Smashboards Community Voted Tier List: Version 4 COMPLETE! Break for a few months...

[Bowserboy3]

And again, people forget poor old .

 

[Wintermelon43]

And again, people forget poor old .

Haha that was because Nidtendofreak was the most recent poster on here when I started making my vote and I just looked off of his. I edited him in

 

[MarioManTAW]

A bit harder than the last round.
is IMO the best of the bunch in the current meta: very good in theory but mediocre air speed and poor representation hold him back.
is the 2nd best because she has the most high-level representation (and thus results) of this group, but lacks a theory as strong as 's.
and are both characters that I really think could be higher, but their lack of representation (at least recently) gives me nothing to support that.
also suffers from poor representation, but unlike and , his meta doesn't have a lot of room to grow because he's an objectively worse clone of a top tier.
has more representation than , but like , he is a clone of a much better character.
also is poorly represented and a bit overrated IMO. With the recent rise of , it may potentially move up, but at this point, I don't think it has enough results to warrant any higher a placing.
, like , is a clone of a far better character, but he has more differences from than do from their original characters. Unfortunately, in almost all of these differences, is superior to .
is in a lot of ways a worse version of . Perhaps better mobility, but poorer representation and kill power. As far as Miis go, has better 1111 specials than , but 1111 moveset (as well as Miis' dubious legality) hold back.

 

[MrGameguycolor]

And again, people forget poor old .

LOL, no wonder people don't think very highly of him.

 

[lbrasz44]

 

[kaz99]

Low tier:

 

[Nidtendofreak]

I reserve the right to forget a forgettable clone character who hasn't been relevant in over a year when exhausted.

 

[MrGameguycolor]

I reserve the right to forget a forgettable clone character who hasn't been relevant in over a year when exhausted.

While its in the OP, maybe the next time we move onto the next tier show what the previous tier ended up looking like in the update post. Just a bit easier to find that way.

Anyhow:



-1

Fraud.

 

[Kirby Dragons]

-

 

[jespoke]

Avoided looking at other votes first because it is one i wanted to ponder for myself. I'm still contemplating some specifics.
Again this round nothing stands out to me as needing to move up or down.

People are really down on is seems. That F-air though

 

[Munomario777]

Roy and Samus are pretty close for me. Gunner, while saved from bottom tier due to having decent projectiles and KO options that are at least better than someone like Zelda's, doesn't have a great overall kit in 1111 default, and also has very little to speak of in terms of results.

 

[Tizio Random]

I don't think any of this character should go up or down as of now but I can see Roy, Charizard or Samus having some possibilities in the future. Sorry Falco, you suck.

 

[Victory.IsMyDestinySSB4]

+
-

 

[MarioManTAW]

+
-

We are well past that phase, plus votes are limited to 5 characters per person. Right now we are ordering these characters:

 

[Routa]

Gunner is worse Samus?
How? What? When? Where? What are you smoking boy?

I see that there is a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to Gunner. I will post more about this once I'm back from my trip to SoCal.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Gunner is worse Samus?
How? What? When? Where? What are you smoking boy?

I see that there is a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to Gunner. I will post more about this once I'm back from my trip to SoCal.

He isn't getting more results than Samus that's for sure.

 

[L1N3R1D3R]

+1

Samus has done WAY more than the other characters here, getting much better results through solo mains, most notably IcyMist, and I would honestly put her above half of the tier above her as well. Roy is second because quite a few people secondary him to moderate success, and Kirby is third due to moderate representation and counterpick potential. The others I will explain if I need to.

 

[Samuelwisebaggins]

+

 

[Frihetsanka]

+1

No upvotes or downvotes.

Samus is a character with a lot of theoretical potential, yet her flaws are significant enough to keep her out of mid tier for the time being. If she gets a few small buffs or if her metagame develops a bit I could see her somewhere in mid tier, but for the time being she should stay in Low tier.

Kirby is a character that can do a lot in certain matchups, and works really well as a counter-pick character. Unfortunately, his overall MU chart is pretty bad, and his ability to approach is lacking.

Mii Gunner 1111 is not really that bad, the character has a pretty solid neutral game. The character is hurt by the lack of a consistent rule-set for Miis, and the inability to play as Miis in For Glory.

