Official BBR Tier List v7

[Grim Tuesday]

Why do you say things with an air of authority in regards to match-ups that we have no real reason to believe you understand?

 

[PMC66]

i just say what i think and if you want to argue thats fine lol i'm not a judge or anything, it's just arguing stuff sometimes you can learn a thing or two

it's just previously i'd used to say dumb statements to get people to correct them and then go into depth on sub ject matter i wanted. That made people like Joe though think i knew pretty much nothing so i just changed my tactics to simply stating points i wanted to argue, which i thought was what pretty much everyone does.

 

[RaptorTEC]

Grim, why do you say things with an air of authority in regards to match-ups that we have no real reason to believe you understand?

 

[PMC66]

^ thank you GGZ from the other night btw

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Grim, why do you say things with an air of authority in regards to match-ups that we have no real reason to believe you understand?

Liiike...? I only talk about characters I use lol

 

[PMC66]

^ well so do i what makes me less knowledgeable than you lol?

you've given me a humourous image of me dressed in a police Uniform with a hitler stache stating my opinions on an internet forum rofl

 

[Grim Tuesday]

ZSS does not beat Ice climbers you are correct.

That is all.
I'm just teasing you, I really don't care that much xD

 

[PMC66]

oh rofl kk xD,

sometimes it's hard to tell what people mean with the internet :/

 

[Steam]

I'll say it then. PMC is full of it. Doesn't actually play beyond wifi and thinks wolf >= snake

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

No one ever thinks ZSS beats their character until they get beaten by ZSS and go "oh"

ZSS +1 wolf btw

 

[Emblem Lord]

Marths fair is good because of versatility, the arc and the diff ways he can use it.

But it's real strength is its synergy with his gameplan and toolset. Fair alone will get any Marth owned up at high level.

 

[NickRiddle]

Too bad Marth's fair arc makes him weak to anti-airs.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

No one ever thinks ZSS beats their character until they get beaten by ZSS and go "oh"

Ivysaur-DK is +2 in Ivysaur's advantage. Probably the same for Ivysaur-Charizard.

This can be applied to your statement, is what I mean. I know the feeling.

 

[Player-1]

diddy's fair da bess

 

[NickRiddle]

Ivysaur-DK is +2 in Ivysaur's advantage. Probably the same for Ivysaur-Charizard.

This can be applied to your statement, is what I mean. I know the feeling.

Do you feel Squirtle beats ZSS? I know out isnt the right thread, but I'm curious. I'm between -1 & 0.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

I think it's a slight advantage. Leaning toward -1. Even with fatigue in play, a smart Squirtle can make ZSS struggle to do the things she wants to do while Squirtle's racking up bits of damage more efficiently overall.

 

[NickRiddle]

I only think it might be even because we can get him tired fairly easily, and it helps us live quite long.

 

[PMC66]

I'll say it then. PMC is full of it. Doesn't actually play beyond wifi and thinks wolf >= snake

I do play offline lol damn steam you think if i played nothing but wifi i'd still be playing this game? probably not to be quite honest Sakurai and lag seem to have it in for me :/ and what makes you think i'm full of it? I just state my opinions and argue points accross like everybody else.

ZSS does not +1 Wolf she combos well but wolf out lives her and can combo her back pretty well, heck frame 4 advantage when you hit her with reflector shine thats a free jab everytime.

I would have thought if either side won wolf did he revenge kills Zamus better than she can him and has a slight KO deficit in general albeit by like 20% overall, which isn't much. It's more an even matchup only thing is ZSS chain down throw to *inc follow up 40% but i can't really picture a character like Wolf that's centred around abusing his range and being prioritised on spacing, and a move that comes out quite slow being too much of a deciding factor. I suppose Zamus D-smash is godly vs players with side step habits lol

 

[NickRiddle]

ZSS 0/+1 Wolf

 

[Emblem Lord]

Too bad Marth's fair arc makes him weak to anti-airs.

Strengths balanced by weaknesses = good game design.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

Actually not good game design.

 

[Emblem Lord]

So u want chars to be flawless?

