Official BBR Tier List v7

[da K.I.D.]

So whos number 2 in this game? Some say ics, which is only the case in a single digit stage list environment. Some people say diddy. Hes probably the most well rounded top tier character. Some say olimar, who can function on more stage than ICs but still benefits greatly from a small stage list. A few people still sAy falco and snake but their ability to adapt to situations is based on the fact that there has to be more situations (read, stages) forthem to show their increased adaptability and viability

This leads me to them conclusions that its actually impossible to place these 5 characters correctly until we have an established (unity?) Rule set that everyone is using so that we can glean a proper understanding of all the characters and where they should be placed.

As a sidenote marth, gains a massive amount of viability from not having to deal with the multitude of situations introduced by the addition of more legal stages.

But asit stands right now, with now centralized stage list, i would give the 2 spot to diddy, because i believe he performs the best across all of the ruleset option due to being the most well rounded character in the discussion.

 

[bubbaking]

We already have an "established ruleset". It's called the Apex Ruleset.

Diddy is the most well-rounded, despite having a pretty mediocre MU spread for a Top Tier? I would honestly say to just put the ICs at #2. They're the ones with the best MU spread after MK. The stage list we have now is fine for them. Like, their worst stage is what, Delfino? Yeah, the rest of the cast is screwed. We don't even know if they lose to the characters the MU chart says they lose to (MK and ZSS, mostly).

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Does tier position even matter after #1 tho?

 

[bubbaking]

Of course it does, Grim! Don't you know that you can only challenge #1 if you have the #2 headband?

 

[NickRiddle]

K.I.D., don't pretend people listen to official rulesets.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I also give the edge to Diddy, then Olimar, then ICs. ICs isn't even a candidate for #2 IMO.. Olimar, though, could be #2. It's close between the two.


MK,
Diddy, Olimar, ICs,
Falco, Snake, ZSS, Marth, Pikachu

This isn't perfect (I'm not sure who comes first, Falco or Snake, or whether or not their should go in tier 2, maybe some other stuff) but it's about right IMHO. I also think Diddy is very close to Olimar, and Olimar ICs are very close, so having ICs at #4 looks weirder than it is, I guess. Second tier is very difficult atm.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

How can a character that gets borderline hardcountered by MK, that loses to ICs, Olimar, Falco, Snake and is evenish with Wario, ZSS and Marth be 2nd best?

 

[RaptorTEC]

Because your argument is severely flawed.

 

[Espy Rose]

The fact that people even feel like Apex should be the unified ruleset makes me sick.
The stage list shrinking is one of the worst things that's ever happened to the ruleset since MK-limiting rules.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Apex is the closest thing the smash community has to the mob

BTW, the fact that we let top players have input to the game's stage list and rule set is a joke

 

[da K.I.D.]

Well, in all fairness, the best players are the second most qualified group of people to make ruleset decisions...

And when i say well rounded, i meant in terms of character traits, not matchups. As in diddy doesnt get horribly molested offstage like the other 4 do.

 

[Sunnysunny]

What would the ideal ruleset/stage selection be for most of you?

Or what do you think is the stupidest rule we currently have?
Just outta curiosity.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Well, in all fairness, the best players are the second most qualified group of people to make ruleset decisions...

What do you mean by "qualified?" Being good at the game isn't the same as knowing what's best for it. It's also a huge conflict of interest.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Any ruleset with mk in it is terrible. Because you have to limit ledge grabs, flying under the stage and ban 2-5 stages just to make him bad enough to be legal. At which point he still dominates the cast to a seemingly unhealthy degree.



Yes, its a huge conflict or interest. But being good at the game still comes with some inherent knowledge of how tbe game fhnctions and what makes things better or worse on the whole.

I mean ifyou took top players out of the equation, who else would you have making the rules? Aside from tos the best players are best forthe job. And its not like the tos are perfect or even that much better for the job either

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Any ruleset with mk in it is terrible. Because you have to limit ledge grabs, flying under the stage and ban 2-5 stages just to make him bad enough to be legal. At which point he still dominates the cast to a seemingly unhealthy degree.

One day, they'll see the light. I wonder if Smash 4 will be out by then or not.

I'm not sure what the answer to that question is, but to be honest. We don't have the luxury of having a committee that doesn't play the game overseeing its development. We know what the qualifications aren't though (which is being a top level player) and we know that it's a conflict of interest.

The Unity Ruleset committee was a really good start with bad direction and a dozen other problems. Ideally we'd want a panel leader who interviews for prospective members impartially and then have the ruleset made from there. As it is now, APEX staff just asks top players what they want and then everyone uses the APEX ruleset.