Roy has gotten quite a bit of hype lately, yet he's still not all that good... Ryo's results with Roy are enough to put him in the upper end of Low tier though.

Charizard is considered a Low-Mid or Mid-tier character by some. I remain unconvinced right now, but he does have some useful tools.

Wii Fit Trainer has some things going for her, yet very few people seem to play her. I'm really not sure where to place her, and I could see her climbing up to the top of Low tier or perhaps even into Low-Mid tier in the future.

Dr. Mario is a significantly weaker Mario, but how much weaker? I don't really know, since few people would seriously main Dr. Mario when most people think that regular Mario is much more fun to play. It's possible he would be a Mid tier character if Mario didn't exist, so perhaps we're underselling Dr. Mario. Then again, perhaps he would still be Low tier.

Bowser. Jr is not all bad, but he's pretty bad. Probably not Bottom tier though.

Falco is not terrible, but he's pretty bad. Probably not Bottom tier though.

Edit: Added a Samus upvote and moved Mii Gunner up one step.

 

[Bowserboy3]

Of note, I just came back from a tournament in Birmingham, with a few UK threats attending (Willz, Afro Smash, Ho, Magi etc), and Afro Smash (the Samus main), placed 3rd, ahead of a bracket/top 16 full of top/high tier characters such as Captain Falcon, Cloud, Sheik, Bayonetta, Mario, Corrin, ZSS, Rosalina etc.

Afro Smash placed 3rd. In November, at SmashZilla 5 in Nottingham, Afro Smash placed 1st.

Samus can perform, and she does do. Look at the wider spectrum.

---

Something I wanted to bring up about Kirby I saw above, was that his "theory" is supposedly better than all in this tier.

For me, the fact that the character has next to no results (especially when compared to characters like Samus who has solid results, and others like Charizard, Doc and even Bowser Jr, all of whom have had showings now and then) only outlines to me that his "theory" is being blown way out of proportion.

If it really is the case that he has better theory than characters like Samus, Charizard, Doc etc, why do they all have better results than him? Why do these characters somehow get past MU's that they should be having trouble with, yet ones that Kirby "theoretically" should be doing better in, isn't?

I hate the use of the word "theory" when ranking character, because believe it or not, it is theorycraft; lmao, it's got the word in there. We don't build tier lists on theory or ideas; we build them on facts.

But for the sake of discussion, to me, results are backed up by a character's good tools/options, or, if you like, "theory", and Kirby's results (or lack thereof) only signals to me that his "theory" is certainly not as good as we give him credit for, epsecially in comparison to others in the tier (can't stress Samus enough for this point).

Not trying to say Kirby's bad, not trying to say he needs to move down. Merely bringing an interesting point up.

 

[Frihetsanka]

Tiers matter much less at non-top level. At locals even bottom tiers can (and often do) really well when played by one of the best local players. According to his twitter, Afro Smash is a top 4 UK player, so chances are he was a much better player than most people he played against. ZeRo could probably win some local tournaments with Shulk, Nairo could probably win some local tournaments with Dr. Mario or Zelda, and ANTi could probably win some local tournaments with Charizard (assuming they didn't face any other top players).

I don't think Kirby has better theory than Samus, and his theory is pretty poor, hence why he is Low tier and not Mid tier. If we're going by results Charizard should be close to #1 in the tier, and perhaps he should be, yet he placed really low on the 4BR tier list (Bottom tier, even, which I thought was a bit much). Every character in Low tier has something going for them, yet they all have significant flaws that keep them for being all that relevant at top levels. I think that when it comes to Bottom, Low, and Mid tiers results matter a bit less since top players are more likely to play Top and High tier characters.

Don't forget that you placed Kirby as #3 yourself, only Samus and Dr. Mario are higher.

And, frankly, with lower tiers it's mostly theorycrafting and guessing, with the occasional data. These characters are not played much by top players for a reason, and this makes it harder to order them properly.

