Official MBR 2010 NTSC Tier List

[Mahone]

Shroomed probably outplaces the highest placing falcon player at like every tournament

what is your reasoning for falcon being so good?

Also i thought about it more, and i do think that doc/falcon should be a tier below peach/ics, but im still not convinced falcon is that much better than doc

 

[Gea]

I feel about shroomed the same way you feel about hbox. One player doesn't make a rule of thumb. Doc has to work much, much harder off of reads to get things like grabs or hard punishes. He has no tool like knee and his movement game blows next to falcon. People REALLY overrate his jab game because they aren't experienced enough to stuff his options. He has even less mixup tools in his recovery game than Falcon. I really think shroomed is just a great player that makes it work because he is great at what he does, just like Axe is for Pika.

I'm not saying Falcon is insanely good, but his movement is better and he can convert off of his pokes/get grabs way, way easier than Doc can.

 

[KrIsP!]

I meant more...on peaches level. Doc is good but...well I guess it's just your weird numbering again. I'd put doc at fifth or else it makes me feel like doc and peach are pretty close. Thing is there are a lot of good falcons and few docs. I feel like in terms of losing matches, falcon can be more viable than doc. He has to be really on point but I feel like he has better combos, dd/movement and edge guarding not recovery though and doc does have pills. They're close but I'd have

B tier- Peach, Falcon/Ics
C tier- Doc, etc.

 

[Mahone]

Ya, i agree with a lot of what you are saying, i will say however that at top level i think doc's recovery is much better, with good di he can defend himself very well and his upb is very good at breaking combos offstage and just recovering in general. He's also better at gimping, and like i said, his playstyle is higher variance i guess, which i consider a positive in bad mus. I just don't see him having a worse mu vs fox/falco than falcon.

@krisp: i think ics have just as good mus or better than falcon vs tier 1 and they do MUCH better vs sheik, so how can they be tied?

i also really think falco shuts down falcon BADLY... like i think its even worse than sheik in some ways, i wish hax or someone would come in here and share their thoughts... i dont play falcon or doc so im just going off what i see at high level

 

[KrIsP!]

Yeah I agree with him having better recovery. As for the spacies MU you could be right, his pills are dfeinitely a big facotr...getting let out of lecture early so leaving the post at that

 

[Gea]

Yeah he has better gimp game and some other stuff. I don't think they are mega far off on the tier list or anything, I just think Falcon edges out. As for their MU vs spacies it's hard to say who has it worse. Spacies have some nasty *** combos on Falcon and Doc has CGs but I also feel like Falcon can just get his punishes going and exploit windows of opportunity better. Either way they both struggle with spacies that know what's up. Doc can definitely handle sheik better though.

Edit: Ics are hard to accurately place but imo they are better than Falcon/Doc

 

[Divinokage]

Shroomed probably outplaces the highest placing falcon player at like every tournament

what is your reasoning for falcon being so good?

Also i thought about it more, and i do think that doc/falcon should be a tier below peach/ics, but im still not convinced falcon is that much better than doc

I also outplaced the Falcons at FC... Does that mean Ganon should be a bit better than people think they are? Or is it me too good with Ganon?

I mean if there's only ONE player per character that can completely outplace the average, I don't think it's good enough to place them high on the tier list.

 

[Mahone]

I also outplaced the Falcons at FC... Does that mean Ganon should be a bit better than people think they are? Or is it me too good with Ganon?

I mean if there's only ONE player per character that can completely outplace the average, I don't think it's good enough to place them high on the tier list.

I was just responding to this post (below), i wasn't using shroomed's placing to justify my list

Yeah this. Falcon's DD game and Peach's... well defensive game Doc got nothin' on. There are two Doc players right now that are tournament level threats and I feel like they glass ceiling way before any of the many falcons or peaches...

edit: talking about from a point of view of placings and consistency

 

[JPOBS]

1: Fox/Falco
2: Sheik, Marth
3: Jigglypuff

You don't even have peach.

Any respctable list should go up to at least falcon.

 

[Mahone]

My tier list is divided into viable, semi-viable, and not viable, but since i don't know enough about the semi-viables and lower to rank them, i've just ranked the viable characters

1: Falco/Fox
2: Sheik, Marth
3: Jigglypuff
4: Peach, Ice Climbers
5: Falcon/Dr.Mario

1: I believe falco does better on average in most mus, but I have him tied with fox because fox does significantly better vs puff and peach. The significant attribute of this tier is that these characters have no BAD mus (40-60 or worse)

2: What's most important about these characters is that they can compete with tier 1, having evenish mus with both fox and falco. I think sheik does a little better than marth vs falco and a little worse than marth vs fox. Sheik also has the benefit of destroying the low tiers and having very solid mus vs the mid tiers. She also beats marth in the head to head. However, sheik does lose to ICs and puff pretty solidly.

