Official Brawl Tier Discussion (OP Updated)

[Yonder]

Alright then, I guess adapt may have one of the best tier lists on here then .

 

[Adapt]

I think he meant

Upper Mid
Lower Mid

Correct


DDD is a funny character... his matchups are not as good as GaW's by any stretch of the imagination, but he is really kicking *** in tourneys. He has ~50% more points according to Ankoku's list. I think part of that is because people like M2K use DDD+MK... but it can't all be like that.

I could switch him I guess. We'll see.

 

[Dpete]

@Adapt's list: I don't think Kirby is better than Pikachu and Toon Link... tourney results or not. Also, I might switch Ganon with Jiggs.

And do you care to explain the Fox argument, NSS?

 

[metalmonstar]

Lucario's results are so skewed it is not even funny. Azen, with some help from a few other players such as Anther, Shadow, and Boa, has pretty much bumped Lucario's placing higher than it would be if he wasn't played by greats. Azen comes in either first or Second and could do so regardless of character. If we took away all the points Azen has given Lucario we would me left with about a C ranking.

With the exception of Lucien and Gamble Fox really hasn't won much. In fact his placing seems to be around 5-7th on average. This concerns me about a bit. Fox also has some matchup issues.

Dk is a great character don't get me wrong but I think he places well because a large amount of the tournament scene is Snake and Metaknights both of which he does well against. Thus DK players can make it far in tournaments with little worries of fighting a character that beats him. DK has some noticeable character flaws. Probably the biggest thing that will keep him from a higher placement is his matchups across the board. I am sorry, but a 1-9 or 0-10 matchup can really hurt your position on a tier list especially when it is a popular tournament character.

Pika, toon link, and Zelda are all great characters on Paper. All three of them have 20+ favorable matchups. Each of them have very good properties and a decent overall moveset. However they are all unpopular characters. However when toon link appears at a tournament he seems to normally place top 3. Pika seems to place somewhere in the top 4 sometimes just missing the mark with a 5th place. Also Pika doesn't seem to show up in the big tournaments. 37 is the largest tournament that Pika has placed top 8 in. Anther's win was in a tournament with only 20 or so people.

The final point to note is that these characters are moving up. Which can lead on to believe that they are going to reach their actual position in the future.

 

[Browny]

what a stupid way to look at things. Overswarm seems to be doing all the ROB wins, and the rest by himself, no one considers ROB a bad character. pretty much every character has a few great players behind them. I honestly doubt Falco would be anywhere near where he is now if it wasnt for the few players dominating the early tourneys with him. Wario even more so.

did you ever think, maybe the reason characters like lucario, dedede, wario, falco, ROB (especially, never expected it to become popular) attract great players to main them, is because those people believe that character is actually really good, and on top of that, can prove it again and again?

 

[Dpete]

I agree with djbrowny. Wasn't some big name maining Ganondorf at the beginning of Brawl, then realized he was terrible and moved on to MK?

 

[metalmonstar]

Overswarm is in the same position as Anther really. He has won two tournament with less than 30 people. He certainly does not make up the majority over ROB's score considering ROB has reared his head over 20 times in the summer tournaments.

Also Sethlon isn't the only one spear heading Falco's position either. Both ROB and Falco do well in multiple hands not just the greats.

Look at Falcon's position. Often considered the worst character in the game yet RoyR came in Second with him. How can you say that is an accurate representation?

Not including Critical hit, Azen has given Lucario almos, if not more,t 100 points. Overswarm has only given ROB 40 points.

 

[KingK]

I think metalmonstar has a point; those things need to be taken into consideration. Is a character placing well in tournaments because of actual strength or more because of perception of strength created by one really great player?

I'm not saying that a really truly crappy character could be turned into an A rank in the community's eyes because of one player. However, I think there's probably a margin of error of at least 5-6 places with tourney placings, especially for the characters metalmonstar mentioned (DK, Pika, TL, Zelda, and so on). It's not necessarily the case but it certainly could be.

A good question to ask though is how much should tournament performance factor into a tier list? What I mean by that is if a character like DK tends to do well against the most popular and strongest tournament characters (Snake, MK) should that be taken into consideration for their tier placement? Or should tier placements be created based on the matchups that a character has with every other member of the cast?