Oh yeah, and there's also a huge problem in the smash community: people value player skill over all other values and factors which is flawed and morally wrong. Remember that ******** video MikeHaze made attempting discredit the URC for being mid-high level players in regions he didn't think were good? What a load.

Also worth noting that I don't exclude top players for being top players, I just don't include them by default. There's a difference.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

tl;d r

tl;d r

 

[Peachy-Desu]

tl;d r

tl;d r

 

[infiniteV115]

Well, let's see. I'm going to assume that Kakera is a "best"-level MK because he got 5th at Apex 2012, which is pretty darn "best" and is also the same placing that Ally got (going solo MK). Now I'm going to look at all the MKs at Apex 2013 that placed as well as or better than Kakera and list them all as "best"-level MKs. Admittedly, this logic may be somewhat faulty, but it more or less gives a good idea of all the top-of-the-line MKs:

1. Kakera
2. Tyrant
3. Pwii
4. Rain
5. Zero
6. Dojo
7. Anti
8. Nairo
9. Otori
10. M2K

Now this is just solo-MKs. If we include the players who went a very notable amount of MK with a some help from other chars, we get:

1. Ally (he also got 5th at Apex 2012 going solo MK, mind you)
2. Havok
3. NAKAT

So we arguably have 13 "best of the top level" MKs. That's a lot. Perhaps we shouldn't have "stopped banning him universally".

Ally didn't go solo MK at Apex 2012, wtf.
Also Pwii, Dojo, Havok and Nakat are not top level MKs. Even Tyrant being top level is arguable.
I guess different people have boundaries/definitions for this kinda stuff but I define top level as anyone who can realistically win a national/international tournament. I don't see any of the 5 I mentioned as being top level, by that definition. And I think it's kinda silly to say something like "oh he's top level, but he's not winning a national any time soon. He's gonna have to step it up", don't you agree?

 

[Tien2500]

Apex is the closest thing the smash community has to the mob

BTW, the fact that we let top players have input to the game's stage list and rule set is a joke

I get what you're saying. An IC main is definitely going to want a more conservative stage list. But then again what's the alternative? If it's not Smash players deciding on the rules, who would? It's not like there are a whole lot of people who are knowledgeable enough to make these decisions who don't play the game.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I get what you're saying. An IC main is definitely going to want a more conservative stage list. But then again what's the alternative? If it's not Smash players deciding on the rules, who would? It's not like there are a whole lot of people who are knowledgeable enough to make these decisions who don't play the game.

I answered this above:

The Unity Ruleset committee was a really good start with bad direction and a dozen other problems. Ideally we'd want a panel leader who interviews for prospective members impartially and then have the ruleset made from there. As it is now, APEX staff just asks top players what they want and then everyone uses the APEX ruleset.

Oh yeah, and there's also a huge problem in the smash community: people value player skill over all other values and factors which is flawed and morally wrong. Remember that ******** video MikeHaze made attempting discredit the URC for being mid-high level players in regions he didn't think were good? What a load.

Also worth noting that I don't exclude top players for being top players, I just don't include them by default. There's a difference.

 

[Tien2500]

I answered this above:

And who would this panel leader be? How would they be determined? How would they check for impartiality?

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

And who would this panel leader be? How would they be determined? How would they check for impartiality?

Brain scans, clearly. :D

That was one of the things that was problematic: so many people were convinced AZ had an agenda at the start. Even though that's debatable, we want someone that doesn't have an agenda. But the problem to me isn't finding someone that's not objective (this is relatively easy and there are plenty of people who will play on any stage and in any ruleset, are impartial to MK bans, and so forth), it's forcing a shift in the community's expectations that is nearly impossible. Right now, players (wrongly) want rulesets approved by top players.

For example, I think Alex Strife is a good guy. He wants to give the community what it wants for the most part and make it happy. If the community wanted a ruleset made by an impartial panel, he would make a pretty good panel leader, but he wouldn't be, because his goal is to satisfy the wants of his community and not to be a beacon or martyr for some higher moral cause. And that's his prerogative and is totally understandable.

Someone like Keitaro, Doom, Dazwa, and so forth would be a good panel leader. Someone we know is willing to run a variety of rulesets and tournament types but also cares about the health of the community. There are plenty of guys out there, but then that isn't even the issue. :/

 

[Tien2500]

Brain scans, clearly. :D

That was one of the things that was problematic: so many people were convinced AZ had an agenda at the start. Even though that's debatable, we want someone that doesn't have an agenda. But the problem to me isn't finding someone that's not objective (this is relatively easy and there are plenty of people who will play on any stage and in any ruleset, are impartial to MK bans, and so forth), it's forcing a shift in the community's expectations that is nearly impossible. Right now, players (wrongly) want rulesets approved by top players.

