a tier list, sort of serve as the foundation for it. Beyond that, the current representation/performance of characters allows us to build on that foundation.

Based on matchups solely (if we were to do a tier list like other fighting games), sheik would be the best character. She counters essentially half the game simply by grabbing and pressing down, or maybe some ftilts and fairs. I know that sounds like oversimplification, but those aspects of sheik alone probably give her the best overall matchups in the entire game. Yes, better than fox's. Yet, I doubt anyone is saying sheik should be considered in her own tier on the tier list as god tier? That's where we go "oh wait, fox does way better in the important matchups, so he should be above her." In fox's case, that's rather obvious. In other cases, the weight assigned would be more or less arbitrary, and it would be difficult to decide how exactly to weigh each matchup. Tournament results/representation are honestly the only factual data we have to base the weight of each matchup on. That said, even if we did just use a matchup chart to determine the tier list, the weighting essentially makes it so that tournament results play a significant role regardless.

My personal ideal method of making a tier list would be as I said, matchup chart with weighting based on tournament results and representation.

I hope within all of that you can find a valid response to your question =D

 

[TheGoat]

I don't even understand how that post even responds to me lol. Theorycraft is annoying, data from tournaments and high-level players of the bad characters' opinions would be used to determine match-ups.
Theorycraft is what made KAOSTAR get Icy to make Mewtwo vs. DK in Mewtwo's favor. I mean, what?

I was basically hating on theorycrafting, which match-ups are largely composed of.

Dk hasnt changed since 2005, my money is not on him becoming randomly better.

I was speaking of a hypothetical situation.