 

[Dpete]

Determining matchups is really difficult and should be taken with a grain of salt, especially with tier rankings. I'd say I have experience in this subject, trying to organize Kirby's matchup rankings. There's so many factors in getting a correct rating for any given matchup. Plus, you get the anomalies that totally go against your rankings.

Tournaments aren't perfect to base tier lists off of, but its the best thing we have. Other smaller things such as matchups and at this point in the metagame "potential" should have an affect on tier lists, but not to the extent of tourny results, which is just the application of matchups and potential.

 

[metalmonstar]

How I would do it? I would create two self learning, self correcting CPU’s. They would continually be pitted against each other, improving their game and learning new ATs and exploits in order to improve. After battling each character 15 times they would print out the results and thus continue this process until they reached the ceiling of technical skill thus a final and perfect tier list would be created.

However this has a few problems, 1) the computers would reach a level unattainable by human players and 2) A program would take forever to create and would require a very high level computer. I do avoid the first problem a bit by having the computer print out tier list every so often. I would have to find out where the competitive scene is at with the current metagame and use that print out.

Anyways, I mentioned earlier how I would create a tier list and why.
Tier list can’t be based of tournament placement solely because popularity and skill skew the results. A really good player may help push a bad character up in tournament placing.

Also if there are 100 good metaknight mains across the globe yet there are only 2 good DK players across the globe. Then is obvious that metaknight will have more tournament wins and a higher ranking.

To me tiers are based off how good the character is when everyone is playing at the same skill level. If a Fox faces a Pikachu, both at the same skill level, who will win more often then not.

Which is why I propose the following system,

First compile a weighted list of pro and cons. This can be weight, speed, priority, little quirks, advanced techniques and so on. This would take a lot of time. Something I had hoped to do but realized I couldn’t. To me this is the most important aspect in deciding where a character goes, because this shows how good a character is and can be.

Secondly we arrive at a list of matchups. I hold it as being the second most important because it allows us to see how well the character stacks up against everyone else. However it is the second most important because a bad character could have one aspect that shuts down a better character completely. Look at Snake, he has the worst matchups of any top tier character, yet there is little dispute that he is the best.

Finally we have tournament placing. In time this will become a reliable way of placing characters. However it is the most open to skewing and bias, which is why I rank it third in importance. Better players can tip their main up a bit on the scale and popularity also plays a part. It will be years before tournament standings reflect an accurate tier list, and we are trying to make one now.

Determining matchups is really difficult and should be taken with a grain of salt, especially with tier rankings. I'd say I have experience in this subject, trying to organize Kirby's matchup rankings. There's so many factors in getting a correct rating for any given matchup. Plus, you get the anomalies that totally go against your rankings.

Tournaments aren't perfect to base tier lists off of, but its the best thing we have. Other smaller things such as matchups and at this point in the metagame "potential" should have an affect on tier lists, but not to the extent of tourny results, which is just the application of matchups and potential.

Just put up whatever Gonzo says. I am sure he is at least 90% correct on the Kirby matchups.

 

[Dpete]

To me tiers are based off how good the character is when everyone is playing at the same skill level. If a Fox faces a Pikachu, both at the same skill level, who will win more often then not.

First of all, let me point out that never at any point are humans going to be playing at the same skill level. There's generalized "tiers" of skill (excuse the irony), but I don't think its possible to have two players with the exact same experience, granted the amount of variables in Brawl. Your supercomputer sounds nice and could produce the same level of skill, but I think we both realize its not going to happen.

First compile a weighted list of pro and cons. This can be weight, speed, priority, little quirks, advanced techniques and so on. This would take a lot of time. Something I had hoped to do but realized I couldn’t. To me this is the most important aspect in deciding where a character goes, because this shows how good a character is and can be.

This "weighted list" is impossible to compile. The only thing that can easily be proved on your list is weight. The rest either have so many variables or are so hard to test you could never get accurate measures on them. I first had this thought when trying to create matchup rankings, but it was quickly shown to me how hard it was to prove these facts. This also means it is hard to really prove matchups, so they turn out to be more abstract than tourney rankings, making tourney rankings the most concrete thing to base a tier list on.