Sorry I like my games where everyone is good but has at least one or two exploitable weaknesses. Though only a few games really hit that mark.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

I can't speak for your preferences, but in general you aim to design characters based on the flavor of the character and shooting for specific strengths. You should never design an inherent weakness (fatigue anyone?) and balance should be the result of interesting interaction between characters' strengths.

 

[Tesh]

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/stages/stage03.html

The Whimsical Support Ghost. I know Sakurai doesn't capitalize "Whimsical," but it's too good not to.

I pray at the Temple of the Whimsical Support Ghost. I yell out his name when I need him to save me.

Funniest thing I've heard him called is "the angry condom"

I can't speak for your preferences, but in general you aim to design characters based on the flavor of the character and shooting for specific strengths. You should never design an inherent weakness (fatigue anyone?) and balance should be the result of interesting interaction between characters' strengths.

Very much this. Its far more interesting when balance is attained by everyone being really good rather than everyone being really bad. Look at low tier tournaments.

 

[Sunnysunny]

So u want chars to be flawless?

Sorry I like my games where everyone is good but has at least one or two exploitable weaknesses. Though only a few games really hit that mark.

Wouldn't that lead to the fighting game, being more of a game of rock-paper-scizzors?

Actually, I read a quote of sakurai somewhere. Apparently he intended for all characters to have a weakness, and for another character being able to counter that weakness. Its a really bad way of balancing the game imo. I like my characters to be able to stand alone against any enemy.

That and he didn't even do it right. Like, who the hell is ganon suppose to counter?

 

[da K.I.D.]

I can't speak for your preferences, but in general you aim to design characters based on the flavor of the character and shooting for specific strengths. You should never design an inherent weakness (fatigue anyone?) and balance should be the result of interesting interaction between characters' strengths.

but if a character has a strength, that means comparitively it has to have weaknesses too right? or else the character is perfect and having a character that can do everything is counter productive to balance.

 

[Emblem Lord]

Ok about sakurai. I thought this was common knowledge. He knows nothing about how to balance a game or test it properly. Diddy, snake, ics and mk prove this. Grab infinites? Really guys?

Secondly unless you intentionally give weaknesses then chars are flawless and you don't want that to happen. You think mk is bad?

Lol. Go to YouTube and google Ivan ooze power rangers tournament edition. You don't know what god tier is until you see him.

Chars need weaknesses. The key isto make sure they aren't crippling.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

but if a character has a strength, that means comparitively it has to have weaknesses too right? or else the character is perfect and having a character that can do everything is counter productive to balance.

Effect: Marth finds himself weak to anti-airs.

Good game design:

Cause: Marth's Fair is designed to be used to dominate horizontal space and link from the rest of his moveset.

Bad game design:

Cause: Marth's moveset is designed to space horizontally in order to prevent this from becoming a problem, we will intentionally saddle him with a weakness.


Two different examples:

Ken's flavor broadcasts him as a Ryu-like character with an emphasis on his shoryuken and not his fireball game because it is interesting from a flavor standpoint to have the point/counter-point. In SFIV his fireball game is pretty ***. This is not done to intentionally leave him with a weakness, but because it makes sense with the idea behind the character.

Lux in League of Legends is designed as a mage who deals a lot of burst damage with skill shots. She has an issue with high mobility assassin characters because she has pathetic defenses and is designed around skill shots that a high mobility character can generally avoid. She has these weaknesses because she is a little girl and because skill shots don't do **** if you don't land them.

Both of these characters were not designed with weaknesses in mind, but rather had their weaknesses inherently based on the interactions between their strengths and the opponent's strengths. If you have an overpowering character and buffing others isn't reasonable (generally the better solution), the trick is to tone down his strengths so that other characters can match it or to remove gameplay elements discovered that do not match the character's original purpose and flavor.

EDIT: Basically, you guys act like I have to give a character a tool for every single situation because I don't intentionally include a weakness. Weaknesses should not be in mind when characters are being designed, the idea of making them too strong should be, but you should not intentionally add a weakness. You should make a character interesting and make him match his flavor. Weaknesses should only be determined by the effect of another character's strengths when measured against your own. Balance generally means shoring up the weaknesses of those characters who's kit do not give them a leg to stand on. The nerf bat should be used sparingly and with good judgement.