 

[Routa]

These 2 characters are held down for reasons in current meta.
In Gunner's case it is lack of rep and and ruling
In Doc's case it is the lack of walking

Been discussing with some Doc mains and also looked into Doc myself and I do have to agree with them when they say that Doc is really underrated. While his recovery ain't good it isn't trash like many claim it to be. Other reason why I have have started to think that Doc deserves to be higher is walking. The next direction where meta will evolve is walking. Many of the characters have amazing grounded options that are a lot safer to use without getting punished as hard. And Doc happens to be one of them with the top lvl grounded options kit in the game. I can see Doc become more relevant when the time goes on.

And Gunner... Gunner is not inferior Samus. His playstyle is not even close to that of a Samus. Best comparison would be ROB and even that comparison would be a bit off. Gunner is a heavy zoner with a good trap game. He has great neutral and is able to challenge characters like Diddy, Mac and Sheik on the ground. By this I mean he is able to play the neutral against these characters in his own terms and only very few characters are able to do this. I have stated before that Gunner does well against better characters like Bayonetta, Marth, Sheik and Diddy (he does however have really bad MUs against Mario, Fox, Rosa and M2). His issues as a character are his kill game and his poor cqc. Note he does have good kill moves, but the issue is that they are not that easy to land due to Gunner having to leave his comfort zone which is out of cqc for the kill.

Only reason why I can see why people think that these characters should be on this tier is due to lack of results.

I wont be voting either of the characters up due to lack of results.

I hope what I wrote was readable. Still on a jet lag hehe...

 

[Zerp]

Okay, serious question here: I do see Kirby as a Low Tier, (but barely, I view all the characters I put behind him as being Bottom Tier lol) but I've been having a hard time actually justifying my view on him being low tier lately, can someone pinpoint to me what exactly sets him apart from ,,, and in terms of viability?

 

[Bowserboy3]

Tiers matter much less at non-top level. At locals even bottom tiers can (and often do) really well when played by one of the best local players. According to his twitter, Afro Smash is a top 4 UK player, so chances are he was a much better player than most people he played against. ZeRo could probably win some local tournaments with Shulk, Nairo could probably win some local tournaments with Dr. Mario or Zelda, and ANTi could probably win some local tournaments with Charizard (assuming they didn't face any other top players).

I don't think Kirby has better theory than Samus, and his theory is pretty poor, hence why he is Low tier and not Mid tier. If we're going by results Charizard should be close to #1 in the tier, and perhaps he should be, yet he placed really low on the 4BR tier list (Bottom tier, even, which I thought was a bit much). Every character in Low tier has something going for them, yet they all have significant flaws that keep them for being all that relevant at top levels. I think that when it comes to Bottom, Low, and Mid tiers results matter a bit less since top players are more likely to play Top and High tier characters.

Don't forget that you placed Kirby as #3 yourself, only Samus and Dr. Mario are higher.

And, frankly, with lower tiers it's mostly theorycrafting and guessing, with the occasional data. These characters are not played much by top players for a reason, and this makes it harder to order them properly.

The first part of my post was to report some Samus results.

These were not just mere locals, or weeklies either (hence why I mentioned the top UK players in attendance). Pretty solid stuff for a Samus player.

I know I placed Kirby as #3 myself.

Not trying to say Kirby's bad, not trying to say he needs to move down.

My post was aimed at a post that claimed Kirby had the best "theory" of this tier. It was merely food for thought on if he DID have the best theory, why doesn't he have solid results like the rest of the characters in the tier?

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Okay, serious question here: I do see Kirby as a Low Tier, (but barely, I view all the characters I put behind him as being Bottom Tier lol) but I've been having a hard time actually justifying my view on him being low tier lately, can someone pinpoint to me what exactly sets him apart from ,,, and in terms of viability?

Semi-viable counter pick while the bottom tiers aren't even that. (I thiiiiink it was against Fox in particular where he's actually a legit option to CP with? Been a while don't remember 100% for sure)

 

[TDK]

I have no idea how this works

 

[Frihetsanka]

-1 mostly because I think this would help stop Samus from moving up.

No? Samus probably won't move up anyway, but why would voting for Charizard make any difference?

 

[MarioManTAW]

My post was aimed at a post that claimed Kirby had the best "theory" of this tier. It was merely food for thought on if he DID have the best theory, why doesn't he have solid results like the rest of the characters in the tier?

Same reason you don't see any results from . Hardly anyone is playing them. Very few people are willing to put in the time and effort to play a character who's not as good as the top tiers. Why put in the time to learn when you could put the same amount of time into someone like and win tournaments easier? Or better yet, spend half the amount of time learning and win just as easily!