I completely understand your points about tourney rankings being not so optimal to base a tier list on, and I do agree. But again, its the best thing we have.

And on a side note, I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic with that Gonzo remark or not. I would assume so, but I will say he is one of the most experienced Kirby's on these forums and you cannot just disregard his opinion.

 

[Nigerian Star Storm]

@Adapt's list: I don't think Kirby is better than Pikachu and Toon Link... tourney results or not. Also, I might switch Ganon with Jiggs.

And do you care to explain the Fox argument, NSS?

Two characters that are getting too much slack from theoretical match-ups despite the fact they do very well in tournaments: King DeDeDe and Fox.

Everyone consistently disregards their tournament performance and simply goes with the match-ups with these two. These two are the ones who are most unjustly placed.'

Looking at King DeDeDe, in the character rankings thread vs. others:
1 Snake (25 top8, 20 top4, 10 top2, 11 wins) - 875.4
2 Meta Knight (24 top8, 13 top4, 14 top2, 8 wins) -624.925
3 King Dedede (15 top8, 8 top4, 7 top2, 7 wins) - 543.73125
4 Marth (13 top8, 9 top4, 2 top2, 6 wins) - 316.29375 - 5
5 Mr. Game & Watch (9 top8, 7 top4, 6 top2, 5 wins) - 284.037535 - 8
6 Lucario (8 top8, 4 top4, 3 top2, 5 wins) - 228.66875 - 10
7 ROB (13 top8, 10 top4, 2 top2, 4 wins) - 221.14375 - 4
8 Wario (12 top8, 8 top4, 1 top2, 4 wins) - 211.14375 - 9
9 Falco (10 top8, 5 top4, 3 top2, 2 wins) - 196.46875 - 7
10 Olimar (8 top8, 8 top4, 3 top2, 3 wins) - 185.30625 - 6

Look at the gap in points: over 200 between him and Marth. Not only that, look at his wins. They rival Metaknights. He's easily a cut above the rest of the "great" characters along with Snake and Metaknight. Why people flat out refuse to accept his tournament results are beyond me. Especially when many of those wins are from people using King DeDeDe SOLO. Yes, they don't even fall on secondaries a lot of the time. I'm sorry but that says something about his match-ups being completely out of proportion and should definitely make them hold zero water over tournament placings.

Then we look at Fox:
11 Donkey Kong (4 top8, 5 top4, 1 top2, 4 wins) - 125.74375 - 13
12 Wolf (11 top8, 1 top4, 1 top2, 2 wins) - 115.4625 - 11
13 Fox (3 top8, 1 top4, 2 wins) - 111.2375 - 14
14 Ice Climbers (3 top8, 3 top4, 2 top2, 1 win) - 99.625 - 16
15 Kirby (5 top8, 6 top4, 1 top2, 1 win) - 92.0625
16 Pit (4 top8, 1 top4, 1 top2, 2 wins) - 86.725 - 12

Looking at Fox's points, he has significantly less placements than the other characters in his area. I mean, look at Wolf who has 15 placements versus Fox's 6 placements. Yet Fox is a mere 4 points behind him. What does this say? The things Wolf, Donkey Kong, etc... are winning are small tournaments with very little weight. But Fox is winning big events, and the people who are winning with him such as Gamble, are using Fox SOLO. So Fox is still very high despite being vastly underplayed compared to the other characters around him and still doing well in big events despite his supposedly terrible match-ups. Once again I believe the match-ups for this character are heavily flawed and should definitely not be holding more weight than tournament results.

You're hurting two characters who continually PROVE themselves to be great characters. I constantly see people say "well if you think so-and-so is so good and their match-ups aren't so bad, then go prove it by winning BIG tournaments!". Well Fox and King DeDeDe are showing what their worth, even with Fox being underplayed with almost no one maining him and very few people contributing to his metagame. Yet, people will make exceptions for Zelda and Toon Link and Diddy Kong saying "well, they are obviously very good and just underplayed!". Yet when you look at their character boards you see many people contributing to their metagame and helping developing strategies and match-ups. Yet you don't see much intelligent discussion in the Fox forums. Yet, he's still doing great. King DeDeDe is doing amazing and people just want to say everyone in the world has an advantage on him and it just isn't true. He's winning these tournaments and beating these characters despite having terrible match-ups supposedly.