 

[SoulPech]

Effect: Marth finds himself weak to anti-airs.

Good game design:

Cause: Marth's Fair is designed to be used to dominate horizontal space and link from the rest of his moveset.

Bad game design:

Cause: Marth's moveset is designed to space horizontally in order to prevent this from becoming a problem, we will intentionally saddle him with a weakness.


Two different examples:

Ken's flavor broadcasts him as a Ryu-like character with an emphasis on his shoryuken and not his fireball game because it is interesting from a flavor standpoint to have the point/counter-point. In SFIV his fireball game is pretty ***. This is not done to intentionally leave him with a weakness, but because it makes sense with the idea behind the character.

Lux in League of Legends is designed as a mage who deals a lot of burst damage with skill shots. She has an issue with high mobility assassin characters because she has pathetic defenses and is designed around skill shots that a high mobility character can generally avoid. She has these weaknesses because she is a little girl and because skill shots don't do **** if you don't land them.

Both of these characters were not designed with weaknesses in mind, but rather had their weaknesses inherently based on the interactions between their strengths and the opponent's strengths. If you have an overpowering character and buffing others isn't reasonable (generally the better solution), the trick is to tone down his strengths so that other characters can match it or to remove gameplay elements discovered that do not match the character's original purpose and flavor.

EDIT: Basically, you guys act like I have to give a character a tool for every single situation because I don't intentionally include a weakness. Weaknesses should not be in mind when characters are being designed, the idea of making them too strong should be, but you should not intentionally add a weakness. You should make a character interesting and make him match his flavor. Weaknesses should only be determined by the effect of another character's strengths when measured against your own. Balance generally means shoring up the weaknesses of those characters who's kit do not give them a leg to stand on. The nerf bat should be used sparingly and with good judgement.

^ This. Even then, it can be difficult because even when testing a game, they find and assume characters are balanced...but when it gets released to the public and when people start playing it, we mostly discover the strengths and weaknesses (which is why we have a form to discuss), but some games do put in a weakness and strength on purpose. Take the newer Street Fighter games for example. Most of the female characters as well as Akuma and Seth have low health and quick stun. On the flipside, You have Zangief who a huge fatty.

So yeah, Nerf and Buff carefully..although SSBB wasn't even touched after it was released.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

but some games do put in a weakness and strength on purpose. Take the newer Street Fighter games for example. Most of the female characters as well as Akuma and Seth have low health and quick stun. On the flipside, You have Zangief who a huge fatty.

So yeah, Nerf and Buff carefully..although SSBB wasn't even touched after it was released.

Buff carefully and nerf with even more care even in the pre-release versions.

As for your SF example, that's no good. Akuma and Seth are both designed around the concept of being glass cannons. Incredibly strong, but without being bulky which allows them speed. They fit into the glass cannon archetype as a branch of the character's flavor and their health and stun are made to reflect that. The female characters, as in most games, are designed to be slimmer, faster, and less solid than their male counterparts. Their health is made lower because of that.

I mean, look at Juri and then look at Gief. Now back to Juri, and now back to Gief. Sadly, she is not Gief and she cannot be expected to take a punch like Gief, so let me pre-emptively shut down that Soviet Russia response.

 

[da K.I.D.]

youre basically saying the same thing as us and the only difference is mentally how you interpret the information.
Personally I would say that juri is made to (intentional weakness) have lower health and stun and a bad fireball game (from long range) because she is a girl who is very fast and mobile and has painful mix ups and combos (strengths)

when you look at the character, the character is the same regardless of whether youre playing her or I am. But how we interpret her design is where the difference in opinion comes from.

Personally, I think its a bit disingenuous to say that Giefs strength of being a powerhouse grappler with massive health isnt intentionally mitigated by his lack of a projectile and lack of options to get in on people.

 

[Ishiey]

ZSS +1 wolf btw

Elaborate please? I don't think it's out of the question, but it hasn't really shown up in tournament often at high levels for matches to be used as a reference (inb4kainvsdakpo)

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

youre basically saying the same thing as us and the only difference is mentally how you interpret the information.
Personally I would say that juri is made to (intentional weakness) have lower health and stun and a bad fireball game (from long range) because she is a girl who is very fast and mobile and has painful mix ups and combos (strengths)

when you look at the character, the character is the same regardless of whether youre playing her or I am. But how we interpret her design is where the difference in opinion comes from.

