Official MBR 2010 NTSC Tier List

[Niko45]

Ness' hitboxes are competitive with all those characters shrouded. I think his fair stops turnips too but I don't know for sure. He loses to those characters but can definitely beat them. When it comes down mostly to frontal hitbox to frontal hitbox Ness tends to hold his own. Getting out maneuvered and dropped in on with dair or bair from Fox is much harder for him to deal with, as well as falco lasers locking him down and keeping him from putting out his good moves.

Both mofo and hbox have said all matchups are somewhat doable beyond spacies for ness.

 

[Wake]

I can see Peach being manageable for Ness. That woman has some silly lower tier MUs I think.

 

[Bones0]

Peach can't turnip "spam" for **** vs. anyone competent. Certainly not Ness considering he can pretty much WD OoS after shielding a turnip and hit her right as her lag ends.

Marth out ranges everyone, so that's a dumb explanation for why Ness loses. Dash attack can really do work when they want to stay grounded, and his fair can honestly compete with Marth's aerials just because he has DJCs to increase his movement options and speed. His punishes on him are hardly any worse than on the spacies, and often times they're better because they are both floaty, meaning Ness can venture a little higher during combos and still be able to get to the ground in time for the follow-up.

 

[KirbyKaze]

Ness's dash attack sucks and his combos on Marth aren't that good.

 

[Niko45]

Dash attack is really CCable so its not a great tool for grounded opponents. It's mostly great for punishing landing lag, and it has great range to beat out most of the aerials in the game. It's great for stopping other people from zoning him.

 

[KirbyKaze]

Fox invalidates whole characters by jumping.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Its so hard to order the bottom 8 characters...

 

[leffen]

Random rant about low tiers

Low tiers are much much much better than people think they are. Why is it that every region that has a good low tier main (Taj, Cosmo, Hack, Mofo/Hbox, Gimpyfish and so on) are almost always convinced that the specific character is much better than what the average opinion.
The whole "Low tiers are actually crap, people are just terrible at the matchup" is also kind of flawed, since no low tier main much worse in their own region... well, except for Kage (mainly because ganon is sooooooo limited and the easiest character to master by a landslide)
When I played Yoshi there was no player that did better the second time/the longer (in the case of friendlies) they played me.

Imo melees game engine is just designed so that skill allows you to bypass disadvantages very easily in comparison to almost all other E-sports.

I guess you could compare it to how 3rd Strike allows for bottom tiers to be the best in the world, even though its extremely unbalanced (even more so than Melee) while in SFIV (which well balanced) you cannot really overcome your character being worse.

This is due to the fact that Melee is extremely deep, it provides its players with an INCREDIBLE amount of options at all times. This, added with the fact that so much is unexplored (at least ATM), means the game isn't (and imo, never will be) as broken down into several known RPS like situations like the more traditional 2d fighters are


blerph. whatever, this community is filled with people that think playing terrible characters such as Marth and Captain Falcon means you are a ****ing saint even if you lose and that all low tiers are hopeless because that one time you got Ness on random he lost to someones elses main
The fact that all low tier mains are in general, low aiming wussies doesn't help either

 

[JonnyW]

blerph. whatever, this community is filled with people that think playing terrible characters such as Marth and Captain Falcon means you are a ****ing saint even if you lose and that all low tiers are hopeless because that one time you got Ness on random he lost to someones elses main
The fact that all low tier mains are in general, low aiming wussies doesn't help either

You calling falcon and marth terrible?

 

[ShroudedOne]

Peach can't turnip "spam" for **** vs. anyone competent. Certainly not Ness considering he can pretty much WD OoS after shielding a turnip and hit her right as her lag ends.

Marth out ranges everyone, so that's a dumb explanation for why Ness loses. Dash attack can really do work when they want to stay grounded, and his fair can honestly compete with Marth's aerials just because he has DJCs to increase his movement options and speed. His punishes on him are hardly any worse than on the spacies, and often times they're better because they are both floaty, meaning Ness can venture a little higher during combos and still be able to get to the ground in time for the follow-up.

You're so abrasive, Bones. Gosh.

Obviously, when I say turnip spam, I don't mean the literal spamming of turnips. That's stupid. I mean that Ness doesn't have a good answer to her turnips. She isn't going to sit on the ground throwing them, so I hardly see how WD OoS for Ness solves that issue.

When I say Marth outranges him horribly, I mean that Ness doesn't have a good way to get in on Marth that doesn't involves Marth screwing up. Peach gets outranged, but she has turnips and dash attack to mitigate that. Falcon gets outranged, but he has speed (and, more importantly, good out of dash options). Spacies are self explanatory. Sheik has needles and speed. And so on (for top/high tier, at the very least).

You do know how very vulnerable to CC his dash attack is, right?

Honestly, whether his punishes are better or not on different characters is hardly the issue, if he doesn't have a good approach (way of getting in). That is why low tiers are low tiers: they are delegated to a few, easily countered, predictable approaches. Combo game doesn't matter if you can't get the combo.