You need to realize when match-ups need to be re-evaluated instead of saying tournament placings need to be re-evaluated. Tournament match-ups are the actual, theoretical match-ups are simply opinions. If King DeDeDe is still beating these characters in real life, then obviously your opinions on paper are flawed. Same goes for Fox. If it's so easy for someone to pick Pikachu and chaingrab Fox to 70% three times and kill him, then why doesn't this happen? Obviously because it's harder than people think to do such a thing.

 

[Dpete]

Wow. I try to keep up with the tourney rankings, but it's obvious I need to look more into little details, such as the comparison between Fox and Wolf's placings, yet the similar score. Quite interesting really. Fox for most underrated character in Brawl? Maybe not quite, but still...

 

[TwilightKirby]

I dunno tierlists seem kinda hard to take seriously. I mean in the end its all about skill anyways. And what exactly are tierlists supposed to represent? people say they show which characters are "best" but what does this mean exactly? You can have a character that one person could use in such a bizarre perfect way that they beat everyone else but nobody else is capable of using that character and that person wouldn't be able to play as well with a "top tier" character. But since thats the character that wins all of the biggest tourneys mean its the best? Or is it the character that everyone can use extremely well with little practice?

Best just seems so subjective. Would a tierlist be the easiest to most difficult characters to use effectively? If so then tournament results shouldn't necessarily have as big of an impact due to all the variables on what is going on at a tournament.

 

[KingK]

....pointless drivel about tiers not meaning anything....

Anybody want to try to guess how many pages this thread would be if we removed all the vaporous posts about how "tires don exits" and "tiers are all subjective" and "who needs tiers anyway? what do they even mean?" and "characters don't win, players win" and on and on?

My guess is probably about 50.

 

[TwilightKirby]

Anybody want to try to guess how many pages this thread would be if we removed all the vaporous posts about how "tires don exits" and "tiers are all subjective" and "who needs tiers anyway? what do they even mean?" and "characters don't win, players win" and on and on?

My guess is probably about 50.

I am asking you to please define what you are trying to organize the characters by so that there is less conflict over tier arrangements. Best is extremely vague.

 

[Tomkraven]

I am asking you to please define what you are trying to organize the characters by so that there is less conflict over tier arrangements. Best is extremely vague.

QFT

guys he actually has a solid point. You cant really arrange characters in a "best to worst" list because that means that you should rank the players in a tier list too. who cares if yoshi is at the bottom of bottom tier if the player can beat any snake/Mk/DDD or any other character using him. In that way making a tier list without including the players who win the tournaments is meaningless.

If you all think that tier lists are acurate then just pick a top tier character in a tournament and just leave the controller laying on the floor. Is the character going to win by itself? NO!

i think ive made my point clear and sorry for my sucky english

 

[Corigames]

Yes you can. There are bad characters, and there are good ones. You can't say that the low tier stand just as fair a chance against the high ones, it's just simply not true. As the meta evolves and more things are introduced and more variables to the game are added, people will shift around in the tiers, but that doesn't mean that someone who is now at the bottom stands just the same chance as two at the top!

You can organize them. We will organize them. We have organize them. Tiers are suppose to represent who has the best chance of winning if two opponents that are fairly equal were to face off. You take into consideration why they are winning and how well they are winning. As the game grows it changes, and so will the meta. Snake may not always be on top, but you shouldn't be praying for Yoshi or Ganon to go on top any time soon. they just aren't as good as everyone else.

Now, stop bringing up overplayed topics such as tires don exits and such. We have walked this path a thousand times over and it is just pushing it into the ground.

 

[Dantarion]

I am asking you to please define what you are trying to organize the characters by so that there is less conflict over tier arrangements. Best is extremely vague.

Heres my take on it.

When you look at the moves that the characters have in Brawl, certain characters have an advantage over others.

For example, MK is fast, has multiple jumps, good recovery,good range, and many recovery gimping techniques. His only weakness is his weight.