 

[Wintermelon43]

Of note, I just came back from a tournament in Birmingham, with a few UK threats attending (Willz, Afro Smash, Ho, Magi etc), and Afro Smash (the Samus main), placed 3rd, ahead of a bracket/top 16 full of top/high tier characters such as Captain Falcon, Cloud, Sheik, Bayonetta, Mario, Corrin, ZSS etc.

Afro Smash placed 3rd. In November, at SmashZilla 5 in Nottingham, Afro Smash placed 1st.

Samus can perform, and she does do. Look at the wider spectrum.

---

Something I wanted to bring up about Kirby I saw above, was that his "theory" is supposedly better than all in this tier.

For me, the fact that the character has next to no results (especially when compared to characters like Samus who has solid results, and others like Charizard, Doc and even Bowser Jr, all of whom have had showings now and then) only outlines to me that his "theory" is being blown way out of proportion.

If it really is the case that he has better theory than characters like Samus, Charizard, Doc etc, why do they all have better results than him? Why do these characters somehow get past MU's that they should be having trouble with, yet ones that Kirby "theoretically" should be doing better in, isn't?

I hate the use of the word "theory" when ranking character, because believe it or not, it is theorycraft; lmao, it's got the word in there. We don't build tier lists on theory or ideas; we build them on facts.

But for the sake of discussion, to me, results are backed up by a character's good tools/options, or, if you like, "theory", and Kirby's results (or lack thereof) only signals to me that his "theory" is certainly not as good as we give him credit for, epsecially in comparison to others in the tier (can't stress Samus enough for this point).

Not trying to say Kirby's bad, not trying to say he needs to move down. Merely bringing an interesting point up.

Kirby was actually getting pretty good results for a while. Mikekirby was doing great with Kirby. Then suddenly, Mikekirby stopped attending tournaments for the most part. Coinidence? I don't think so. Kirby's results are mostly low because his playerbase is already small (Like most characters below high tier), but his best players aren't going to many tournaments anymore. When his players DO go to tournaments however, he still gets pretty good results for his viability level. Mikekirby gets good results when he DOES go to tournaments, and there are other players, such as Triple R and Devon3000 (I think that's how it's spelled) who do good too. The main problem is that they don't attend much.

I'm not trying to say his results are great though; They're not. But compared to the other characters in this tier (Assuming that the last poster to post their vote placed all of them):

Kirby has less results:

Kirby has a similar level of results:

Kirby has more results:

Not sure:

That's really good compared to the rest.

As for theory, I'm not sure whether you are talking to me or somebody else, but I always refer to theory AS the facts about the actual character other than results (Or what I believe to be the facts, I'm not gonna say I'm right 100% of the time.). For example, that Kirby is great at comboing, and that he has a bad neutral. These are two facts, and that's the kind of thing that I classify as "Theory" (It's not an accurate word, but I don't know what else to call it). Kirby's theory is probably better than all of the characters here, or at least most of them.

It's mostly his matchup spread that is so much better than the rest here, and the biggest reason why he should go up. Most characters here aren't a good counterpick to any character (And the best counterpick is a niche "-1 that's a better matchup that most character in the tier because you don't lose quite as badly" thing), and the ones that do have a counterpick matchup or two aren't as good as counterpick characters

Overall, Kirby is a clear outlier compared to the rest of the characters here and defitenly deserves to go up a tier (The only other one that I think could possibly deserve to go up is Samus, but I'm not fully sure of that, he might be fine here too).




Anyway, I'm gonna change my vote a little bit:

Old vote:

New vote:

Still voting Kirby up a tier

 

[QualityQ]

A few thoughts.

First, Wii Fit has some pretty good results. Not one mention of John Numbers yet?

Second, I think it's reasonable to ignore tournaments of <70, unless there's good talent attending that has done well in a larger setting. There's a point where player skill and fundamentals carries way over character choice. Wadi still pulls out ROB or Mii Gunner sometimes, but that doesn't say much about the character because when Wadi faces difficult opponents, he's going to play Mewtwo. Wadi beating players with less experience with ROB or Gunner does not prove anything other than Wadi is good. I know there's some debate over this, but that's my opinion on the subject.