Also, you don't have to be so mean. It's only Ness.

 

[Niko45]

Personally I agree with leffen to a certain extent about low tiers (as far as them being dismissed/underrated a lot) but I disagree that melee overall is incredibly balanced. I think people underrate low tiers, yes, but I think people very commonly also underrate top tiers.

I think there is a very big gap between the top 2/3 characters and the rest of the cast (and the top 3 tiers I think are pretty well defined and apparent in gameplay) but I also think once you get down to Link and below there isn't considerably much difference between that and bottom tier. Not worth distinguishing anyway.

 

[Warhawk]

The whole "Low tiers are actually crap, people are just terrible at the matchup" is also kind of flawed, since no low tier main much worse in their own region... well, except for Kage (mainly because ganon is sooooooo limited and the easiest character to master by a landslide)

I'm confused at your wording... Are you trying to say that most low tier main don't place worse in their region than they would in a different region or on a national stage?


I almost wanted to argue about Ganon being the easiest to master, but then I thought about it and I couldn't think of an example of an easier character to master lol. His options/stategies are good just not many in number or super difficult to master (at least compared to the rest of the cast).

 

[kailo34ce]

His options/stategies are good

WD onstage from ledge.
retreating aerial.


ganon complete.

 

[Divinokage]

What is this 2007? If you want to be able to master Ganon by all means, try. I don't see anyone else doing well with him other than Linguini, isn't that proof enough that's it's actually really damn hard to do good?

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

We had a similar conversation in the Falco boards:

Axe has a fighting chance against every Sheik in the world; in fact hes probably favored most of the time
Armada beats every Fox in the world soundly
Hax is known as a Sheik slayer
Wobbles prides himself in his Peach matchup
Linguini has been ****** Falcos since the dawn of time

I think for most players, the ratios don't particularly work out as cleanly as they do in theory. For example, I do much better against Sheik than I do Falco, despite playing Marth.

Melee is really deep and most imbalances that the smash community places on things have been either overturned or changed by metagame shifts. In the end there is so much to every matchup that its really common for one player to outclass everyone else in knowledge and execution. It doesn't really matter where the theory lies if most people can't apply or even comprehend the full bredth of the theory.

I think in simpler games, matchups have more weight...when it is easy to comprehend and abuse your advantage, then it becomes impossible to lose. Except for the truly crippled low tier characters, there is a lot to learn and implement in every matchup so results aren't as predictable as the theory would make you think.

Plus...spacing exists. Baiting exists. Mindgames exist. Every character has a grab. Most have death combos off that grab. There are a lot of non-character-specific defensive and offensive options that counter top tier strategies. Matches aren't just option-coverage tests...there is more going on.

Eh, Bones you are going a bit off the deep end. I wouldn't agree that there are no "unwinnable" matchups in Melee, just that we don't know yet and even if there is, I doubt there is a player who can execute it to that degree. There hasn't been sufficient testing to come to the conclusion that any matchup is unwinnable; I think its silly to theorybro our way into utterly condemning a matchup. I also think that even in our most developed matchups (Marth-Fox is probably the most metagamed matchup in the game imo) there is still an extremely large window for improvement, and since people so imperfectly apply the things we know now, in PRACTICE, matchup ratios tend to even out in tournament. You will rarely find a player who plays matchups at their perfect metagame standard, or one that implements very much of what needs to be improved in the metagame, so the wiggle room for the losing side is large and forgiving.

Simpler games don't have this flexibility; if all you need to do to beat Hakan is throw fireballs and block his slide, then the matchup is very easy to execute and understand, and the likelihood that the Hakan player is going to overcome the matchup is a lot worse. With more options comes more complexity, so even if the "winning strategy" is just as dominant in Melee as it is in the Hakan example, the execution and understanding ceilings make it so that the losing side will likely see much more success in tournament.

Melee IS pretty imbalanced (in terms of bottom v. top) but its complexity hides that greatly...

I think the top and high tiers are balanced moreso than just about any game I've ever seen though.

 

[JonnyW]

What is this 2007? If you want to be able to master Ganon by all means, try. I don't see anyone else doing well with him other than Linguini, isn't that proof enough that's it's actually really damn hard to do good?

True thaaat.

 

[kailo34ce]

i dont think anyone is too serious about talking down ganon, someone has to be the most basic tho....

we should all agree on Zelda, nobody really plays her cept that one guy.

 

[JonnyW]

i dont think anyone is too serious about talking down ganon, someone has to be the most basic tho....

we should all agree on Zelda, nobody really plays her cept that one guy.

d-tilt all day

 

[ShroudedOne]

I was going to mention her. She's really basic, and I think she has the lowest amount of "things to know." Not to take credit from Cosmo/TheLake, though. They ****.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Pichu and Kirby are both really basic.

Oh, and Bowser.