However, Jigglypuff has a whole lot of problems. Lack of range, killing moves other than rollout and fsmash, and her ability to gimp peoples recoveries isn't as good at MK.

So, when looking at these factors, and not the skill of the people playing, MK should beat Jiggs.

We are just trying to make a list of characters based on the usability of their movesets.
Yes, a skilled Jiggs player can beat a Metaknight player, but it will probably take more skill and effort to win with jigglypuff than it will to use metaknight against that same person.

 

[TwilightKirby]

Heres my take on it.

When you look at the moves that the characters have in Brawl, certain characters have an advantage over others.

For example, MK is fast, has multiple jumps, good recovery,good range, and many recovery gimping techniques. His only weakness is his weight.

However, Jigglypuff has a whole lot of problems. Lack of range, killing moves other than rollout and fsmash, and her ability to gimp peoples recoveries isn't as good at MK.

So, when looking at these factors, and not the skill of the people playing, MK should beat Jiggs.

We are just trying to make a list of characters based on the usability of their movesets.
Yes, a skilled Jiggs player can beat a Metaknight player, but it will probably take more skill and effort to win with jigglypuff than it will to use metaknight against that same person.

So then tournament results really should have little bearing on tier lists? Because I think skill is probably the majority of what determines who wins a tournament no matter how you look at it. I think the only reason for people that win with "top tier" characters a lot is because people that are really skilled look for a character that they think is "the best". Since what we base the list off of are the same qualities that make a character feel better than others, than it makes sense that a good player that wants the best character would pick them. This would also explain things like D3 with his amazing tournament results but bad matchups in theory.

So if we are basing it entirely on theory like this, then tournament results really shouldn't come into play since thats much more of the players than the character. Now I am not saying this for sure but I am just thinking that theory and tournaments are two different things. The theory behind a character is just the character alone. A character with a player tied to can be something entirely different.

I dunno its just a lot of arguments in this thread seem to get recycled a lot (ive been lurking XD) and I think we should have a clear definition of what makes a character place higher than another. Someone will argue about how a character has matchups than another will bring up tournament results etc.

Theory and what players do are two different things. Does a tierlist base itself entirely on theory, entirely on how players perform, or a combination? I just get a feeling from reading this thread that everyone is basing their lists off of different variations of these.

 

[Adapt]

Argument for Fox and DDD

Update the tourney data NSS:

1 Snake (24 top8, 20 top4, 10 top2, 8 wins) - 665.51875
2 Meta Knight (28 top8, 16 top4, 12 top2, 11 wins) -508.5145833
3 King Dedede (15 top8, 9 top4, 7 top2, 7 wins) - 389.4541667

A Rank <Overused>
4 Mr. Game & Watch (8 top8, 8 top4, 8 top2, 5 wins) - 264.131285 - 5
5 Marth (15 top8, 9 top4, 3 top2, 7 wins) - 254.91875 - 4
6 Wario (11 top8, 7 top4, 2 top2, 4 wins) - 250.71875 - 8

B Rank <Standard>
7 ROB (18 top8, 11 top4, 2 top2, 3 wins) - 189.315
8 Falco (12 top8, 4 top4, 3 top2, 2 wins) - 162.2708333 - 9
9 Lucario (10 top8, 4 top4, 3 top2, 3 wins) - 148.29375 - 6
10 Olimar (8 top8, 8 top4, 2 top2, 3 wins) - 139.0875

C Rank <Borderline>
11 Donkey Kong (4 top8, 3 top4, 1 top2, 5 wins) - 106.66875
12 Wolf (11 top8, 2 top4, 2 top2, 2 wins) - 100.49375
13 Pit (4 top8, 1 top2, 3 wins) - 93.275 - 16
14 Fox (4 top8, 1 top4, 2 wins) - 92.08125 - 13
15 Ice Climbers (3 top8, 4 top4, 3 top2, 2 wins) - 90.5875 - 14
16 Kirby (5 top8, 6 top4, 2 top2, 1 win) - 87.5 - 15


DDD still has ~50% more points than GaW and his wins are nearly on par with Snake's for the June-July period. Fox has 10 less tourney placings than Wolf and is 8 points lower

So the arguments are still valid, imo.