For example, I think Alex Strife is a good guy. He wants to give the community what it wants for the most part and make it happy. If the community wanted a ruleset made by an impartial panel, he would make a pretty good panel leader, but he wouldn't be, because his goal is to satisfy the wants of his community and not to be a beacon or martyr for some higher moral cause. And that's his prerogative and is totally understandable.

Someone like Keitaro, Doom, Dazwa, and so forth would be a good panel leader. Someone we know is willing to run a variety of rulesets and tournament types but also cares about the health of the community. There are plenty of guys out there, but then that isn't even the issue. :/

Brawl is kind of a lost cause at this point. The game is what it is, and there is no structure that would enable any sort of major shift in rules. My advice to you, and to the community in general, would be to start focusing on the next game, and create a strong and flexible infrastructure to make rules BEFORE the game is out. Have a clear cut criteria for what makes stages/characters ban worthy or not, and so on. Unless you have that ready from day 1, it's going to be very hard to get anything meaningful accomplished.

 

[1PokeMastr]

Brawl is kind of a lost cause at this point. The game is what it is, and there is no structure that would enable any sort of major shift in rules. My advice to you, and to the community in general, would be to start focusing on the next game, and create a strong and flexible infrastructure to make rules BEFORE the game is out. Have a clear cut criteria for what makes stages/characters ban worthy or not, and so on. Unless you have that ready from day 1, it's going to be very hard to get anything meaningful accomplished.

How would we be able to make a ruleset for a new game based off of an Old one ?

New Physics, Stages, Characters, etc.

It'd be like hearing about Melee's development during the 64 era and trying to make a ruleset based on what happens/ happened in 64, but for Melee.

Each smash game is entirely different from the next so it's impossible to have a predetermined ruleset.

^-^

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I wouldn't go so far as to say most. Going by their achievements (whom they've beaten) and/or their results at Apex 2012 and 2013, Coney, Atomsk, Vex, Seibrik, Kain, Havok, and MikeHaze are all most probably top level. If I wanted to be more liberal, I'd say that 4GOD could arguably also go on that list.

Atomsk was once top level, but not anymore. I don't think Coney and Vex were ever top level (maybe Vex with Bowser). Havok might have been, but it doesn't matter anymore since he quit Snake. I would say kain is top level though

How can a character that gets borderline hardcountered by MK, that loses to ICs, Olimar, Falco, Snake and is evenish with Wario, ZSS and Marth be 2nd best?

He goes even with all those characters, but that is why I feel Diddy should be 4th. He has no significant Disadvatages, but at the same time, he has no significant advantages

 

[Z'zgashi]

I personally feel Diddy should be 4th.

Imo, MK > ICs > Oli > Diddy > Snake > Falco > ZSS/Marth > Pika > Wario > Everyone else

 

[Seagull Joe]

Kain and I are about equal in skill level. Our placements are generally the same wherever we go/whenever we're at the same tourney. He does usually beat me in dittos (I suck at these) and doubles (Usually game 5 lmao) if that holds any worth. Ish placed the highest at Apex 2012 of mains!

The best is MegaRobMan though. Dunno why any other name is being popped around.

How can a character that gets borderline hardcountered by MK, that loses to ICs, Olimar, Falco, Snake and is evenish with Wario, ZSS and Marth be 2nd best?

is even with /. He +1's or +2's . He loses to / -1. He loses to -1 or -2. I don't ever know where to put the ratio of vs . Adhd's record is so good vs 's...

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

He +1's or +2's

+1 maybe, +2 keep dreaming.

salem can (and has) beat adhd, v115 beat zinoto and p-1 recently. I don't think it's even like gheb does but +2 is out of the question.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Snake isn't all that difficult for Diddy. I'd say it's even. Even lingering in Diddy's advantage with 55-45 imo.
Falco isnt half bad either, as both characters can destroy each other quite well. It's 50-50 imo.
Wario is stupid, but not too hard either. Don't know where to rank this one though.
MetaKnight isn't -2, but -1 can easily be assumed yeah.

Diddy does have the advantage vs Zero Suit Samus yeah (no +2 though, but +1; definitely), but also Marth and Pikachu (which are imo easier than Zero Suit Samus).

So overall, he only loses against MetaKnight. Ohh... And chain grabs.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

@ Seagull, you second MK though

 

[infiniteV115]

Lol @ the thought of Diddy:ZSS being +2

 

[Seagull Joe]

@ Seagull, you second MK though

While true, has not advanced me in tourney vs any character besides / and I never run into them in the Midwest/At Apex's (The tourneys Kain and I have both been at).