 

[twizzlerj]

i really think bowser is just awful it doesn't really matter but almost 100% sure he is the worst

 

[Hat N' Clogs]

I do agree that Bowser is bad, but I don't think he's the worst character. I agree with Pichu being the worst. Even if Bowser is a lot slower, Bowser outranges him and Pichu relies on combos, which require to be at a close range. This way, Bowser can avoid this because of his superior range. Also, Pichu being the lightest character doesn't help, and against a strong character like Bowser, this gives Pichu another large disadvantage. Kirby suffers from a lot of problems that pichu has, so I think Bowser is fine where he is. I don't think he's the worst, but he can't be any higher because he is very slow and is easily comboed, and all of the best characters are fast and can rack damage. So, he's the polar opposite of top tier, but not the worst.

 

[twizzlerj]

i dunno what to think of this i feel that aside from pichu being the lightest you can actually try and do something unlike waiting for really bad mistakes with bowser in order to get 1 or 2 hits in.

 

[Warhawk]

Bowser's better range than Pichu probably makes him less dependent on mistakes to get hits in. Bowser has an actually useable crouch cancel as well that can let him get hits. He's just easily camped by a few characters.


@Kage Ganon's difficulty to master depends on your exact definition of what makes a character difficult to master. I personally think that being able to win shouldn't be a huge impact on how difficult a character is to play and that difficulty in executing techniques and strategies is more important. Ganon's strategies and techniques are not the hardest to learn, but winning with him is more difficult so if your definition is more based on being able to win with him at a top level, then yes, he's difficult to master. I think however because an evenly skilled top-level Fox player isn't going to consistently lose to a similarly evenly skilled top-level Ganon player, and that this makes this level of mastery almost impossible at top levels of play, that this factor shouldn't have such a large impact on a character's difficulty to master.

 

[Sephirothxxx]

I don't know about you guys, but I really feel that Kirby should come up at least one or two slots.

 

[Warhawk]

Sometimes I think that and then other times I think he's worse than Pichu.

 

[Sephirothxxx]

Sometimes I think that and then other times I think he's worse than Pichu.

Yeah that can be true. Of course it doesnt help that he gets some moves that hurt himself when he absorbs Roy and pichu

 

[Max?]

What is this 2007? If you want to be able to master Ganon by all means, try. I don't see anyone else doing well with him other than Linguini, isn't that proof enough that's it's actually really damn hard to do good?

Agreed. If anything, the spacies are the easiest and **** with in the game

 

[Geenareeno]

What is this 2007? If you want to be able to master Ganon by all means, try. I don't see anyone else doing well with him other than Linguini, isn't that proof enough that's it's actually really damn hard to do good?

Don't forget about BizzaroFlame. That guy *****.

 

[stelzig]

@Kage Ganon's difficulty to master depends on your exact definition of what makes a character difficult to master. I personally think that being able to win shouldn't be a huge impact on how difficult a character is to play and that difficulty in executing techniques and strategies is more important. Ganon's strategies and techniques are not the hardest to learn, but winning with him is more difficult so if your definition is more based on being able to win with him at a top level, then yes, he's difficult to master. I think however because an evenly skilled top-level Fox player isn't going to consistently lose to a similarly evenly skilled top-level Ganon player, and that this makes this level of mastery almost impossible at top levels of play, that this factor shouldn't have such a large impact on a character's difficulty to master.

You really think that it is more important to be able to do things than to utilize them properly?

 

[KirbyKaze]

I feel like the space animal argument is basically, "Falco and Fox are hard to play because they have specific moves for every single situation and you need to figure out where to use them. Also, button inputs."

And those people don't realize that having to use awkward ghetto moves and weird crap to cover up your inability to function properly in specific situations (where Fox & Falco have <move> to deal with that situation for them) is actually... kind of difficult.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Thats why ICs are the hardest character in the game.

Technical difficulty, always under immense pressure due to Nana's vulnerability and they don't have "cover-everything" options like spacies.

 

[Strong Badam]

no main bias at all

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I quit Ice Climbers last year.

I use spacies now.

 

[Strong Badam]

i main meta knight

 

[KirbyKaze]

Thats why ICs are the hardest character in the game.

Technical difficulty, always under immense pressure due to Nana's vulnerability and they don't have "cover-everything" options like spacies.

I thought Sheik was popular in PAL...

 

[Grim Tuesday]

1st/2nd (arguable) best player in Australia uses Sheik, thats about it for notable Sheik mains here haha.

 

[KirbyKaze]

In an environment where there are no Sheiks, ICs can never relax.

 

[ToastyTHT]

Mario over Luigi and Link over Young Link are complete stupidity.

 

[Warhawk]

You really think that it is more important to be able to do things than to utilize them properly?

No but a part of mastering the strategies and techniques of a character is also knowing when and how to use them. Its both. I was talking along the lines of the difficulty in learning how to properly execute, at a high/top level, a character's strategies and techniques as what I view as most important to determining the difficulty in learning a character. Proper execution involves being able to do the strategies and techniques as well as knowing the right situations to apply them in.