I still have yet to see a reason to put TL or Pika ahead of characters like Fox

 

[Grunt]

So then tournament results really should have little bearing on tier lists? Because I think skill is probably the majority of what determines who wins a tournament no matter how you look at it.

Yes, skill does play a factor, but would Cort and PC Chris be doing as well if they played yoshi? no, they would get beat out by mediocre MK's and Snakes.

I think the only reason for people that win with "top tier" characters a lot is because people that are really skilled look for a character that they think is "the best". Since what we base the list off of are the same qualities that make a character feel better than others, than it makes sense that a good player that wants the best character would pick them. This would also explain things like D3 with his amazing tournament results but bad matchups in theory.

People try and say "X character is better than Y character, despite the tourney results", but the reason so many people play D3, snake etc, is because they are good, and easier to win with than the general cast. (if this has nothing to do with what you're talking about, I'm sorry, but that was a strangely worded run-on sentence.)

So if we are basing it entirely on theory like this, then tournament results really shouldn't come into play since thats much more of the players than the character. Now I am not saying this for sure but I am just thinking that theory and tournaments are two different things. The theory behind a character is just the character alone. A character with a player tied to can be something entirely different.

many people thought Wario was only decent at best, but Futile showed us otherwise. obviously Wario doesn't have much more potential, but was winning. In melee, Fox is top teir majorly based on his potential (shine etc.) despite Shiek and Marth winning more tournies. so yes. you have to find the right blend of both potential and tourney results.

I dunno its just a lot of arguments in this thread seem to get recycled a lot (ive been lurking XD) and I think we should have a clear definition of what makes a character place higher than another. Someone will argue about how a character has matchups than another will bring up tournament results etc.

Theory and what players do are two different things. Does a tierlist base itself entirely on theory, entirely on how players perform, or a combination? I just get a feeling from reading this thread that everyone is basing their lists off of different variations of these.

a combo. if we think X has terrible matchups, but he seems to be doing ok in tournies, then he must not be all that bad.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You need to realize when match-ups need to be re-evaluated instead of saying tournament placings need to be re-evaluated. Tournament match-ups are the actual, theoretical match-ups are simply opinions. If King DeDeDe is still beating these characters in real life, then obviously your opinions on paper are flawed. Same goes for Fox. If it's so easy for someone to pick Pikachu and chaingrab Fox to 70% three times and kill him, then why doesn't this happen? Obviously because it's harder than people think to do such a thing.

Not quite, if it's obvious that the DDD player is considerably more skilled, a 60-40 disadvantage is easy to overcome. Remember, incredibly good players picking certain characters do inflate a character's tournament results, because even if the character is fundamentally incredibly weak, near-perfect use of spacing and safe moves along with incredible mindgames can beat any character if the player is sloppy enough.

Look at Roy_R with Captain Falcon as a perfect example.


DDD has M2K maining him, that's gotta inflate his tournament results.

 

[Ch0zen0ne]

Just to point this out.. ALOT of those "popularity contest" character posting as VERY VERY skewed...

OS lives in the midwest and wins tourneys all the time w/ ROB.

The best players in the US [ie-Chillin/Azen/PC/M2K] play Snake/DDD/Falco/Lucario/Snake/Snake/MK..

which basically means lucario is going to be higher than he should.. and so is ROB.


ROB for mid tier >_>;

 

[Griffard]

Grouped in what I think is the most appropriate way

Top Tier
Snake
Meta Knight
DDD

Hi-Hi
G&W
Wario
Falco
Marth
R.O.B.

Lo-Hi
Donkey Kong
Wolf
Fox
Lucario
Pit

Can Still Win
Toon Link
Pikachu
Olimar
Diddy
ICs
Kirby

Less Likely to Win
Luigi
Zelda
Ness
Peach
Shiek/Zelda
Ike
Sonic
Lucas
Zero Suit Samus

Low Tier
Captain Falcon (He's been doing well!)
Pokemon Trainer
Bowser
Mario
Ganondorf (Perhaps a bit biased, but I think he has lots of potential)

Bottom Tier
Yoshi
Link
Shiek (Unranked without Zelda!)
Samus
Jigglypuff

Some things might be completely incorrect towards the middle, but I think the tops and the bottoms are quite solid considering results, matchups, and potential

 

[shadowtroop]

How about this...

