• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Official MBR 2010 NTSC Tier List

Fortress | Sveet

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,256
Location
Northern IL
Cosmo used to space zelda's fsmash so it covered 100% of knock down options in the corner. It has surprisingly long range, covers most of her body, can't be CC'd and has fairly low lag. I can agree with it being zelda's best move (or one of them)
 
Kal

Kal

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,973
Pretty sure you can just ASDI Zelda's fsmash, since it is a move with multiple hits. A friend of mine actually tried fsmashing a Jigglypuff player who then DI'd towards him and rested. Pretty gross.
 
twizzlerj

twizzlerj

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
349
Location
Freehold NJ
TheLake said:
vmans yoshi rocks

firefly is god tier

and ZELDAS BEST MOVE ISNT F SMASH GOD DAMNIT

STOP SAYING THAT

ITS NOT TRUE

AND YOU WILL BURN IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE!!!

I want to start watching game of thrones and reading one piece

but thats where im at in life.
Click to expand...
one piece is amazing man as for zelda a good one can probably beat me since i dont know **** about zelda
 
Strong Badam

Strong Badam

Super Elite
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
26,560
lol you can't blame hbox
it's an issue with the game. a horrendous, terrible issue.
 
Zivilyn Bane

Zivilyn Bane

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
3,119
Location
Springfield, MO
stelzig said:
If marth still doesn't lose the other matchups, then it matters a whole lot more that marth is better at a matchup that the others actually lose. Especially when this matchup is against the top tier. But I take you do think that marth actually losses some matchup that they win - just wanted to to point out (once again), that it isn't really all that important how much you win with as long as you win.

Stavie: Last time I pointed this out, I actually started hearing alot of marth mains saying he does have losing matchups. I still think some people do place him wrongly relative to how they place his matchups. Recovery, abbility to kill, whatever, it is all already reflected in the matchups. I don't understand how people can convince themselves to place a character that low when they only think he loses to sheik.

(idk what to think about marth myself anymore, but I think people who want to claim him as bad/falling, at least need to specifically point out where in his matchup chart this is actually the case instead of just pointing out his general weaknesses)
Click to expand...
Because when voting on the tier list, you aren't supposed to theorycraft how good Marth SHOULD be, but how good the high level players are expected to perform with him. And the Marth pool of pros right now is pretty stagnant, to say the least. Some analysis of recent Nationals based off this:
A tier list is a list of characters ranked best to worst in their likelihood to perform well in a tournament setting in the near future based on recent, relevant tournament results. We then separate characters at statistically significant gaps to be grouped with their relative equals, and those groupings are called "tiers". A tier list is, in essence, a "prediction" list as to how any given character will fare in a competitive setting. We naturally assume top level of play.
Click to expand...
Analysis
 
Fortress | Sveet

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,256
Location
Northern IL
I disagree with the idea that characters determine tournament placings, but agree that it matters somewhat. I like the CRL method where the exact placement is weighted to the size of the pot.
 
Zivilyn Bane

Zivilyn Bane

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
3,119
Location
Springfield, MO
I'm most certainly not saying that characters determine tournament placings. My analysis shows character placing because I'm displaying their likelihood to perform well in a tournament setting in the near future based on recent, relevant tournament results
 
Fortress | Sveet

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,256
Location
Northern IL
Oh, I read until the point where you had the totals and then implied that falcon was better than marth and puff because he had more placings in the top 17. I suppose I should have read on...
 
Fortress | Sveet

Fortress | Sveet

▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
16,256
Location
Northern IL
asianaussie said:
hei guys i heard melee was pretty cool and i cant beat sheik with my pikachu help me?
Click to expand...
Pikachu isn't as good in melee as he was in 64. I don't claim to really know pikachu or the pikachu vs sheik match-up, but feel free to check out the character specific boards for more info. Also check out the Axe vs M2K (sheik) sets that are online... I think Axe took a game from m2k's sheik and otherwise kept it quite close.
 
stelzig

stelzig

Smash Lord
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
1,415
Location
Århus, Denmark
Zivilyn Bane said:
Because when voting on the tier list, you aren't supposed to theorycraft how good Marth SHOULD be, but how good the high level players are expected to perform with him. And the Marth pool of pros right now is pretty stagnant, to say the least. Some analysis of recent Nationals based off this:

Analysis
Click to expand...
It is all fine and dandy to base a tier list that way. But I see no reason why people who think think that way wouldn't continue to think that way regarding their matchups. In my eyes a tier list is still just an extension of a matchup chart.

My problem is that in one place you say that the character is friggin' good, but then in another you say that he actually isn't that good. I suppose you could say we get more types of statistics this way, but it bothers me and I find it silly. Be consistent.
 
Zivilyn Bane

Zivilyn Bane

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
3,119
Location
Springfield, MO
Are you saying it's not ok to say "he's good but he's not THAT good?" Because I see nothing wrong with that.

And the matchup charts have failed over and over. There are way too many variables to get reliable data from one. Axe alone makes matchups charts look stupid. Stages, player experience, player preference, ect. In other words, you can theory craft all you want about x character vs y character, but what really matters is high level tournament results. In theory Marth has the best matchups in the game. Let's just make him number one. Oh and Falcon has terrible matchups. He should be mid tier. Nevermind the fact that Falcon players **** tournies all the time and Marth is lucky to break a top 17.