Personally, I think its a bit disingenuous to say that Giefs strength of being a powerhouse grappler with massive health isnt intentionally mitigated by his lack of a projectile and lack of options to get in on people.

I found your problem.

Characters have weaknesses. Fine and dandy. You find that out by interpreting the information given to you. You're looking at it from a post development point of view. From a "game design" point of view, your weaknesses should be a byproduct of staying true to a character. They only crop up due to something that the character's strengths do not adequately cover.

Speed and health are not inherent weaknesses and should be made to match the character's flavor. They only prove a weakness when matched against a character who's strengths can exploit those elements. The fact of the matter is that well designed characters (good game design) do not excel at everything. That doesn't lead to interesting interaction between character strengths and it overall leads to a boring game. That would be a badly designed character who would crush everyone if you stay true to the character's flavor.

If you create your cast and you find that something is overpowering, you do not intentionally include a weakness to compensate, you tweak the character's strengths to make it less effective, but still true to the character. For example, let's look once more at LoL because the constantly changing environment is pretty good to pull examples from (both good and bad). At launch, Ezreal's second skill dealt damage, buffed teammates, debuffed opponents, and healed your teammates it contacted. He was broken. They didn't, in turn, give him lowered stats in other departments to solve the problem. They didn't neuter his other skills. They took away the heal that let him sustain his entire team while carrying the game. Didn't take away from his status as the number one skill shot based character. Didn't hurt his image as a character with great positioning. Didn't even take away his ability to add utility to a fight, but yet they took something away.

The absence of something does not make it a weakness. No character should ever be designed to excel at everything unless they are designed to be overpowered (looking at you boss characters) or it is a single player game. Weaknesses are the result of interesting contrast between characters and should not be kept in mind when designing characters.


And for good measure, that Ivan Ooze line is not a good argument for giving him a weakness. It's a bad game with bad game design. Ivan Ooze was given tools that lead to overpowering interaction between him and the cast. He didn't need the nerf bat, he needed to be redesigned.



It isn't merely arguing semantics because, when on the subject of game design and as a rule of thumb, no one wants to play a crippled character (exceptions exist: I play Roll in MvC2). That means you design a character around their strengths and what they are supposed to excel at. After that, you can see what weaknesses exist and which result in a crippled character and you shore up that character's strengths in order to deal with the issue. If the issue lies in the a character being overly strong, you nerf that character or remove the offending element (say Akuma's air fireball had he not originally been a boss character) and replace it if it needs replacing (for example, removing shine would need a replacement for melee Fox's down B, but removing the ability to jump cancel would not). Then you repeat the process.

Nothing in that process includes giving a character a weakness. It is all about tweaking their strengths.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Elaborate please? I don't think it's out of the question, but it hasn't really shown up in tournament often at high levels for matches to be used as a reference (inb4kainvsdakpo)

I was actually just trolling PCM. Dakpo vs Kain is the first time I've ever seen the match-up played at a high level and it didn't even look like Kain knew what to do, so no clue

I think Wolf has a few things working against him on paper, fall speed and size for one.

 

[PMC66]

^ more fall speed than anything else means ZSS can juggle him quite badly,

 

[SoulPech]

Buff carefully and nerf with even more care even in the pre-release versions.

As for your SF example, that's no good. Akuma and Seth are both designed around the concept of being glass cannons. Incredibly strong, but without being bulky which allows them speed. They fit into the glass cannon archetype as a branch of the character's flavor and their health and stun are made to reflect that. The female characters, as in most games, are designed to be slimmer, faster, and less solid than their male counterparts. Their health is made lower because of that.

I mean, look at Juri and then look at Gief. Now back to Juri, and now back to Gief. Sadly, she is not Gief and she cannot be expected to take a punch like Gief, so let me pre-emptively shut down that Soviet Russia response.