We could try to get the strategies for each individual character,
and use those to determine each characters rank.
If that is to much, then get one person to study 1 character.

(I have read 2 out of 767 pages for a clear reason, sorry.)

 

[Frate]

Bottom tier:
Shiek (Unranked without Zelda!)

no thanks. Shiek worse than falcon? No. Falcon is not as extreme **** as people claim him to be, but he's still worse than shiek. Few characters have such a tilt lock as her.

 

[adumbrodeus]

How about this...

We could try to get the strategies for each individual character,
and use those to determine each characters rank.
If that is to much, then get one person to study 1 character.

(I have read 2 out of 767 pages for a clear reason, sorry.)

Problem is... best strategies varies by match-up. For instance, Marth can generally play rushdown, but against MK, he has no safe poking moves so he has to camp.

 

[Frate]

I though everyone liked my list >_>.

Reposting lol.
Top Tier:
Snake <1>
Meta Knight <2>
Mr. Game and Watch <4>


Very High Tier:
Marth <5>
Falco <8>
R.O.B.<7>
King Dedede <3>
Wario <6>
Olimar <10>


High Tier:
Pit <13>
Wolf <12>
Pikachu <21>
Toon Link <23>
Lucario <9>
Zelda <18>
Donkey Kong <11>
Fox <14>

Mid Tier:
Ice Climbers<15>
Diddy Kong <20>
Kirby <16>
Luigi <27>
Lucas <30>
Ness <17>
ZSS <19>


Low tier :
Ike <28>
Peach <22>
Mario <29>
Pokemon Trainer <34>
Bowser <26>
Sonic <24>
Sheik <35>


Bottom Tier:
Link <33>
Samus <25>
Ganondorf <Unranked>
Yoshi <36> (Holy **** finally!)
Jigglypuff <31>
*SPACE*
Captain Falcon <35>

I... like this.
I still think Falcon is not the WORST... he's the SECOND worst!

 

[fujbubccc]

We all are aware that, last I heard, Sonic has had just as many tourney wins as Olimar, right?

 

[salaboB]

We all are aware that, last I heard, Sonic has had just as many tourney wins as Olimar, right?

People only pay attention to tourney results when they don't have strong opinions on how the character should be able to perform.

 

[ROOOOY!]

We all are aware that, last I heard, Sonic has had just as many tourney wins as Olimar, right?

They both had 4 wins I think, but Sonic just got another one.
Regardless, I like how everybody puts Sonic low low tier or in in some cases bottom tier, when he has more tournament wins than Peach, Ike, Zelda, ZSS, Lucas, Ness, Mario, Luigi, Shiek, Kirby, Bowser, CF, Diddy, Ganon, PT, Samus, Link, Pikachu, Toon Link, Jigglypuff, Ice Climbers and Yoshi at least.
He also has good match ups against harder members of the cast, such as D3.
I suppose character bias takes presidence over facts.

 

[adumbrodeus]

They both had 4 wins I think, but Sonic just got another one.
Regardless, I like how everybody puts Sonic low low tier or in in some cases bottom tier, when he has more tournament wins than Peach, Ike, Zelda, ZSS, Lucas, Ness, Mario, Luigi, Shiek, Kirby, Bowser, CF, Diddy, Ganon, PT, Samus, Link, Pikachu, Toon Link, Jigglypuff, Ice Climbers and Yoshi at least.
He also has good match ups against harder members of the cast, such as D3.
I suppose character bias takes presidence over facts.

General lack of priority and the fact that almost all of his wins were really early. In other words, don't necessarily reflect ability to win currently.

 

[Nigerian Star Storm]

Not quite, if it's obvious that the DDD player is considerably more skilled, a 60-40 disadvantage is easy to overcome. Remember, incredibly good players picking certain characters do inflate a character's tournament results, because even if the character is fundamentally incredibly weak, near-perfect use of spacing and safe moves along with incredible mindgames can beat any character if the player is sloppy enough.

Look at Roy_R with Captain Falcon as a perfect example.


DDD has M2K maining him, that's gotta inflate his tournament results.

