Official MBR 2010 NTSC Tier List

[Strong Badam]

heaven's a word and it doesn't exist

 

[Divinokage]

Sure it does, you just need the proper perspective to see the kingdom of heaven =P

 

[RaphaelRobo]

I heard a song about heaven once. It went like "If you want to view paradise, simply look around and view it. Anything you want to, do it. Want to change the world? There's nothing to it."

 

[Divinokage]

Sounds like something I would say, almost. lol.

 

[-ShadowPhoenix-]

There is a Hell, believe me I've seen it.
There is a Heaven, let's keep it a secret.

 

[Veetaak]

There is a Hell, believe me I've seen it.
There is a Heaven, let's keep it a secret.

Pretty good album

 

[Grim Tuesday]

who cares about perfection when it's not possible?

No one does, which is why I was saying that we shouldn't make a tier list based on perfection.

Am I missing something here? o_O

 

[Strong Badam]

Not really, other than the fact no one said we should be making a tier list based on perfection in the first place, so it's kind of random to bring the topic up.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

A tier list is simply analyzing character potential in a controlled setting. Human players lacking the technical consistency required to use Fox at top levels of play, doesn't necessarily detract from the potential Fox initially possesses.

Seems like it to me.

-Suggests tier list should be potential-ordered
-Claims that Fox has the most potential

Practically the same as a tier list based on perfection, as perfection is the pinnacle of potential.

 

[Strong Badam]

oh you take that guy seriously?

 

[Crooked Crow]

Seems like it to me.

-Suggests tier list should be potential-ordered
-Claims that Fox has the most potential

Practically the same as a tier list based on perfection, as perfection is the pinnacle of potential.

Your lack of reading comprehension is quite amusing. Where did I suggest Fox actually was the best? And on another note, you're misinterpreting my post and correlating potential to human technical ability as a whole, and not including anything else?

Fox is a very developed character, we know this. We also know that Fox isn't bringing in tournament results similar to Falco. Why? Is Fox subjectively a higher learning curve? I said "potential." Potential is a very broad word that can incorporate a lot of different meanings, so you cannot reasonably continue trying to misconstrue anything in that post.

Character capability is a more precise way of stating my point. "Fox has more potential than Kirby" doesn't really go against the correct method of looking at a tier list, right? Of course, we study more than just tournament results. Which is what I'm trying to tell you. Again, never said Fox was the best.

You listed three characters. I shouldn't need to expand on why Bowser isn't top tier like Falco and Fox. A tier list is based on top levels of humanly possible metagame.

And Strong Bad... what are you insinuating? You clearly have such important words of insight. Would you mind sharing?

 

[Winston]

We don't have to hypothesize that Fox has more potential than his results indicate. I think it's pretty obvious when you look at all the good Fox players and see that none of them individually approach the metagame possibilities that they have shown together as a group.

Mango demonstrates an otherworldly pressure game that nobody else comes close to, but he doesn't use patience when it's needed, which he himself agrees is suboptimal. Lovage and Jman are the next best Fox mains and are extremely smart players imo, but they don't have the technical refinement of a fox like Leffen's (who can ledgedash, shield drop, waveshine oos, grounded doubleshine etc.), or the more optimized punish game of a fox like Zgetto or KirbyKaze's. (I don't know if Zgetto is better than Lovage or Jman, he might be, so don't yell at me guys. That's not the point here.)

There's a difference between pointless unrealistic theorycraft like "fox would be the best if he just beat everything on reaction with shine invincibility" and theorycraft that just deals with everything we KNOW to be humanly possible.

 

[choknater]

on the other hand we can discuss why armada never freakin loses

 

[Warhawk]

Lovage and Jman are the next best Fox mains and are extremely smart players imo, but they don't have the technical refinement of a fox like Leffen's (who can ledgedash, shield drop, waveshine oos, grounded doubleshine etc.)

I could have sworn I've seen Lovage use all of thse its just he doesn't seem to mix them up very well (from what I've seen he'll do one of these many times in one match but then he'll have a number of sets where they aren't used once). I think if he does start to mix them in better that Lovage could become that scary Fox main that everyone expects there to be.

 

[Winston]

Yea I know Lovage can do all the stuff, but he's not super solid at it yet.

I'm not saying all that stuff is necessary, but it certainly helps in some situations if you get really consistent with it

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Fox is better than falco, falco players are just better.

 

[Deleted member]

Fox is better than falco, falco players are just better.

nice troll bait.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Yeah, but its true.

