Metagame threat~? I see~ I like the meaning of the tier list but I think the whole theorycraft and voting thing skews the results of it. I'm just one of those guys that think results should do the talking ya know? Actions speak louder then words and what not. In theory, theres plenty of ways to make fighting snake alot easier, yet the results show he's making the 2nd most money out of any character.
I think theorycraft should be cut out completely. MU's kinda speak for theorycraft anyways. There basically theorycraft backed up with experience, frame data, and results.
Well, according to only results, Kirby is the worst character in the game. However, he still is more of a threat in the metagame than Ganon, Falcon, Jiggly, etc. So, naturally results can't be everything (keeping in mind our only method of tracking results is via money won. So if DKs place one spot outside of the money, non-stop, then he's much bigger threat than our results would lead us to believe).
MUs have a similar problem, although not as close to pronounced- at least assuming that they theorycraft behind them is perfect (which it rarely is- unless I'm the one making it ofc
). Since the theorycraft behind MUs isn't perfect, there is going to be a flaw for that too. To use DK as an example again, DK would be under characters like Luigi. Very few people would actually agree with that statement (at least in regards to how much of a threat a character is).
Also, while weighted MU charts help alleviate the next problem, they don't fix it. If the most common character was Snake, and a character beat Snake and the next most common character badly, but then proceeded to lose to a lot of characters in a row, his MUs would be trash while still being a relevant threat.
Now, if the tier list was based strictly on how good a character is, then all MUs would make sense.
So combine the two. That seems like a solution, right? Well it might, and would be most of the time. But then you might come across an instance where the two problems overlap making it impossible for objective data to be given to judge how big of a threat a given character is in the metagame at that point in time. This is where the votes come into play as a correcting factor for things that we can objectively observe (character X placing one spot out of the money every week, for months on end for example) but we don't have the capacity to calculate at the moment due, unfortunately, to a lack of data. Most of the votes typically fall into place with what the data shows and usually would have very little, if any, real impact or difference from what the data would show. However, there are bound to be the few and rare instances where the data we have just isn't giving an accurate description of the metagame at that point in time.
Note that this is all in my opinion and how I view it. It may or may not be representative of the BR as a whole. Just what makes the most sense to me.
It is curious how Luigi is dropping.
My friend is hoping for him getting low to use him in low tier tournaments...
Luigi's write-up is coming, but, he can't approach, can't kill (he has great kill moves, just not kill potential- at least not vs good characters), can't really keep people out, etc.
because my trolling failed, so I'll try to get Luxord mad by calling him butt hurt.
[...] 