Marth has the benefit of having FD vs fox and falco in the current ruleset Best of 5s, which sways the mus to his favor for that one (possibly 2) game(s). He struggles much more vs mid tiers such as pikachu (if u type pikachu it wants to correct it to spinach), but likely wins those mus regardless, so this isn't weighed that heavily.

The difference between these two isn't that big, which is why they are in the same tier, but since marth loses the head to head solidly I rate Sheik slightly higher.

3: Jigglypuff would easily be in tier 2 if it wasn't for her bad mu with fox. She slightly beats falco, beats sheik, and is evenish with marth, possibly beating him, but her mu with fox is BAD. I weigh this very heavily since he is in tier 1. She also struggles much more with mid tiers (and some low tiers) than tiers 1 and 2 (the fact that people are even discussing whether she is even with ylink shows this).

4: Peach gets a lot of points just for being evenish (55-45) vs falco, since the rest of the characters don't really have this ability, and again this is weighted heavily because he is tier 1. She does lose badly to fox, but not much or any worse than the rest of this tier (they all for sure lose to fox). She is actually pretty weak besides falco, since she loses to sheik, is evenish vs marth, and loses BAD to jigglypuff. Peach vs ICs however is probably the worst mu of all the possible mus in the viable tier (in peach's favor).

ICs can be argued to be better than peach since they have a much better mu vs sheik and jigglypuff. They lose to tier 1 for sure, especially fox, but they have a lot of tools to deal with falco... I will be honest and admit that its hard for me to rate ICs since i don't believe i solidly understand them as a character and am not sure how their mus vs tier 1 really go. Their main downside would be having a somewhat hard counter in peach. This rating is assuming wobbling is legal. I guess id have to rate them slightly lower since they lose so badly to peach.

5: I actually think Falcon is pretty bad because he plays so straightforward. I just see him solidly losing to falco and fox, with not much room to gimmick them. Dr.Mario has very similiar mu ratios to falcon vs fox and falco, but i think his moveset and playstyle is conducive to stealing wins more often. This difference is pretty negligible and shouldn't be scrutinized since i do have them tied. They both lose to sheik solidly, both evenish with marth (id say falcon is better though), same thing goes for jiggs (but id say doc is better), then falcon does better, beating peach and ICs. Head to head is evenish.

I wrote up to falcon after

 

[JPOBS]

Lol I'm dumb.

I don't think Ice climbers should b so high. They are good vs sheik and puff i guess, but
but they get hard counterd by peach, and falcon and Ganon also bop them really badly too.

I can't see them being higher than falcon assuming all players involved know the matchups (which is what we should be assuming anyway).

Their biggst advantage in a practical sense though is that few regions have good ICs and ICs vs unexprienced players, even good ones, is usually destruction.

 

[tarheeljks]

think doc gets shut down much harder than falcon does by falco. watching shroomed vs zhu/mango/pp it seems like he frequently lacks good options. there have just been so many times where i've been watching shroomed fight a good falco and thought "doc blows, he really cannot do anything." the fact that he also plays marth/sheik against falco says a lot. falcon is obv also at a disadvantage but can fall back on mobility/speed to create openings more reliably. he obv has to work, but falcon can be very slippery so i don't think it's as easy as it looks for falco to land hits that lead to combos. both punish super hard, though i disagree about doc being higher variance. that depends on the tech chasing habits of the falcon. falcon can inject lots of variance by going for reads out of tech chases (as opposed to regrabbing) and kneeing lots

edit: falcon is obv combo food once there's a clean hit, but given that you've restricted this to top players i don't think he's giving up a ton of ground there b/c falco combos doc to pieces also (just not as much with shines)

 

[Bones0]

Doc's OoS game vs. pressure seems way better than Falcon's though. Usmash is a complete reversal. Up-B is super fast (and can be canceled). His WD is also goes really far so he can almost always bail out safely, especially when used in coordination with ledgedashes.

 

[KirbyKaze]

Nothing isn't better than nothing

 

[tarheeljks]

that's a more succinct way of saying what i was going to say


edit: that all sounds nice on paper (i asked in this very thread about the use of up b against shield pressure), but i don't see these things happening in the way that you are saying in matches. also think you are really oversimplifying how easy it is for doc to get out of shield pressure, but i will counter with s2j rolling and getting out of pressure all the time lol. but really i don't think doc's shield game being better means that much b/c falcon's oos game is not a significant component of what he does well against anyone (so it's not like he's losing a tactic) and good falcons are good at staying out of shield (even against falco)

 

[ShroudedOne]

Peach loses to Fox less badly than Puff does, imo.

 

[Mahone]

Lol I'm dumb.