Third, theory does matter but it is often used incorrectly. Theory is NOT something you came up with that could happen that would be really good. Theory is a series of exact actions, which can be recorded or used in a match. It may not happen every time, but the fact it exists alone counts for something because it can be put into actual practice. Good example: Pikachu Up-Tilt to Footstool, which although isn't seen much yet has been mapped out, works at specific %'s for specific characters, and has good data to back it up. It's on the Pikachu player to actually use it. Theory has nothing to do with results. Any pikachu can do this at any level, following this specific guide. A player must consider this only if the Pikachu can use it effectively, and that boils down more to results and player skill.

*ramble, ramble*

I'll vote tomorrow; I have no Dr. Mario knowledge so I'm looking for some examples before I make a final decision.

 

[Bowserboy3]

Theory has nothing to do with results

I mean, it kinda does; character with little amount of options vs character with multiple options... usually the character with more options (so, the better theory) gets more results, because they have more options, and thus, can deal with MU's better, and get past roadblocks more, and get more results etc, etc, etc...

Of course player skill matters a whole deal as well.

 

[jespoke]

Theory is so ambiguous. On Shulk it refers to his breath of options, on Pikachu it is specific techniques that are possible but super hard to input. For Kirby it refers to optimizations in very specific circumstances if i understand it right?

And his wonky matchup spread that is all over the place regardless of tier positions i guess.

 

[Bowserboy3]

Theory is so ambiguous. On Shulk it refers to his breath of options, on Pikachu it is specific techniques that are possible but super hard to input. For Kirby it refers to optimizations in very specific circumstances if i understand it right?

And his wonky matchup spread that is all over the place regardless of tier positions i guess.

Theory can be anything the user wants it to be, which is part of the reason I personally dislike the overusing of the term when ranking characters, but alas, we all have different things we hold dear when ranking characters.

For me personally, I value results the most.

 

[Frihetsanka]

Not that it really matters at this point, but I decided to look at some IcyMist Samus games and she seems slightly better than Low tier. I also moved Mii Gunner up a step, so Mii Gunner is now 2nd highest instead of 3rd highest.

 

[QualityQ]

Low Tier:

No votes in any direction.

Explanations condensed for convenience:

Spoiler

Kirby: Kirby is likely best in this tier, and it can be argued Kirby should be moved up. You really need to watch Poyo or another great Kirby to see how powerful a kirby grab combo can be. I think Kirby has the best OOS options here as well, which single-handedly can win matchups against these characters. Good speed helps with poor range, which is irrelevant to OOS-play anyway. I decided not to move kirby up because of a weak recovery and very little use for special moves. Low-kill power paired with being easy to launch is also not a good combo.

WiiFit: Wii Fit is very unique and, frankly, underappreciated. In addition to having some of the best results in this tier, Wii Fit has access to tools such as burrow, self-healing, and deep breathing that can really cash in. Add-in (arguably) the safest spike in the game, and you have a decent character. Wii Fit struggles with very patient opponents or simply not getting the right hitbox on difficult-to-land moves. Also lacks damage to provide real kill-power, without deep breathing. One of the few characters in this tier that is, in my opinion, more likely to move up rather than down. Salute the Sun? Salute the Sun!

Samus: Samus has always fluctuated between bottom 10 and bottom 15, but has a lot of tools for close combat to make up for lackluster projectiles. The grab is awful, even if samus can get value out of it when it connects. Overall, you still need your opponent to give you an inch first; Samus struggles against shields. Upair strings keep her above other characters in this list more than anything else.

Mii Gunner: Gunner outside of for glory is nonexistent mainly because Gunner and Diddy Kong have similar playstyles. Which means a good gunner would simply move to a better character. However, Gunner is not bad at a trap game, and has remarkable range for projectiles. This is excellent against heavy characters, meaning gunner has good matchups within this tier and the tier below. No kill pressure is a weakness, but not as bad as other characters.

Dr. Mario: Dr. Mario feels very lackluster to play, even with dthrow dair. On top of that, there's barely any representation; it took me a long time to find just one example of his play. Being a worse version of Mario doesn't look good for Dr. Mario's future either given this already-low playerbase.

