Official MBR 2010 NTSC Tier List

[Fortress | Sveet]

Marth doesnt win nationals because all the people(top end of bracket) that play against them are much better at the game. easy to rationalize.

Pool of equal/comparable skill marth players doesn't exist with the exception of PPU (doens;t travel alot) and M2K ( multi character main). obvious.

Yeah i complete agree. You do very well for how much energy you put into the game.

Marth doesn't have a top player != marth can't be played at the top level.

 

[Beat!]

Marth is so **** fycj you guys he's got swords n **** hes like a ninja. with swords. yeah hiw good is that. really fkn good. spam arrowd aka arcgangel you're mad negative you gotta believe woooo. Wooo! Marrthjjjhhh! all other chars so free especially falco just combo the fkn burd

**** smahboards

 

[Kink-Link5]

Yeah i complete agree. You do very well for how much energy you put into the game.

Marth doesn't have a top player != marth can't be played at the top level.

Marth currently being listed at the top doesn't mean we can rightfully dismiss any character moving above him either. I'm with Spam_Arrows on this. You can't rely on the previous tier list as a means of describing the next one. If we were making this as the first tier list in Melee's history, no one would ever consider Marth to be in the top 5. Yearning the days of Ken is just too conservative of an approach with the tier list, especially if it's as slow to update as ours is.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

I never use the previous list as a means to describe the new list... That doesn't make sense. I play the game with as many good players as I can and from my experiences marth is 4th in the game. Other people will have other experiences.

 

[Archangel]

Marth is so **** fycj you guys he's got swords n **** hes like a ninja. with swords. yeah hiw good is that. really fkn good. spam arrowd aka arcgangel you're mad negative you gotta believe woooo. Wooo! Marrthjjjhhh! all other chars so free especially falco just combo the fkn burd

**** smahboards

Are you drunk? Anyway I don't think I will stop being a Marth player in melee I even still use him in Project M. I'm not going to stop trying to win with him. I just think it's pretty obvious that removing 2001-2007 and starting at 2008-today Marth has done pretty mediocre. He's not a bad character and he does have alot of historically victorious match-ups that have become relatively close.

Yeah i complete agree. You do very well for how much energy you put into the game.

Marth doesn't have a top player != marth can't be played at the top level.

I think it's unfair to say there are no top marth players because he's not winning. There are alot of very good Marths who've pushed him very far but other characters have simply pushed just as hard. Others(like the ones above him) sort of blew past him. Marth and Fox were once tied for best in the game.....I'm not sure that was ever true...who's idea was that?

This video is a pretty good indication of Marth from 2001-present.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odwnpFwuwF8

Marth = white car

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Other characters didn't "blow right past him". The characters are still the same characters they were in 2002. Marth has good match-ups with spacies and he only has one bad match-up.

Puff actually has an argument to be above marth. I personally think Marth is better, but I respect the point of view that puff is better. To me Puff has bad gimmicks but a really good bair... oh yeah and rest and a great recovery. Marth has really good gimmicks and is very agile, a good recovery (not as good as puff's, though), he can combo to death on most of the cast (or at least maintain positional advantage) and he has a much better ground game. But puff beats sheik or something and marth loses to sheik so the love triangle favors puff.

Peach doesn't have a valid argument in my mind. Armada himself says peach is below marth. Armada happens to be an amazing player with enough talent and dedication to win tournaments with his character. Peach loses to more characters than Marth. Peach has some obvious character limitations that make her less versatile than Marth. I can like the amazing stuff Armada does, but it doesn't change the fact that peach isn't as good at winning.

Anyone else is right out

 

[Strong Badam]

Nothing annoys me more than someone that talks about a character solely by "how well players are doing with the character" rather than traits that the character actually possesses/doesn't possess. It tells me that in most cases the person speaking doesn't actually understand how high level smash works and just looks at tournament result data rather than figuring out how characters interact and making arguments for character placement based on how good the characters are in relation to each other.