• At Apex 2013 I used one time vs Nakat's in which I lost.
• At Apex 2012 I used once vs DeLux in which I lost.
• At Ps5 I was all except vs LOE1 in a pools set and vs Shugo one time which I lost (Shugo is my midwest kryptonite).
• At Ps4 I was all except I beat DeLux in pools with a round.
• At retribution I went for 2 games vs Fizzle's / and won via timeout lmao.

I don't use my alts very often unless I feel I can gay someone via stage mechanics or the matchup is horrendous for .

I also don't really care much in pools except at nationals so I've gone a lot of characters. Only bracket matters to me.

 

[Tien2500]

How would we be able to make a ruleset for a new game based off of an Old one ?

New Physics, Stages, Characters, etc.

It'd be like hearing about Melee's development during the 64 era and trying to make a ruleset based on what happens/ happened in 64, but for Melee.

Each smash game is entirely different from the next so it's impossible to have a predetermined ruleset.

^-^

It's not possible to have a completely set in stone ruleset, but we can decide some things in advance. For example, we can come up with an objective way to determine criteria for banning a character. Maybe that could be done based on character viability (if character X makes X amount of the cast unviable) based on tournament representations, based on tournament winnings etc. That's an example of something that could be set up beforehand.

More importantly though, an overall system for decision making can be arranged. For Brawl we didn't have a clear way to decide anything. Some issues were made by the backroom, others were put to popular vote, then the whole Unity thing. It was kind of a cluster**** where there was no established way to set anything up, and any major changes became impossible.

And that's really the important thing. It's not so much about setting rules in stone right now. Obviously, we can't put together a stage list or anything. It's about setting up an agreed upon system to deal with these various issues as they arise and perhaps setting up general guidelines regarding issues (roster and stage lists, things like hacking out tripping, etc) that can be expected to pop up.

 

[swordgard]

Lol @ the thought of Diddy:ZSS being +2

It's one of the few where ZSS really seems to be innately really good at in the top tiers due to her moveset too.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

TBH, it's debatably even. I don't agree, but it isn't totally out of the question and with some more solid performance from ZSS in the MU I could change my mind.

ZSS' item game is silly, probably better than Diddy's at top levels of play and if Diddy takes out two bananas, ZSS can pretty much always take one of them due to her mobility.

 

[infiniteV115]

ZSS' item game is silly, probably better than Diddy's at top levels of play

I don't agree. You can't just apply the term 'item game' in a situation like this. Bananas and suitpieces are 2 very different items; the ZSS is going to be slightly better with suitpieces and the Diddy is going to be slightly better with bananas at top level, barring something like a huge gap in skill/MU experience.

I agree with everything else though.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I don't know... ZSS is very, very good with bananas. lol

 

[Zinoto]

Since when did we get hard countered by ? MW players are starting to pick up for . I'd say -1.

Also I agree with - being even. We don't +2 (I wish we did).

 

[infiniteV115]

I guess I misread cause I thought you were talking about the players lol
I still think Diddy's is better. He can set up the fortress (banana in hand, banana in front, blasting peanuts) and the fact that he can cancel his popgun into his shield makes it that much stronger.

Additionally his glidetosses are the ideal length for his moveset, he can still grab you while holding a banana (sideB), his regular throws complement his bananas well cause they have good base knockback (ie they're good GTFO options that allow him to establish stage control and set up the fortress easily) and his sh aerials to pick up the bananas (mostly fair and bair) work really well cause they'll come out at a very good height and still AC. He can also mixup his landings well using a combination of banana tosses (including z-drops) and reverse popgun cancels.

ZSS has good locks with bananas that incorporate dsmash and lasers, but they're hard to setup. Outside of that she doesn't really have much. Sometimes I feel like her glidetoss is too long, but maybe that's just me not using JCtosses enough.

It's really mostly the fortress, sideB, glidetoss length and his regular throws that make his banana game so good.

 

[Dekillsage]

I personally feel Diddy should be 4th.

Imo, MK > ICs > Oli > Diddy > Snake > Falco > ZSS/Marth > Pika > Wario > Everyone else

I don't really agree with IC's being top 3, let alone 2nd. If you're gonna have Oli and Ic's as top 3 then at least put oli at 2nd.

is even with /. He +1's or +2's . He loses to / -1. He loses to -1 or -2. I don't ever know where to put the ratio of vs . Adhd's record is so good vs 's...

Ice Climbers beat diddy kong imo.(clean) Olimar diddy also looks +1 for olimar as well.

Since when did we get hard countered by ? MW players are starting to pick up for . I'd say -1.

Also I agree with - being even. We don't +2 (I wish we did).

Snake vs Diddy kong is evenish. It really depends on whether or not the diddy player can put snake in positions to get spiked/ saving your kill move. Watching adhd vs razer @ apex 2012 is an example of this. Adhd outplayed razer for the most part but couldn't kill him because his kill moves were staled.