Roy: Countless players trying to make Roy good has only proven how awful he is, and SEVEN (more if you count robin, etc.) better sword characters means he really brings nothing to the table. A surprisingly good air and run speed keeps him above other characters, though. Lack of range and a bizarre lack of kill pressure keep him from succeeding.

B. Jr: A wide variety of unreliable tools prove to be unreliable. It's nearly impossible to use down special effectively against an opponent, which is key to him making use of otherwise sluggish moves. His recovery options are so poor it's often better to use them on-stage to make the cart a stage hazard. Poor grab data is also a plague.

Charizard: Charizard can feel like a better character if you manage to stay grounded; and there, his range and down special receive good use. But anyone who's played charizard extensively knows once you get knocked in the air, charizard is very, very easy to juggle. Your opponent must make a mistake to land again; which is a very bad trait to have, especially in FD/TaC/DH/Sville stage selection. Generally slow smashes and direct inferiority to Bowser and DK leaves charizard here.

Falco: Falco is the bottom here due to a very weak projectile (the lag is bad enough to make it near-worthless), no grab game, surprisingly weak smashes, and 46th in air speed AND 41st in run speed (see Kurogane). To top it off, he has no weight making him relatively easy to kill. Although down air into 2nd down air *technically* exists, it requires a lot from your opponent and has no real use. He stays in this tier only because dair is an offstage threat, should you ever find your opponent in a bad position.

Other than Samus, Kirby, and Falco, there seems to be no agreement whatsoever among the votes, which is interesting.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Here's some interesting data for ya all:

https://smashboards.com/threads/4br...ive-impressions.440784/page-214#post-21612220

Very noticeable gap in points between Pit and Palutena. Another in a bit more a stepdown fashion going from Roy to D3 to Lucina (I told you all D3 was better than the others in bottom tier, it ain't even close), and then a massive step between Falco and Jigglypuff.

From that list I'd say Pit is the cutoff for mid tier if we were to make a list using strictly only results (don't know how large that tier would be, the cutoff for this bit of data is 200 points, there could be like 10 characters within 20 points of Robin for all I know). Then you have the large group of low tiers of various degrees, and then a bottom tier of 7 years.

If you really really really wanted to insist on looking at things from a "low mid" perspective (which is what this tier list we're making is doing soooo there is that) I'd still say that the cut off for Mid Tier proper is Pit. Palutena to Dog Hunt or Wii Fit would be "low mid", with Wii Fit or Charizard down to Falco being low.

Will admit Falco had a bit more results than I had realized. Might slightly tweak my vote later, gotta think about it. Ain't only results in a tier list after all. It does however cement for me that: 1) Samus does not deserve to move up 2) Gunner absolutely needs to move down. Theory doesn't hold any water with results like that.

Also cements to me that Shulk shouldn't be moving up when the next tier comes up for voting (but maybe Wario should). And Link needs to move back down. As does Lucas.

 

[Bowserboy3]

I'm not sure some of you realise how relevant Afro Smash actually is when you think of the UK.

Seriously, how many of you have actually seen him play?

Some of the comments regarding Samus and her relevancy, MU's, toolkit etc are completely blown out of the water when you actually watch Samus players that know what they're doing.

"need your opponent to give you an inch first"? Certainly not. It helps, yes, like it would for any character, but nope, she does not need the opponent to screw up to do things. She has plenty of moves that she can use to make openings, or force the opponent's hand to get her that opening. Missile is an example; it forces a reaction for example, that Samus has a tool to punish every option around it.

Please watch some of these first: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3ABnR0vb_fny9OR_FDS6xSFZUgZ8Ir3d (bearing in mind that video's 1 - 16 are the only relevant ones, being the only ones since Samus's buffs).

---

I reserve the right to forget a forgettable clone character who hasn't been relevant in over a year when exhausted.

This is almost funny, considering 2ManyCooks recent decision.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Indeed it is. I'd say Dr.Mario is truly dead at this point.

Also, the full list of what I last posted is up: https://smashboards.com/threads/4br...ive-impressions.440784/page-215#post-21612436 Its in the last spoiler.

 

[TDK]

B7Games is the last hope for the good doctor now.

 

[APairOfBeats]

+
-
+
+
+