But the thing is, it's not only M2K, there is no humanly possibe way by himself he gave DDD the Large gap he has over EVERYONE with the exception of Snake and MK.


I think we all need to realize that we shouldn't take tournament results at face value, we should also see who's winning the big ones and how many people are actually successful with characters.

 

[Dpete]

O knoes, teh Sonic trolls r bak. I like how most of those characters you listed only have one less win than Sonic...

Really though, people who put Sonic in bottom tier are just ignorant. Low-low is a little absurd as well, but I don't see him getting out of low tier just yet.

 

[Nigerian Star Storm]

They both had 4 wins I think, but Sonic just got another one.
Regardless, I like how everybody puts Sonic low low tier or in in some cases bottom tier, when he has more tournament wins than Peach, Ike, Zelda, ZSS, Lucas, Ness, Mario, Luigi, Shiek, Kirby, Bowser, CF, Diddy, Ganon, PT, Samus, Link, Pikachu, Toon Link, Jigglypuff, Ice Climbers and Yoshi at least.
He also has good match ups against harder members of the cast, such as D3.
I suppose character bias takes presidence over facts.

Two things wrong with this

A.Tournament Wins are not everything and should NOT be the only thing to look at, besides, he's still only 24th even with more wins than those characters. oes that not strike you as odd? This is a great example why tournament results should not be taken at Face Value and we should look at the two other factors I stated earlier.

B.I call complete Bull**** on the Good matchups part, even on DDD. I'd say that Matchup is probably even at worst, and he does crappy against basicially everyone else in the potential Mid Tier and up. His matchups really do not seem to warrant anything more than the top of Low at best.

 

[adumbrodeus]

But the thing is, it's not only M2K, there is no humanly possibe way by himself he gave DDD the Large gap he has over EVERYONE with the exception of Snake and MK.

This IS M2K we're talking about. If for no other reason, he advanced DDD's metagame significantly beyond what it would be without his influence.

There is of course, substance to this, but I doubt it would be anywhere as massive were M2K removed from the equation.

I think we all need to realize that we shouldn't take tournament results at face value, we should also see who's winning the big ones and how many people are actually successful with characters

Which is precisely what I'm saying.

 

[Griffard]

This IS M2K we're talking about. If for no other reason, he advanced DDD's metagame significantly beyond what it would be without his influence.

There is of course, substance to this, but I doubt it would be anywhere as massive were M2K removed from the equation.


Which is precisely what I'm saying.

Lots of other people are placing with DDD tho, (no i can't provide immediate examples) whereas there are better examples of one person pushing a char (Azen providing nearly every lucario placing for example).

 

[Dpete]

So, in conclusion, there's really not one amazing thing to base a tier list off of. Tourney results, matchups, potential, and even personal experience all have a near equal role in determining a tier list. It just so happens that of these things, tourney results are the most concrete and factual, yet they still are quite flawed.

 

[WolfCypher]

I though everyone liked my list >_>.

Reposting lol.
Top Tier:
Snake <1>
Meta Knight <2>
Mr. Game and Watch <4>


Very High Tier:
Marth <5>
Falco <8>
R.O.B.<7>
King Dedede <3>
Wario <6>
Olimar <10>


High Tier:
Pit <13>
Wolf <12>
Pikachu <21>
Toon Link <23>
Lucario <9>
Zelda <18>
Donkey Kong <11>
Fox <14>

Mid Tier:
Ice Climbers<15>
Diddy Kong <20>
Kirby <16>
Luigi <27>
Lucas <30>
Ness <17>
ZSS <19>


Low tier :
Ike <28>
Peach <22>
Mario <29>
Pokemon Trainer <34>
Bowser <26>
Sonic <24>
Sheik <35>


Bottom Tier:
Link <33>
Samus <25>
Ganondorf <Unranked>
Yoshi <36> (Holy **** finally!)
Jigglypuff <31>
*SPACE*
Captain Falcon <35>

I like the two high tiers. When I saw Diddy in the mid instead of high, I thought "wow...I was just considering that maybe Diddy, as good as he is, isn't higher than mid", then I see your list. I'm no expert, but what are the numbers about?

Nevermind, I figured it out.