EDIT: Not targeting anyone specific

 

[john!]

there is also the opposite problem of people who think they know more about the game than they actually do, and theorycraft matchups at a level which they are not even close to attaining, despite the fact that top players have proved them wrong by their results.

the best way to approach this is with a mixture of both methods... but that would mean that people would have to be aware of the limits of their knowledge, which is traditionally incredibly difficult for humans to do

 

[ShroudedOne]

@JPOBS: I agree with you that we had no reason to push Puff that far up just because of Mango.

 

[Dr Peepee]

**** pp has a girlfriend?

This CANNOT mean good things for his smash. It's like Rocky. Women weaken legs. His dairs are gonna be stale forevermore.

I know what I'm doing.

You can trust me or not.

 

[Purpletuce]

Contrary to popular belief, smashers CAN have girlfriends. . .

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

More staling, less knockback, longer combos.

 

[Deleted member]

I know what I'm doing.

You can trust me or not.

I'm just glad that you're finally doing something to indulge your own desires. I hope it works out well for you.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

there is also the opposite problem of people who think they know more about the game than they actually do, and theorycraft matchups at a level which they are not even close to attaining, despite the fact that top players have proved them wrong by their results.

the best way to approach this is with a mixture of both methods... but that would mean that people would have to be aware of the limits of their knowledge, which is traditionally incredibly difficult for humans to do

It is difficult to understand your limits, but that doesn't mean its not possible. I like to think the MBR is has people like that.

On topic:
Results are just that, a result.In this case the argument is "If Character is (good/bad) then Character has (good/bad) results, therefore If Character has (good/bad) results then Character is (good/bad)". This translates to:

A->B
QED: B->A

which is a logical mistake as the relationship works one way only.

 

[Deleted member]

On topic:
Results are just that, a result.In this case the argument is "If Character is (good/bad) then Character has (good/bad) results, therefore If Character has (good/bad) results then Character is (good/bad)". This translates to:

A->B
QED: B->A

which is a logical mistake as the relationship works one way only.

i think your application of discrete mathematics makes you relatively more attractive as a male of our species.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

is that want passes as being hit on these days? you can do better than that sugar.


edit- but thanks

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

If you could prove B->A and have A->B, then the statement A <==> B is actually true as you very well know Sveet.

Lets get to proving **** at this moment.

 

[Max?]

Marth sucks

 

[Zivilyn Bane]

Sveet is right, the MBR has some pretty awesome people in it. For example, me.

 

[Max?]

The MBR is made up of frauds

 

[Deleted member]

The MBR is made up of frauds

What a beautifully academic example of cognitive dissonance.

 

[Kink-Link5]

It is difficult to understand your limits, but that doesn't mean its not possible. I like to think the MBR is has people like that.

On topic:
Results are just that, a result.In this case the argument is "If Character is (good/bad) then Character has (good/bad) results, therefore If Character has (good/bad) results then Character is (good/bad)". This translates to:

A->B
QED: B->A

which is a logical mistake as the relationship works one way only.

This would be true if anyone was following this line of thought. The premise of shown capability as a factor of character viability has nothing to do with the premise of character traits as a factor of character viability.

A->B
C->B

A and C are not directly related in any form but instead are two separate premises from which the conclusion B is drawn.

But please, don't continue this line of formulaic argument structure as a means of dissecting either side's position. It's fine for a Critical Thinking course but it falls dangerously close to argument from fallacy, so let's all try and keep things as close to we can to how they apply to the subject at hand rather than in generalizations.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

If they aren't related, how are you coming to a conclusion?

 

[Kink-Link5]

Please read over my sentences again.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

A and C are not directly related in any form but instead are two separate premises from which the conclusion B is drawn.

You no longer have A->B, B->A. You now have A->B, C->B. Two things to the same conclusion. Maybe I am misunderstanding

 

[Armada]

I don't think I said Marth has nothing more to learn...did I?

