Official BBR Tier List v7

[da K.I.D.]

Regardless of MKs existence it is an arbitrary decision to use % as the deciding factor upon a timeout.

Its also the best rule to use as the deciding factor, upon a timeout.

 

[Cassio]

Honestly, it comes down to preference. I think overall sentiment is its silly to split hairs on how 'correct' specific common practice rules are when in the end the overwhelming majority of people prefer a game thats been nuked to oblivion and back.

 

[Delta-cod]

IC > Yoshi

I play the MU tons with Firefly.

Yoshi has some safe stuff with DJ nair but once in Yoshi has no counter to a desynced blizzard as trying to trade will just get him hit. Ice blocks also create a real problem since Yoshi's shield is really bad.
Also Yoshi gets off on punishing landings, but Yoshi has no way of punishing blizzard.

Competent ICs vs competent Yoshi

I think this MU is hard for ICs but if both players know the MU it's in ICs favour.

No. Desynced Blizzard is easy to beat, because you have nearly ZERO mobility with it. All Yoshi needs to do is throw an egg. It goes right through Blizzard and breaks up the desync.

Yoshi's shield doesn't matter in this MU, lol.

 

[Karnu]

Lucas for mid tier!!!

*runs*

 

[| Big D |]

No. Desynced Blizzard is easy to beat, because you have nearly ZERO mobility with it. All Yoshi needs to do is throw an egg. It goes right through Blizzard and breaks up the desync.

Yoshi's shield doesn't matter in this MU, lol.

Trust me I'm aware, that's why I said once in. Yoshi has eggs and we have ice blocks. Once the gap closes then Yoshi doesn't have an answer to blizzard.

A synced ICs are subject to pivot grab, but with one with an ice block/blizzard to protect them doesn't need to fear pivot grabs, double jump nair, or egg lays.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Its also the best rule to use as the deciding factor, upon a timeout.

Even if that were the case that'd still means rules such as a LGL can be argued to be legitimate as they're not 'arbitrary nerfs' but counter-measures to an arbitrary buff.

 

[Delta-cod]

Trust me I'm aware, that's why I said once in. Yoshi has eggs and we have ice blocks. Once the gap closes then Yoshi doesn't have an answer to blizzard.

A synced ICs are subject to pivot grab, but with one with an ice block/blizzard to protect them doesn't need to fear pivot grabs, double jump nair, or egg lays.

Ah, I may have missed that. Sorry. Yoshi may not have a direct answer in that case, but he can still just escape. It's not like he's locked.

If ICs attempt to rush with an Ice Block protecting them, they're still subject to DJ Nair and Bair, because those cause Yoshi to be above the IB. Blizzard would usually imply you're very close, and if you're further away, Eggs are still a valid option.

 

[Luigisama]

so the big question is. both ics run in for a grab and yoshi goes in with a grab. Who gets the grab?

 

[Delta-cod]

Yoshi because his has more range.

He then gets Fsmashed by Nana

 

[BSP]

Should've been chucking eggs from fullscreen.

 

[infiniteV115]

I imagine Yoshi has very little trouble landing due to Egg Lay (that's his nB, right?)

 

[Juushichi]

Yes, V115.

 

[Delta-cod]

Yeah, but if the ICs can get close enough they can spotdodge > Grab to punish. It's not too difficult to learn the spacing to avoid Egg Laying in that situation, though.

 

[Z'zgashi]

I really only use retreating egg lay unless I know i can land it (cuz retreating egg lay isnt punishable by ICs at all) and pivot grabs keep the ICs out sooooo well.

 

[Delta-cod]

Both options are punishable on read by dash > spot dodge > grab.

 

[DMG]

Even if that were the case that'd still means rules such as a LGL can be argued to be legitimate as they're not 'arbitrary nerfs' but counter-measures to an arbitrary buff.

Well what win condition for timeouts isn't arbitrary at all, at least for this game? Going off stock only ignores obvious and massive damage/% leads. Even if you make the argument that "well we can't really tell who's in the lead with gimps and xyz possible in Smash", that rule will still obviously deprive people of wins in pretty obvious leading spots. Going off % is the best method IF your goal or belief is to definitively find a winner once time runs out. Having a rematch if stocks are tied is the best method IF your goal or belief is that it's too hard/impossible for people to tell who's "ahead" in Smash and therefore you should rematch until someone takes away the last stock.