They were designed to have those glass cannon features, which is a strength and weakness they implemented into the game: Fast in attacks and strong in attacks, but low health, easier stun, etc. As for female characters, I am aware they're designed to be slimmer and faster, but it's still a strength and weakness. Also, most of the female cast have fast hitting links, which can cause quicker stun.


Then you have Street Fighter 4 Vanilla Sagat....ughhhhhhhhhh

 

[Ishiey]

I was actually just trolling PCM. Dakpo vs Kain is the first time I've ever seen the match-up played at a high level and it didn't even look like Kain knew what to do, so no clue

I think Wolf has a few things working against him on paper, fall speed and size for one.

lol just checking. I'm just going to cut things off here before theorycraft ensues then

 

[DMG]

What you said is kind of in line with what he's saying. Good character's aren't supposed to excel at everything. You can stay to "flavor" and yet conscientiously choose to give them weaknesses/tweak those weaknesses.


If you only look at areas the character "should" be good at or that fit the character, you can miss huge crippling downfalls or even miss that they are good at just about everything. You would not look at Zangief's ability to get in or tweak his prowess at grappling, without also analyzing how well he deals with projectiles/anti airs, whether his general defense also holds up.


You look at the pros and cons of characters. You want powerful, capable characters, and you also want reasonable weaknesses. People SHOULD start with what "fits" the character or what the general theme is, and then double check that they aren't sending out something too weak or too strong. Capcom doesn't just say Let's make a Glass cannon, hope it's balanced. Give Zangief positive things, hope he doesn't rush people down too well or get zoned too easily. Etc. I'd like to at least hope that there's more comprehensive analysis and action on both sides, plus and con. What his jump in animation looks like, what his hurtboxes look like, etc.

 

[Emblem Lord]

About vanilla sagat. Gouki crushed him. Kow why? Because he exploited all the things sagat lacked. As a char he countered sagat. This is another kind of balance I'm ok with.

Also what I'm really advocating is design awareness. Don't just give chars arbitrary stats and moves but be aware of the affects their gameplay and how they will interact with their chars. Don't give chars with amazing rush down, super high damage as well as high stamina etc etc. be aware of what you are doing when you create a roster.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Ill use numbers here because I feel like they will describe what im trying to say better.

there are other factors that go in to things and they arent equal but lets just say they are.
If you have, offensive damage and combos, melee speed and range, defensive ability and health, movement ability, and ranged weapons.

if you have character like hypothetical mario in smash, he would be:
Damage: 5
Melee: 5
Range: 5
Defense: 5
Movement: 5

What it sounds like you are saying is that if you want to make a fast agile character like... hypothetical fox, you would make him
Damage: 5
Melee: 5
Range: 5
Defense: 5
Movement: 9

And what I was saying was that in order to make a character like that, you would have to make him something like

Offense: 5
Melee: 5
Range: 5
Defense: 1
Movement: 9

This is where the typical, "pixie" character archetype comes from.

But what I just realized in the time I typed this out, is that between different games, It doesnt really matter.

Because the fact of the matter is that you hypothetical fox could be balanced in a game just like my hypothetical fox could be balanced in a game, but what makes the difference is the game itself and how all the other characters factor in.

If your hypothetical fox has 29 points, in a game full of marios with 25 points, then hes going to be OP. but my 25 point fox is going to be perfectly balanced in a game of 25 point marios.

at that point it becomes a matter of opinion on which is the best way to balance a game, because as long as all the character have the same or almost the same amount of stat points, so to speak, then the game will be balanced, regardless of the approach you go about it with.



And to follow up with EL I think street fighter does they balancing really really well. because they make a complete character from the ground up and they make them to play a certain way, and then when they nerf/buff them, they do it in small simple, subtle ways that dont change they way they play. Like giving Hakan oil at the start of each match. or making some ones SRK do 10 points less damage or making Yuns lunge punch -1 on block instead of +1. They dont do anything so drastic as to make a previously over the top move terrible beyond usage, they just make it equal enough to what everyone has, but they most definitely give their characters weaknesses, or else seth and akuma would have the same health as ryu. The fact that they cant take a hit was intentionally given to them to counteract the fact that they are so powerful offensively.