I don't think Ice climbers should b so high. They are good vs sheik and puff i guess, but
but they get hard counterd by peach, and falcon and Ganon also bop them really badly too.

I can't see them being higher than falcon assuming all players involved know the matchups (which is what we should be assuming anyway).

Their biggst advantage in a practical sense though is that few regions have good ICs and ICs vs unexprienced players, even good ones, is usually destruction.

Ya, im not sure how losing to peach should be weighted. I agree its a big deal that they have some counters, but I just have them that high because I weigh the higher tier matchups more, although i do see how this reasoning could be flawed.


@everyone else: Ok, you've convinced me falcon is better than doc, so i now have Falcon, then doc in the same tier

 

[Xyzz]

i also really think falco shuts down falcon BADLY... like i think its even worse than sheik in some ways, i wish hax or someone would come in here and share their thoughts... i dont play falcon or doc so im just going off what i see at high level

Falco is really good at shutting down Falcon, yes. I still think Sheik is still the harder MU for CF for some reasons:
CF is really good once he gets a hit on Falco. There's a pretty good chance that the bird dies if he gets touched at practically any percent. Sure it often involves techchases and/or other reads, but Falcon has much better punishments on Falco than on Sheik. (Stomp > Knee works super early and practically forever on spacies for example. Also Sheik can come back vs knee longer than spacies can).
Sheik ALSO shuts down Falcon really hard. It doesn't look as stupid as vs Falco who just shoots lasers and does whatever he pleases, but her tilts / grabgame are really strong at stopping whatever Falcon does (also: Sheik is much better at getting in on nair walls, because she's faster).
Sheik can finish her combos better. Falco does combo the living daylights out of Falcon from a single shine, but Sheik also gets great stuffs from relatively simple setups (grab, any tilt, dash attack), and can often send off CF with a fair and get a good edge guard opportunity at the very least. If Falco can't combo into a dair that will send the Falcon off the stage, he has to resort to his bair. Not that his bair is bad or anything, but CF really is a fatty and with proper DI the bair isn't too threatening until super high percents and he will be much higher above the stage than where Sheik fair would leave him. Also Sheik edgeguards him better from any position than Falco does.

 

[Hax]

i also really think falco shuts down falcon BADLY... like i think its even worse than sheik in some ways, i wish hax or someone would come in here and share their thoughts... i dont play falcon or doc so im just going off what i see at high level

Falcon's matchups:
Fox 30-70
Falco 35-65
Jiggs 35-65 but not as bad as Falco
Sheik 40-60
Marth 50-50
Peach 50-50

 

[TheLake]

Hax I like your list

and I dig your style

can you elaborate on the puff/falcon matchup though?

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Someone else out there won't agree and thus begins the continual cycle of displeasure lol

 

[odinNJ]

hax would you say that falcon - sheik on fd brings it closer to even? or does fd not help falcon THAT much in this matchup?

 

[Divinokage]

Falcon's matchups:
Fox 30-70
Falco 35-65
Jiggs 35-65 but not as bad as Falco
Sheik 40-60
Marth 50-50
Peach 50-50

Fox-Falcon is as hard Ganon-Sheik? I don't think you would be shut down at every corner. Though that would make sense at very high level but if you play anyone outside the top players it's not that bad at all though.

 

[Lovage]

Someone else out there won't agree and thus begins the continual cycle of displeasure lol

sounds like ur the only one unhappy

 

[knightpraetor]

i hate matchup percentages cause I don't know whether to judge the matchup by how difficult it is for each player to perform perfectly, or only by the probability of winning if both players were playing perfectly.

It it's the former, then yeah, those matchup percentages for falcon seem about right...poor guy

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

sounds like ur the only one unhappy

My vocabulary is pretty limited, but I'll try to sound smart anyway.

My previous comment was made with the intention of being neutral. The intent was to comment about a particular trait of smasher behavior. Or in other words, attempt to make it obvious to people about a particular trait of the most recent conversation.

TheLake enjoyed Hax's opinion. I was attempting to point out that some people will likely find some little nitpick about Hax's choice of match-ups ratios.

It has not happened yet and might not be explicitly shown that someone disagree's with Hax. It sort of depends upon if the right person shows up like Leffen or Umbreon. Their usually more discussion-heavy people that tend to show up to challenge opinions. But, once someone like that comes along to differ from Hax's opinion. Someone else would come along to differ from their opinion. The endless cycle of displeasure continues and we end up on page 356 (40ppp).

But with my opinion included, I have no grounds to disagree with Hax's list or not. I'm from the midwest, I'm bad.

 

[john!]

there were many different ways to effectively respond to lovage's ***********... that was not one of them

 

[Purpletuce]

I think Xeylode's post illustrated his point quite well. . .