I get what you are saying but honestly none of it is exactly unknown. Same thing happened about a year ago when someone thought of fthrow-pivot-fsmash and they just started saying it everywhere. Shield drop-Uair is a good move though especially vs characters you need to keep above you at all costs.

What exactly do you mean by Uair and Utilt being overrated?

You said something like "The only things Marths have left to learn is stuff all chars can improve (sort of). And Im not so sure if thos 2 arguments is something everyone realize because NO ONE is useing it.

I maybe wrote wrong but I meant that Uair is underrated and u-tilt is overrated (in combos). U-tilt is sending the opponent further away and when the other char have a specific percent it means u-tilt is basically giveing your death combo away (good position but him beeing dead is better then stage controll).

Even then Marths use u-tilt A LOT when uair is way better and make the combo longer and actually end with a death combo (at least a kinda good edgeguard possibillity after a tipper on 100% or more).

 

[Strong Badam]

The MBR is made up of frauds

Not all of us main Falco.

 

[SleepyK]

na the mbr sux

i'm in it

gg

 

[john!]

It is difficult to understand your limits, but that doesn't mean its not possible. I like to think the MBR is has people like that.

On topic:
Results are just that, a result.In this case the argument is "If Character is (good/bad) then Character has (good/bad) results, therefore If Character has (good/bad) results then Character is (good/bad)". This translates to:

A->B
QED: B->A

which is a logical mistake as the relationship works one way only.

why are you using deductive proof?

there is a proven positive correlation between how good a character is and how good their tournament results are. therefore it's perfectly reasonable to inductively conclude how good a character is based off tournament results. melee is far too complicated to qualify as a formal science, so we shouldn't be drawing conclusions without empirical evidence

Not all of us main Falco.

SHOTS FIRED

 

[Divinokage]

Contrary to popular belief, smashers CAN have girlfriends. . .

No not all smashers.. only men, champions or warriors.

 

[knightpraetor]

so nice to know that while i'm away from the boards people have finally realized marth sucks. And by that I mean there are characters better than him. However I don't really think the matchup gaps between top 6 are particularly large in this game. So far, the hardest matchups to me seem to be IC vs peach no wobbling, peach vs jiggs, and then IC vs peach with wobbling.

If you're not playing one of those 3 you're probably fine. marth vs sheik is slightly sheik, but definitely doable, and falco vs peach also seems doable though on paper float is too hard to compete with so i would probably give peach the edge there too.

Even if you're not playing a top 3 character in this game, if you're playing within top 6 you probably don't have a big enough disadvantage in the matchup you're playing to complain...unless you're already top 5 in the US and that little disadvantage is enough to matter.

 

[Armada]

The boards haven't realized anything about Marth so far. Im not saying my view on Marth is better or more correct but the boards use results only and that means it is not something they have understood more the fact that they can look at results and that should not be so hard.

The thoughest MU you mention is something I agree on except for Falco/Peach. If I have to pick a side I would probably still give Peach the edge but that MUs is not even close to the "hardest ones". That MU can be the most even MU in the game (except for dittos ofc )

 

[Mew2King]

I also agree Peach around = Falco (float over lasers/easy powershields/Grabs HIGH which is useful in a lot of situations in this matchup), but Fox > Peach
I think Marth = Fox and Falco > Marth
I think same about sheik vs spacies as marth vs spacies

 

[john!]

The boards haven't realized anything about Marth so far. Im not saying my view on Marth is better or more correct but the boards use results only and that means it is not something they have understood more the fact that they can look at results and that should not be so hard.

what i've been saying is that players like you, m2k, etc., who have proven that they thoroughly understand the game, are qualified to use mostly theorycrafting to form their opinions about matchups, as opposed to using results. but most people on the boards don't understand the game at that level, so it is more appropriate for them to be weighting their opinions more heavily on results instead of their inferior theorycrafting.

edit: this applies to me as well

 

[JPOBS]

^ and more importantly, theorycrafting when you are not at a very high level comes off as being slightly pretentious, especially when players who ARE at that level are directly proving you wrong, or at least proving that your theorycraft counts for naught at that level anyway.

edit: thats not to say that people shouldnt theorycraft. Only that we shouldn't entirely ignore results either. using only one or the other is dumb.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Results based lists are probably dumber than theorycraft lists honestly.