Going with stock rematch would take out some incentive and reward for camping strategies, but it would also benefit others. In fact, this rule gives the realistic potential for the losing side to now camp and get back to even for the rematch (unless you did a rematch with % the same but that's a bit iffy). Sure, nobody's pulling off a "flimsy" win, but other people with solid leads will now have to settle with not winning and going back to even.


LGL is not legitimate through the % rule being active. It SHOULD be legitimate through trying to regulate edge gameplay and remove the stalling potential THAT STILL EXISTS even if you change the timeout rule to stock rematch. The stalling potential and implications, even after a rule change, are still worthy enough of controlling edge play. It takes a much bigger bite out of other character's planking though: G^W Pit etc needing a stock lead before planking is a huge boner killer lol. That would actually be a very good way (not permanent but still fairly good) way of dealing with their planking rule wise. Although some MU's would still be incredibly gay with a stock lead, you're at least hitting them strong.


You are going to have to regulate MK's edge gameplay unless you literally change the win condition to "You have to remove all 3 stocks or else you rematch". That would be the only way to permanently shut down planking getting the win, well that and making it illegal for MK to grab the edge, but those would be terrible solutions lol.

 

[Cassio]

Welp, Im not really a big fan of this argument anymore since it repeats everything stated months ago. But Ill put out a few notes.

This:

LGL is not legitimate through the % rule being active.

is incorrect because of this:

Well what win condition for timeouts isn't arbitrary at all, at least for this game?

because its precisely true that any win condition the community will accept will also be arbitrary, which is why an arbitrary lgl becomes reasonable assuming one is requested and unreasonable assuming people hate it.

The problem with appealing to a "best method" is that, ultimately, youre appealing to personal preference. Not what the game determines. Which means there really cant be an objective best method, and I refer back to what I stated last page:

Honestly, it comes down to preference. I think overall sentiment is its silly to split hairs on how 'correct' specific common practice rules are when in the end the overwhelming majority of people prefer a game thats been nuked to oblivion and back.

I actually find it a bit funny that the creators pushed a game that could be played in multiple ways for multiple preferences...and thats how it turned out competitively.

 

[DMG]

That's sorta off the mark I was talking about. What I meant was that the LGL came about, and exists, separate of the % rule. Regulating the edge was going to occur regardless of what the specific timeout clause was. Gheb suggested that you could argue we use the LGL as a counter balance or that we created the LGL directly because of the % rule. But that's not the case. If you changed the timeout rule to stock lead or rematch, the community would still ask for a LGL (at least on MK, it might take some time to see how it impacts non MK plankers).

Regulating the edge to stop stalling is still relevant unless you make that illegal (no grabbing the edge, tiny 5 LGL, stalling rule enforced heavily against planking etc) or unviable (can only get a win with a 2 stock and 100% lead). Making timeout wins completely unviable is not a good idea because it also entails ridiculous win conditions. Making stalling tactics completely illegal also has gray area and negative consequences.


Either way, LGL or some other similar rule will continue to exist unless you implement bad win conditions or strictly STRICTLY and arbitrarily enforce no stalling under a broad range of situations. The LGL was also created independent of the % rule and would have came around even if we started off the game with a stock-rematch rule instead of %. It's not like getting more than a % lead somehow would change the mentality of padding the lead with planking lol. The LGL has it's own goal regardless of what the timeout win condition is, so no you could not argue that it's a direct counter balance to the % rule. There's no reasonable tie-in of the LGL to the % rule. The power of planking is strongest under the % rule, but it's also strong enough under stock-rematch rule to keep it in the game. Again, unless you make win conditions ridiculous or stalling gets hammered, the community will still want AT LEAST something for MK to stop him from grabbing the edge a bajillion times.

 

[Cassio]

That's sorta off the mark I was talking about. What I meant was that the LGL came about, and exists, separate of the % rule.

Alright, thanks for clarifying. In regards to an lgl being indepandant of the %rule, that would be correct if there were a real way to separate a good and bad win condition. But as mentioned ultimately separating 'good' and 'bad' will appeal to personal preference and not anything the game itself has determined. Theres nothing wrong with that, just adding clarification that a 'good' or 'best' win condition at that point will eventually boil down to 'what most people want'.