Also, I don't know much about Falcon, but I think his numbers are going a little extreme. . . if matches like Fox-Falcon are 70-30, what are matches like for low tiers? I have to assume 100-0 is the worst possible MU, and there isn't much room for harder match ups. . . then again, the whole number thing is pretty arbitrary. . .

 

[Blistering Speed]

. . then again, the whole number thing is pretty arbitrary. . .

Yeah, so stop overthinking it. Hax's list sufficiently explains his perspective on Falcon's disadvantages i.e. the hierarchy and a general concept of severity. It's when people start reading too deeply into it e.g. your mindset on what constitutes "70:30" marginally differs from Hax's and you take issue, that things get unnecessarily pedantic and confused.

TL;DR: Subjective, ill defined terms should not be handled with precision.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

I love lovage now.

 

[Gea]

Yeah, so stop overthinking it. Hax's list sufficiently explains his perspective on Falcon's disadvantages i.e. the hierarchy and a general concept of severity. It's when people start reading too deeply into it e.g. your mindset on what constitutes "70:30" marginally differs from Hax's and you take issue, that things get unnecessarily pedantic and confused.

TL;DR: Subjective, ill defined terms should not be handled with precision.

This so much, and is the issue with posts like Kage's. Ranking the MUs by difficulty for the character is far more important than the ratio by which people try to compare different characters' MUs.

 

[unknown522]

Falcon's matchups:
Fox 30-70
Falco 35-65
Jiggs 35-65 but not as bad as Falco
Sheik 40-60
Marth 50-50
Peach 50-50

sounds similar to what you said at your house.

It looks like you flipped fox and falco again

 

[Doser]

I just don't understand why we should use specific ratios if we don't mean something specific. Likewise, if someone does think it is very specific they should use precise terms.

 

[Twinkles]

Numbers make it easier to see how good/bad a mu is in relation to others instead of "fox is kinda harder for falcon than shiek"

 

[KirbyKaze]

I've considered what it would look like along a gradient but that's arguably more abstract.

 

[Bones0]

I guess I am the only one that still views the percentages as the percentage of matches each character is likely to win with two top players of equal skill.

Yes, equal skill is a theoretical concept, but it's better than justifying everything with "these are based on mah feels."

 

[odinNJ]

but "the feels" are often the most unbiased, raw opnions on matchups based off of PLAYING THE GAME, not simply by thinking of theoretical matcups.
Not disagreeing, just putting this out there

 

[KirbyKaze]

I guess I am the only one that still views the percentages as the percentage of matches each character is likely to win with two top players of equal skill.

Yes, equal skill is a theoretical concept, but it's better than justifying everything with "these are based on mah feels."

I usually do it like

55-45 > The 45 has to play 10% better than the 55 in order to go even.

65-35 > The 35 has to play 30% better than the 65 in order to go even.

So forth, so on.

 

[The Star King]

Bones that's assuming pretty high variance in results. If Melee results are inconsistent enough for me to win only 65% of the time with a significant advantage then that's pretty sad. I don't think results are that inconsistent in this game. Especially in match-ups like Jigglypuff vs Peach.

Something like a stock ratio would be better even though I'm not the biggest fan of that either.

 

[Bones0]

So you think just because one player is using a slightly better character that they would win 90% of the time or something? Not trying to straw man you or anything, I just don't get what you mean by inconsistency. It's not like the game is inconsistent, it's the players. If you have two players of equal skill except player A is a tiny bit better and they play dittos, obviously player B who is a little worse will still win almost half of the games. This is basically along the same lines as RPS decisions. Even a player that will destroy his opponent round after round will still lose some RPS mindgames. It's not because the game is random or anything, but because it's just really hard to be perfect. So if you think Fox beats Peach 70-30, then when two players of equal skill face each other in that matchup, the Fox should be winning roughly 70% of the time. I think that's ridiculous, but I guess that's why all of my matchup ratios seem less extreme than others'.

All this miscommunication is why I prefer terms like "negligible advantage/even, small advantage, solid advantage, and large advantage." While they are potentially less specific if you're trying to compare a matchup relative to another (Hax saying Falcon vs. each spacie is 65-35 vs. 60-40 is more descriptive than lumping them both into solid advantage), as a general frame of reference they are probably better at conveying how big of a deal a matchup is. I think a lot of top tier matchups could just be called even without anyone really substantially disagreeing, but people understand that having two different characters be equal is so unlikely that they would rather pick an answer even if they can't formulate their complex opinion of the matchup into words. So this just goes back to players having "dat feels" about a matchup and posting an arbitrary number. There's nothing wrong with viewing a matchup through your almost subconscious feelings about it, but it's a ****ty way to convey it to others because "dem feels" result in wildly different interpretations.