 

[leffen]

Fox mains suck ****

ill show u

 

[Strong Badam]

such a weak statement tho

 

[-ACE-]

Falco is easier to have near-perfect tech skill with. Fox can't afford to make many mistakes, and its very hard to never make mistakes. Falco can pressure like a fiend in close, and even some from a distance. Fox can pressure up close just as well essentially, but it's riskier in regard to human play. Fox's speed and agility give him more potential and is thus the better character, imo.... and, if every gamer in the world played smash, I think it would become obvious very quickly that fox is the best character in the game, simply because SOMEONE would have to have a near-perfect fox, which we have never seen (aside from a few moments in the past where pc's or mango's fox are seemingly untouchable, imo). Near-perfect falco play is much more common.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Fox does have a pretty high tech requirement but i don't think its physically impossible to perform at that level.

Fox has one of the best, if not the best, neutral movement/positioning in the game. More than any character in the game, fox has the ability to take any character from 0 to death if you make the right decisions. Falco is very good and obviously #2 but fox is better. In other words, the tier list isn't wrong; the best falco players are better (read: more consistent) than the best fox players.

 

[john!]

so what is it about falco that attracts better players?

or what is it about fox that attracts worse players?

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Nothing? I don't think theres any correlation. Just coincidence.

 

[Merkuri]

Nothing? I don't think theres any correlation. Just coincidence.

This is silly. We could say the same thing as to why Marth or Falcon aren't performing as well as Falco. The truth is that Marth Falcon are the best but JUST BY CHANCE the players are all worst than the falco players. It's silly.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Umm no thats actually not what im saying. Good try tho, keep it up.

 

[john!]

"[insert character] is better than falco, but falco players are just better, which is why falco has better tournament results"

why does this apply to fox and not anyone else?

 

[Warhawk]

Well I mean its not an unreasonable assertion seeing as the best Fox player doesn't even main Fox (and ironically mains Falco), its just hard to back up.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

"[insert character] is better than falco, but falco players are just better, which is why falco has better tournament results"

why does this apply to fox and not anyone else?

It could apply to anyone. Never used that as justification, though, which is why its not what im saying.

Fox has one of the best, if not the best, neutral movement/positioning in the game. More than any character in the game, fox has the ability to take any character from 0 to death if you make the right decisions. Falco is very good and obviously #2 but fox is better. In other words, the tier list isn't wrong; the best falco players are better (read: more consistent) than the best fox players.

"Falco is the best because he wins/places higher than fox at national tourneys" is a very common argument and i feel like this needed to be explained. Its difficult to differentiate between the players winning tournaments and characters winning tournaments.

 

[KirbyKaze]

You're all gay.

edit: My "optimized" punishment game just involves me tossing in some up tilts or up airs where other people would up smash lolz. And then nairing or w/e into something else. It's easy. Anyone can do it.

Oh and regrab whenever possible.

 

[Blistering Speed]

Nothing? I don't think theres any correlation. Just coincidence.

lol, terrific argument.

You're all gay.

edit: My "optimized" punishment game just involves me tossing in some up tilts or up airs where other people would up smash lolz. And then nairing or w/e into something else. It's easy. Anyone can do it.

Oh and regrab whenever possible.

No, Melee can't be that simple. Clearly you're using magic.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

^ i love idiots who cant read

 

[Blistering Speed]

^ i love idiots who cant read

Show me where I'm off the mark here, champ.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

You probably wouldnt read it.

 

[Blistering Speed]

Maybe, if I keep being condescending, no-one will call me out on stupid statements and make me attempt to explain them.

i c wut u did ther

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Do i really have to quote my posts when they are on the same page? Just scroll up and read. Thanks.

 

[Max?]

There is a Hell, believe me I've seen it.
There is a Heaven, let's keep it a secret.

That might be the only song I like on that CD tbh. Good song tho.

 

[Deleted member]

Fox does have a pretty high tech requirement but i don't think its physically impossible to perform at that level.

Fox has one of the best, if not the best, neutral movement/positioning in the game. More than any character in the game, fox has the ability to take any character from 0 to death if you make the right decisions. Falco is very good and obviously #2 but fox is better. In other words, the tier list isn't wrong; the best falco players are better (read: more consistent) than the best fox players.

Fox is probably the best from the neutral game.
Falco can actively deny you the neutral game.

It's not like Falco is missing his own movement game.

You're dropping some really loaded statements in general. If you actually believe them, that's fine, but understand that they are massive troll bait otherwise.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Well its definitely unsupported, however a statement unsupported is not necessarily a wrong statement.

 

[-ACE-]

Btw, although I just got done saying fox is the best, falco should be #1 on this list if you guys actually want to back up your mission statement. "More likely to perform well in tournament in the near future based off recent, relevant tourney results" seems fairly self explanatory to me. Tournaments are NOT perfect representations of skill, and there is no way to determine which character in the game is the best without opinion. We should accept that this list is not a theoretical list of "the best characters in the game"; it's about damn time. Falco wins more tournaments, and my previous post was an attempt at explaining why this is so.