 

[GoML!]

This Tier List is phenomenal. Good job to everyone who did the research for it
I actually had an extremely similar one a few months ago when v6 came out, but i had ice climbers wayyy lower

 

[MEOW1337KITTEH]

Alright, gonna use some good math here.

New formula for future matches.
Current % = C
Total % Taken = T

(T/3)/C = Magic Number

Now comparing these magic numbers can give a more accurate determination of percent leads. If their health is above the average, due to being gimped earlier or holding on to the stock for a while, the ratio will be lower.

Any problems (other than laziness) eith this idea?

 

[da K.I.D.]

Nope, just laziness.

 

[ぱみゅ]

You have no idea how many good ideas have been discarded ONLY because of laziness.

 

[da K.I.D.]

It all depends on how you feel about knowing whether you are winning or not when time runs out.

Personally i dont know how i feel but im leaning towards not liking the idea of having a game time out and not knowing who won or lost right then and there.

 

[MEOW1337KITTEH]

I feel that it is a punishment for camping to a timeout. Muahahaha now you have to wait another minute if even that.

 

[ぱみゅ]

I actually like not knowing who's in he lead.
It will avoid camping for a timeout vicory (unless it's been obvious who's winnining), and people will only rely on camping because of the matchup, the stage, the playstyle, or simply because they feel like it, not because that would help them earn a victory.

Anyway, I maybe can make some experiments today or tomorrow, to see how it would go.

 

[Z'zgashi]

A stock is a stock regardless of how early it was taken, and if two are tied on the same stock and one has a higher %, the one with the lower percent is winning straight up cuz hes done more damage. If you're in a match up where you die earlier, whether it be from gimps, being lighter, or having less potent kill moves, thats just a disadvantage you'll have to deal with in that MU. No need to make some dumb, questionable, over complicated rule just because you feel that since you die earlier you should have some advantage. Stock = Stock no matter how early it is and % = damage you've allowed your opponent to give you this stock, and since you arent dead yet, having more damage means youre behind in the stock. Say youre a Snake at 80% against a Jiggs at 60%. Snake obv isnt dying anytime soon, and one utilt could easily be the end for Jiggs, but the Snake has been hit more, so if it goes to time, Jiggs wins because Snake allowed himself to take more damage, simple as that.

 

[ErikG]

Alright, gonna use some good math here.

New formula for future matches.
Current % = C
Total % Taken = T

(T/3)/C = Magic Number

Now comparing these magic numbers can give a more accurate determination of percent leads. If their health is above the average, due to being gimped earlier or holding on to the stock for a while, the ratio will be lower.

Any problems (other than laziness) eith this idea?

For one, you can write the formula as T/(3C) = "Magic Number"

Although I'm not really sure why the 3 is in the formula. Is it supposed 3 stocks. In that case wouldn't you want to make the formula be something along the lines of T/(XC) = "Magic Number" where X is what stock you're on?

I don't really see how this shows a percent lead. Having less percent on the same stock as your opponent shows percent leads.

 

[Doc King]

King Dedede sucks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8kUKJJpcac&feature=related

Captain Falcon beats King Dedede. King Dedede is an overhyped gimmick that can be easily beat if you just don't get grabbed. It's Ally so there's no excuses.

I'm pretty sure Ike, Luigi, Mario, and Zelda go even with Dedede.

Dedede's low tier and mid tier matchups aren't destroying because half of the mid tier goes even with him and a few low tiers can actually beat or go even with him.

There's only like a few players that pocket him and ppl hae been quitting Dedede. Dedede has never won a major as far as I know.

Lets celebrate with having the biggest drop in tier list history. King Dedede stands for:

Dumb *** gimmicks that are so easily avoidable
Everyone agrees he sucks
Doesn't get any tourney rep
Even some low tiers can beat him
Dying character without any metagame improvement since Brawl release
Ever think about how his d throw is a cheap low percent combo that goes across the stage a few times

So there you have it. Dedede sucks! King ******* or King d throw is more like it.