Proven capability trumps either, but it makes it harder to compare characters through quantifiable means.

 

[Stylez]

there is a proven positive correlation between how good a character is and how good their tournament results are. therefore it's perfectly reasonable to inductively conclude how good a character is based off tournament results. melee is far too complicated to qualify as a formal science, so we shouldn't be drawing conclusions without empirical evidence

THIS!

Also, the statement "If a character is good/bad, then the results are good/bad" implies "If the results are good/bad then the character is good/bad."

Character is good -> Good results.
Not good results -> character isn't good
Character isn't good == character is bad
Not good results == bad results
Therefore, Bad results -> bad character
AND...the same deduction works to conclude a Good results prove the character as good.

The use of results ITT is not a logical fallacy.

Armada: I don't think the reason behind "marth is bad" is that his potential to combo is falling behind. Rather, he is easily placed in bad positions.
But I agree - upair is highly underrated

 

[DerfMidWest]

Lists should be based mainly on theory.
Results should be taken into consideration as well, but not as a major factor, because most characters are underrepresented.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Lists should be based mainly on theory.
Results should be taken into consideration as well, but not as a major factor, because most characters are underrepresented.

I strongly agree with the wording here: "mostly."

The tier list should be an accurate reflection of the application of theoretical traits, which is where the "Proven capability" I've mentioned comes in. To elaborate one what I mean by that if I can, it's taking what is there in theory, and showing what that can do when applied. This means looking at the best players each character has to offer and comparing that "best of a character" to the "best of the other characters."

This sounds like common sense, like well duh, of course tier lists should reflect the top level of play, but it astounds me how little contemplation there is from some people (Not firing shots at anyone in particular) about what constitutes "top level." The Super Theory Bros. side would contend that top level is at frame perfection, where Fox can shinegrab, nairshine drillshine, infinite waveshine, and all sorts of other mindblowing offensive things with absolute precision to his heart's content. The other, even more ignorant side, the "Results reflect all" side, is that the top level of play is who is getting top 8 or top 4 or just who's winning tournaments, which is just frustratingly inaccurate and is the cause for why no one knows were the **** to place low tier characters.

The third option, not even the middle path because **** Buddhism Daoism is the best, is examining the top as being the highest thus-far proven application of characters. It isn't just looking at whoever is considered the number 1 player for every character, but for many characters, especially mid and low-tier ones, that does have to be the case as that is the only reflection of the understanding of those characters our community as a whole has. Even if it does mean Marth is doing more poorly because no one is good enough with him, we have a tier list that is much more willing to change than those of other games simply because of the complexity, variability, and ever-growing nature of our metagame, so it's fine if Marth has to sit back a few spots until Marths can be like "hey **** all y'all, check this Marth **** out and tell me Falcon and IC's are better than me anymore."

 

[Armada]

john!: Yeah I agree with you there. Theorycrafting is "easier" once you reach a certain level. Im just a bit tired when people talk like "they understand" when it more seems like the results then actually understaning.

Stylez: Ofc that's not the only reason but a big one. When a char have more players understanding him that char will look like he is really good. If a player can't handle all the things it seems to be a bit weaker. This game still have players that is trying very hard to improve and if you can't handle every part perfect you will start loseing more.

Mango/PP/Hbox/M2k exc are not that good because of their char it is because of tons of practice and trying to understand the game and trying to be perfect in what they does. When/If M2k start playing really serious again or when someone else with the motivation (and a lot of other stuff) is giveing his heart to preform well with Marth I think more people actually will understand this.

Im not saying Marth is the best char but for me he is very underrated and that is because of the results.