:phone:
 
S

stavie33

Smash Rookie
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
8
Yeah well I blame that on most of the really good Marth players stopped playing Melee. M2k doesn't play anymore either, which sucks since he can't even play metaknight in brawl anymore. What's he been up to lately anyways?
 
Kal

Kal

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,973
While I certainly agree that it's better to be grounded in reality, specifically large scale tournament results, there is nothing wrong with wanting to use a matchup chart. In fact, most fighting games just sum up the values of the matchup chart and sort the characters in order from greatest to least, and call that the tier list. What a tier list "should be" is a matter of opinion. There will always be disagreement on what people want it to reflect.
 
S

stavie33

Smash Rookie
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
8
odinNJ said:
I want it to be based in character quality. Not tourney results.
Click to expand...
ideally it reflects both. If you look at the newest blazblue charts, when explaining the characters placements they include matchups, and then a scoring from D to S+ on offensive viability, defensive viability, reward assessment, and neutral viability. So they incorporate everything about the character and matchups, though matchups seem to end up mattering the most. However that games extremely different from melee so I'm not sure you could work it the same way.
 
john!

john!

Smash Hero
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
8,063
Location
The Garden of Earthly Delights
guys, this list is supposed to indicate which characters can produce results IN TOURNAMENT.

so we should use old tournament results to the extent that they apply to the current metagame

and we should use matchups/theorycrafting to the extent that we are actually accurate while doing so
 
Zivilyn Bane

Zivilyn Bane

Smash Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
3,119
Location
Springfield, MO
stavie33 said:
Yeah well I blame that on most of the really good Marth players stopped playing Melee. M2k doesn't play anymore either, which sucks since he can't even play metaknight in brawl anymore. What's he been up to lately anyways?
Click to expand...
He still plays Melee quite a bit, so yeah. He won NYTE in Arizona earlier this month. And I saw him on a livestream for an EC tourney this month also. Dude probably still travels more than anyone.

Kal: If we did that, Sheik would be number one on the tier list. Maybe if somebody sat down and made a better matchup chart, it might work. Instead of just saying "Marf has teh swordz, he beats teh Puffz" and giving Marth a 70-30 over a character that AT BEST is 50/50.
 
Kal

Kal

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,973
Zivilyn Bane, I don't disagree. The problem is that there is a discussion about the tier list without specifying what we want the tier list to represent. The ambiguity is what causes bickering between people over what a tier list "should be." There is no "right" way to make a tier list. What should happen is people should agree on the criteria ahead of time, or a separate thread should be devoted to answering this meta question of "how to a tier list."

I agree with you that, for practical purposes, a practical tier list based on results is better. It's more practical, obviously. But I don't think it's remotely fair to dismiss someone wanting to use a matchup chart to create a tier list.

This is something everyone needs to realize: there is no "best" school of thought on how to make a tier list. A tier list based on a matchup chart does not necessarily mean that the best character is most likely to win a tournament (it's not hard to create a contrived counter example). It's more accurate to say it lists the characters in order of who is most likely to perform well against a single, random opponent. And a tier list based on results does not necessarily do this.

In the end, people need to accept these differences and behave amicably. Not dissect their individual listings as "incorrect" because they don't represent something that they aren't meant to represent in the first place.

In retrospect, I realize that the first post makes clear what it wants this tier list to be. That was an oversight on my part. Above stuff still stands, but not really for this thread. So, I guess, people who want a matchup chart should probably have a separate thread for it. WHOOPS

>_>
 
JPOBS

JPOBS

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 26, 2007
Messages
5,821
Location
Mos Eisley
odinNJ said:
I want it to be based in character quality. Not tourney results.
Click to expand...
How do we know the quality of the character except what they have shown to be capable in tournament?
Tournament results and "character quality" are inextricably linked.

Otherwise we get bogged down in the mire of "character potential" and then that inevitably leads to "well according to super derp bros:theory, bowser is the 3rd best character harr harr." And honestly, that's a true enough straw man for me to not even want to consider discussing it.

Tourny results or gtfo yo.
 
odinNJ

odinNJ

Smash Lord
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
1,175
Location
NJ
JPOBS said:
How do we know the quality of the character except what they have shown to be capable in tournament?
Tournament results and "character quality" are inextricably linked.

Otherwise we get bogged down in the mire of "character potential" and then that inevitably leads to "well according to super derp bros:theory, bowser is the 3rd best character harr harr." And honestly, that's a true enough straw man for me to not even want to consider discussing it.

Tourny results or gtfo yo.
Click to expand...
A counter example is weeg. An amazing, underplayed character.
 
Strong Badam

Strong Badam

Super Elite
Administrator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
26,560
I prefer not to look at tournaments results religiously when making a tier list because they're influenced more by player skill than character viability. Armada has consistently placed higher in national/international events than anyone in our current era, and he does it with a character that is clearly not the best in the game. It ends up being a case of "This character is good because a really good player uses him" rather than "This character is good because this character is good"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom