Official SWF Tier List v8

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

This thread isn't about IQs. Let's leave jigglysir's last comment as it is, the last comment.

Yes Sir Shaya.

Let's talk about how Marth is under/overrated.

 

[Deleted member 189823]

Forgive me if I recieve the grand award for the Most Clueless Person on Smashboards, but I just have to, HAVE to ASK.
What is the point of a tier list topic, exactly? Do the Back Roomers read our criterias and complaints to change something, or is it just there...for some reason?

 

[Shaya]

He's high tier, within the realms of other high tiers near him. Over/under rationalisation really stems from how anal retentive people are over the difference between 3rd and 7,8th,etcccth (read: there isn't enough to be worthwhile to ***** over).

Forgive me if I recieve the grand award for the Most Clueless Person on Smashboards, but I just have to, HAVE to ASK.
What is the point of a tier list topic, exactly? Do the Back Roomers read our criterias and complaints to change something, or is it just there...for some reason?

I would say we don't care about individual criteria by subjective persons. Things that pick up momentum here are usually already existing within BBR circles or are comedy-bait/ego-boosting to our members due to how horrendous they are. At it's base levels, this is a gateway/inbetween thing, people who stand out as sensible here are easy for BBR members to become acquainted with.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

He's high tier, within the realms of other high tiers near him. Over/under rationalisation really stems from how anal retentive people are over the difference between 3rd and 7,8th,etcccth (read: there isn't enough to be worthwhile to ***** over).

While I disagree with your assertion that the difference between 3rd and 8th is negligible (Olimar is definitely a lot better than Pikachu lmao), I do agree that orderings within tiers (ie, Diddy vs Olimar, Snake vs Marth vs flaoc) are irrelevant.

 

[Shaya]

I changed it from 5th, to 4th, to 3rd. Oli is noticeably stronger than 8th, but isn't noticeably stronger than 4th, who isn't noticeably stronger than 5th/etc imo.

Actually I lie, Olimar is really dumb.

 

[infiniteV115]

You're just saying that because Tin Man

 

[pidgezero_one]

This goes without saying, but this has been some of the most pompous ego-inflated drivel I've had the displeasure of reading since I moderated Gaia Online.

*facepalm* The fallacies here are numerous enough for me to laugh then cry...

So am I reading the transcript of an average /r/cringe submission, or am I just on Smashboards?

Let's start with the obvious issue - the thought process is "I have an opinion and yours is in conflict with mine, and since I believe I'm right I conclude you are wrong."

The rest of the pretentious fluff in this post is based on a huge fatal error: not only is this not even close to what I was arguing, it's also not how opinions work. Opinions are initially developed in accordance with what resonates with the person. How does that happen? Exposure, upbringing, environmental influence, personal experience, personal worldviews - basically the fundamentals of how people shape their views of "right" and "wrong". People develop opinions based on what they know to be, in their experience, right about whatever issue it is they're talking about. When someone offers a differing viewpoint, the receiver evaluates that against their own framework of right versus wrong. If it checks out, it falls under their personal realm of "right", they agree. If it doesn't, it falls under "wrong", and they disagree. There is a reason people settle on the opinions that they do - the first step is evaluating someone else's opinion against your worldview. This is where many people stop and make the decision of agreement vs. disagreement (others will take it further and challenge their own framework that makes them decide why they think an opinion is right or wrong, but this is not the default) As I said in my post, the thought process is "you're wrong, therefore I disagree with you", because the very nature of agreement or disagreement necessitates being preceded by an evaluation of whether the opinion in question is perceived as right or wrong. It does not work in reverse, nobody randomly selects a side to take on any issue and declares it must be right just because they chose it, with the obvious exception of being assigned a side in your preferred debate class.

Note how none of this has anything to do with whether I think I'm objectively right about anything. Nobody here can make that claim, unless their opinion just so happens to coincide with indisputable fact, at which point it no longer needs to be called an opinion in the first place. This is how opinions and agreement work. You're arguing a whole lot of hot air about absolutely nothing.

The latter in your quote makes the presupposition you are right (rest assured, you're not, or else you would be able to give me proof you had literally never been wrong about anything ever, ever.

Except that's not even what I said. Have you noticed the pattern yet that the amateurish nonsense here is based entirely on a strawman fallacy (that being a term I tend to use sparingly, this ought to tell you something) used in your first sentence? What was that you said about numerous fallacies and crying, again?

And the fact that that video with you vs Vinnie posted on this site somewhere means you made at least a few wrong reads and therefore have not always been right).

And let's not get into that, lest you want your posts in the MU chart thread dredged up.

The former process (the one you state is wrong) is extremely arrogant and also fallacious because it begs the question of a state of always being right, and also that there IS a right answer (I won't say there isn't a right answer [not even going there] but I take issue with the assumption that one is always right which is empirically denied, which means to conclude someone else is wrong because they disagree with you is incorrect).

This is completely missing the point of basically everything anyone could have said about this issue. Outside of indisputable fact, right and wrong are defined subjectively by the individual. In their frame of reference, their opinion is right, and when an opinion is presented to them that is wrong according to their own mental framework, they disagree as a result. There you go, thought processes 101.

And yes people call others names just because they don't share the same opinions. Congress is one prime example, but I can also just say "you're stupid for thinking that" and your statement is false. There is however the option to just label the other person an (whatever they called you) as well and move on because it would be entirely reciprocal (yes I just gave you permission to label me stupid and no I don't care).

I don't call children stupid. I'm at least 7 years your senior, that wouldn't be fair or morally sound of me. You no doubt consider yourself wise for your age, and you seem smart enough to me, but it seems to me you've gotten way too hung up on yourself. I'm sure you've learned of the concept of hubris by now.

And if you say I don't have a right to post here or whatever,

Er, what?

 

[Shaya]

You're just saying that because Tin Man

No. I like the oli match up. Just oli is a pretty dumb character nevertheless

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I appreciated that Sausage

but only because of the SBaHJ picture

the rest was trash

 

[1PokeMastr]

He just lets his emotions and ego get in his way of thinking.
:v

But arguing with Sausage Person is a one way ticket to failure, it never works out.

And Shaya, it's Tin Man.

 

[pidgezero_one]

I appreciated that Sausage

but only because of the SBaHJ picture

the rest was trash

your trash

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

No. I like the oli match up. Just oli is a pretty dumb character nevertheless

Imo Olimar is the 4th dumbest character imo

MK is just dumbness incarnate.
ICs are dumber than Oli
Diddy Kong is dumber than Oli.

Okay maybe it's just Bananas that are dumber than Oli but still. imo MK > ICs > Diddy > Oli

Actually imo Diddy > ICs but the world isn't ready for that yet.

I think I'm just posting nonsense now so I'm going to bed goodnight.

imo imo imo imo imo imo imo

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I'm going to beat TIn Man with a terrible character and have it recorded (y)

 

[pidgezero_one]

I'm going to beat TIn Man with a terrible character and have it recorded (y)

Already did this in doubles

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

I'm going to beat TIn Man with a terrible character and have it recorded (y)

Tin Man is from Toronto. If you think he doesn't have infinity Jigglypuff experience you would be wrong.

 

[Shaya]

Oli's dumbness is the sheer almost infinite number of mechanical applications of his moveset that as an opponent, have to be aware of constantly/consistently lest you die. MK is like... well, you know his **** is completely lagless when used properly, ICs is well you know you're going to die if you mess up and Diddy is a combination of Oli/ICs in terms of dumbness.

 

[1PokeMastr]

Already did this in doubles

Double Jiggs too stronk.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Tin Man is from Toronto. If you think he doesn't have infinity Jigglypuff experience you would be wrong.

if you think I rely on inexperience to win you would be wrong

 

[infiniteV115]

Actually imo Diddy > ICs but the world isn't ready for that yet.

What makes you think Diddy is better than ICs? O.o
For you to believe that you'd have to believe that ICs have a worse MU spread than Diddy, right? So....explain pls

 

[pidgezero_one]

What makes you think Diddy is better than ICs? O.o
For you to believe that you'd have to believe that ICs have a worse MU spread than Diddy, right? So....explain pls

He's still mourning the loss of tier list v7

 

[Thor]

The rest of the pretentious fluff in this post is based on a huge fatal error: not only is this not even close to what I was arguing, it's also not how opinions work. Opinions are initially developed in accordance with what resonates with the person. How does that happen? Exposure, upbringing, environmental influence, personal experience, personal worldviews - basically the fundamentals of how people shape their views of "right" and "wrong". People develop opinions based on what they know to be, in their experience, right about whatever issue it is they're talking about. When someone offers a differing viewpoint, the receiver evaluates that against their own framework of right versus wrong. If it checks out, it falls under their personal realm of "right", they agree. If it doesn't, it falls under "wrong", and they disagree. There is a reason people settle on the opinions that they do - the first step is evaluating someone else's opinion against your worldview. This is where many people stop and make the decision of agreement vs. disagreement (others will take it further and challenge their own framework that makes them decide why they think an opinion is right or wrong, but this is not the default) As I said in my post, the thought process is "you're wrong, therefore I disagree with you", because the very nature of agreement or disagreement necessitates being preceded by an evaluation of whether the opinion in question is perceived as right or wrong. It does not work in reverse, nobody randomly selects a side to take on any issue and declares it must be right just because they chose it, with the obvious exception of being assigned a side in your preferred debate class.

Note how none of this has anything to do with whether I think I'm objectively right about anything. Nobody here can make that claim, unless their opinion just so happens to coincide with indisputable fact, at which point it no longer needs to be called an opinion in the first place. This is how opinions and agreement work. You're arguing a whole lot of hot air about absolutely nothing.

Ooooooohh... That explains a lot. Operating from a basis of subjectivity would easily disperse all issues I had with your statement.

I'm sure you've learned of the concept of hubris by now.

That and the concept of misunderstanding (and straw man).

And let's not get into that, lest you want your posts in the MU chart thread dredged up.

For the record I've have done no more than like 20% - if I'd played my main Pikachu. And you can dredge stuff up if it's needed - maybe then someone can explain to me how to delete a Smashboards account. (or show me that I'm a loser at everything, not just Smash).

You're arguing a whole lot of hot air about absolutely nothing.

That's probably why I'm on the debate team XD. Nuclear war and D-rules and racism and heteronormativity bad and 230 words per minute and all that stupid stuff.

Also your status finally makes sense to me.

Also, I apologize. It doesn't do much, but it's about all I can offer at this point. I'll also stop posting in here (for real this time).

 

[1PokeMastr]

When you come back, come back with Loki.

 

[Aidebit]

your trash

What's wrong with his trash?

And darn, I missed all the PT discussion. PT is low tier, possibly above Luigi, Ivy can be used well, but you can say the same about 'Dorf, Charizard is pretty good for low tier, probably wouldn't move him higher, and Squirtle is like Fox, he has a horrid matchup that pushes him down.

But not as low as Fox.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

What makes you think Diddy is better than ICs? O.o
For you to believe that you'd have to believe that ICs have a worse MU spread than Diddy, right? So....explain pls

I ALREADY SAID

THE WORLD ISN'T READY FOR IT YET.

GEEZ V CAN'T YOU READ!??!?!??!?!

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Diddy is bad and overrated.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

Diddy is bad and overrated.

yeah but so are ICs, Olimar and MK

Jigglypuff is the true #1

Captain Falcon is #2.

 

[Gardex]

Diddy is good and underrated.

Preach on, brotha

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Diddy is right where he needs to be

 

[1PokeMastr]

Falco > Diddy.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Just for fun, remember the first tier list? Remember how the meta has developed? We always see where numbers move from the last tier list, but how about where they moved from the very beginning to now? Here's a cool way to see how the tier list evolved, thoughts? I'll probably format it a tad better later and put on some cool facts I noticed.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

You can see the exact moment where people realized MK's potential

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

You can see the exact moment where people realized MK's potential

You can also see the point where Ally started playing more MK than Snake.

 

[NH Cody]

Remember how the meta has developed?

he didn't develop at all what are you talking about

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Falco > Diddy.

Falco may have better match ups overall but Diddy doesn't have any -3 match ups

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

Falco may have better match ups overall but Diddy doesn't have any -3 match ups

Neither does Falco

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Pikachu 10pikachus

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

Pikachu 10pikachus

-2

10-2s

so it's actually +8. Falco wins by so much it's off the chart.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Well there you go

 

[thrillagorilla]

Yay for finite mathematical proofs using abstract numerical valuations of concepts that have little to do with numbers in the first place.

 

[NH Cody]

If W is a subspace of R5, and the action T on W brings it into R8, and the vector <1,3,0,2,2> is in W, then does Falco beat Pikachu?