 

[Z'zgashi]

Imo hes top of mid tier :3c

 

[MEOW1337KITTEH]

For one, you can write the formula as T/(3C) = "Magic Number"

Although I'm not really sure why the 3 is in the formula. Is it supposed 3 stocks. In that case wouldn't you want to make the formula be something along the lines of T/(XC) = "Magic Number" where X is what stock you're on?

I don't really see how this shows a percent lead. Having less percent on the same stock as your opponent shows percent leads.

True I am just hoping from the bottom of my heart that timeout don't happen with 2 or 3 stocks remaining.. But yeah that would be correct.

 

[Chuee]

King Dedede sucks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8kUKJJpcac&feature=related

Captain Falcon beats King Dedede. King Dedede is an overhyped gimmick that can be easily beat if you just don't get grabbed. It's Ally so there's no excuses.

I'm pretty sure Ike, Luigi, Mario, and Zelda go even with Dedede.

Dedede's low tier and mid tier matchups aren't destroying because half of the mid tier goes even with him and a few low tiers can actually beat or go even with him.

There's only like a few players that pocket him and ppl hae been quitting Dedede. Dedede has never won a major as far as I know.

Lets celebrate with having the biggest drop in tier list history. King Dedede stands for:

Dumb *** gimmicks that are so easily avoidable
Everyone agrees he sucks
Doesn't get any tourney rep
Even some low tiers can beat him
Dying character without any metagame improvement since Brawl release
Ever think about how his d throw is a cheap low percent combo that goes across the stage a few times

So there you have it. Dedede sucks! King ******* or King d throw is more like it.

So you go from heavily overrated D3 to heavily underrated D3?
That's nice.

 

[PMC66]

D3 for 20th place lol

 

[Doc King]

Imo hes top of mid tier :3c

He could be borderline tier too. I was kind of joking/trolling about him being garbage, but I really feel that he needs to be much lower. A character who losses to a handful of top tiers so badly wouldn't be capable of much at top level.

I think that Falcon is probably -1 against Dedede.

So you go from heavily overrated D3 to heavily underrated D3?
That's nice.

Why thank you

D3 for 20th place lol

Indeed.

 

[PMC66]

When Lucas is mid on the next tier list I will congratulate Mekos and the other lucas mains on their achievements.

Then i will procide to laugh and ridicule you all xD

 

[Doc King]

I don't know if one tournament should count as immediately being mid tier. Ally I think placed well with Falcon one time and PT won several events. I also see Luigi do alright in tournament.

Man mekos must really love lucas or something.

Edit: I think Luigi should be a few spots higher.

 

[Chuee]

I don't know if one tournament should count as immediately being mid tier. Ally I think placed well with Falcon one time and PT won several events. I also see Luigi do alright in tournament.

Ally places well with Falcon in Mid/Low tier tournies.
And Reflex's good national placings are him using Wario/PT.

 

[Doc King]

Ally places well with Falcon in Mid/Low tier tournies.
And Reflex's good national placings are him using Wario/PT.

Reflex still wins really well with them and actually makes good money. Reflex made it to Apex bracket.

I once saw mekos get really destroyed by a DK.

Also ppl should stop saying Lucas is mid tier because I wanna mention a couple of things.

1) Mekos didn't make any money.
2) Mekos got 9th out of 17.
3) Mekos won 2 rounds.
4) Trela really wrecked Mekos (At least in game 1)

I still think Lucas is low tier. It just seems that everytime I see mekos, he usually losses pretty hard to a high/top tier character.

 

[Jimmy?]

Um, are those all relating to SKTAR? Because if so, that's.... wrong. .-.

Mekos got 9th out of 64 (I think? Might be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure it was 64) and beat Pelca, Tyrant, and Gluttony, which is more than two rounds.

And, I mean, it's obvious that most players play high/top tier characters, so if he loses, just statistically.... it's more likely for him to have lost to a top tier character. There are just more of them.

Whether Lucas becomes mid tier or not is of little consequence to me and I'm not making an argument either way, but those four points of yours don't really mean much as far as the placing of the character go. A lot of characters didn't place in the money at SKTAR. A lot of people lose to Trela. That's not what makes someone low tier. .-.

 

[C.J.]

64 made bracket. There was something like 140 entrants.