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

[Wintermelon43]

And yet Mr.E beat Kameme (granted with Lucina but an MU ratio shouldn't be that different) Hasn't Sinji faced Mr.E many of times? What's the result of there? I searched and they face quite often at XenoSaga and I looked at the most recent PAC vs Marth set (the most recent is Mewtwo vs Lucina)
Marth was legit all up in Pacmans space and it seemed very hard for Sinji to break out of it. Pasts sets are there and I watched them, but you must remember that both these players have leveled up in the transition and you should use sets from this season. These two also have experience in the MU, something MKLeo might not of had vs Kameme which would explain how he lost and Mr.E won.

I've actually heard from Mega Man mains that Kameme played really badly at Civil War and was not playing correctly at all vs Mr. E. He would've won if he played properly.

 

[ShadowGuy1]

I've actually heard from Mega Man mains that Kameme played really badly at Civil War and was not playing correctly at all vs Mr. E. He would've won if he played properly.

That is heavily debatable. It could be johns, the truth, or false. It was still a tournament. That's like saying not to count Xzax or Luhties wins vs Zero. You need to analyze the matches, not watch for the results and not only watch the ones that agree with you.


Also my typos are the best. The best husband? LOL

 

[Deleted member]

Ike sucks.

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

1111 simply for the consistency and the fact everyone know about it.

 

[Bigbomb2]

I'm not sure about Link's placement, just because T's a really good player who recently had an amazing tournament doesn't mean Link should be in high mid tier.

Most Link mains would agree to be honest. I'd rather him squeeze his way up mid a bit more as opposed to jump straight to High mid. That's just me though

 

[valakmtnsmash4]

Ike sucks.

Really convinced me

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

Ike sucks.

.............................................. thank you...... thank you.....

 

[Nah]

Ike sucks.

Why do you have a low opinion of Ike anyway?

Maybe you explained it once before but **** if I remember anything lol

 

[Linkip]

Most Link mains would agree to be honest. I'd rather him squeeze his way up mid a bit more as opposed to jump straight to High mid. That's just me though

I know nothing about Link and his players, so i'll take your word for it. But in general before Civil War Link was often considered to be low on the mid tier or even low tier, now he's almost in high tier. I just think it's a bit to much of a jump over 1 performance. If T keeps doing well in major tournaments in Japan and America then i'll consider him a high-mid tier.

 

[Bowserboy3]

It's also worth noting that Japan has considered Link potential high tier (or at least in the top 25) for a long while now.

We all laughed.

T performs at Civil War.

Who's laughing now?

 

[Frihetsanka]

I'm not super happy how this tier list ended up. I think too many characters ended up too low, which makes them seem weaker than they actually are. I will compare this list with the 4BR list, and also add some of my own opinions.

4BR list:

-TOP-
S:
A:
-HIGH-
B:
-MID-
C: ()
D:
-LOW-
E:
F: [][]

Community list:

Top Tier: ,,,,,,,,,,
High Tier: ,,/,,,,
Mid Tier (+): ,,,,,,,,,
Mid Tier:,,,,,,
Mid Tier (-):,,,,,,,
Low Tier:,,,/,,,
Bottom Tier:,,,,,

Thoughts:
If we start off with top tier, top 6 has the same characters in both lists. I agree with top 5, although I don't believe Mario is #6. Either way, both top tiers seem mostly fine. I'm not sure if Ryu deserves to be top tier and I believe Lucina should be right behind Marth, but overall I'm pretty happy with the top tiers.

High tiers I strongly prefer the 4BR list. It has 23 characters in top/high tier, while the community list only has 19. In my personal list, I have 25, adding Olimar and Luigi to the 4BR list and Corrin, Peach, Lucario, Captain Falcon, Luigi, and Olimar to the Community list.

For Mid tiers, I think the 4BR list is a bit more accurate overall. The Community list significantly underrates Bowser (at #30), Donkey Kong (at #31), Olimar (#33) and Luigi (#28). The 4BR list puts Bowser at #25, Donkey Kong #28, Olimar #27, and Luigi #26.

With that being said, the Community tier list has a few advantages over the 4BR when it comes to mid tier. Link at #29 is much more reasonable than Link at #39, and Little Mac, Palutena, and Samus are actually Mid tiers instead of Low tiers (though they are roughly in the same position numbers-wise, so this is mostly a case of calling characters "Mid tier-" rather than "Low tier".

If we look at Low tier, both lists are pretty flawed and underrate some pretty decent characters. Kirby is overrated in both lists, and Falco is underrated. Jigglypuff is also underrated, being at the absolute bottom of both lists for some reason (not counting Miis in the Community list). I agree with the 4BR decision to scrap "Bottom tier".

Conclusion:
So, overall I actually agree with the 4BR list more. I think one of the main issues with the Community list was a lack of clarity and persistence. For instance, when we started we were told that tier 5 was mid tier, but then at the end it was changed to Mid Tier (-), so we were voting under false pretences. This affected the was I was voting (I didn't bother upvoting Corrin since I thought tier 3 would be High Tier (-) but we only ended up having one High tier and three Mid tiers for some reason, and I also downvoted Olimar because I wanted him to be Mid Tier (+) and not High Tier (-), though in retrospect I've changed my mind and now actually believe he is a High Tier character), and I bet it also changed the way others voted as well. Also, we had an 8th tier for a bit, but we eventually removed it. Then, at the end, when everything was done, we actually voted on tier names, and then the tier names ended up vastly different from what I, and several others, thought they would be.

This issue could be easily solved by simply starting the process with deciding on number of tiers and tier names. Then we can actually vote on characters based on the actual tiers and not just numbers. This, I believe, would make discussion clearer and less confusing and make the process more enjoyable and the results more accurate.

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

I'm sort of confused about Greninja's placement and think he deserves top tier more than Mario. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[JayZee1700]

I'm sort of confused about Greninja's placement and think he deserves top tier more than Mario. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Uh...no? Where did you find this false idea? I'm pretty sure that everyone agrees Mario is better than Greninja.

It's also worth noting that Japan has considered Link potential high tier (or at least in the top 25) for a long while now.

We all laughed.

T performs at Civil War.

Who's laughing now?

THANK you!

It was clear that, from Brawl, Link was a lot better in Smash 4, and I was positive Link had potential, but thanks to T, we see it. I think that Link's placement is so much better than the low tier he was considered for the past two or so years.

Also, T is not the only high-level Link that exists. Players such as Scizor and SOVA Unknown are basically just as skilled as T is, but Civil War put T in the spotlight. Therefore the claim, "Link can't be that good because only one player carries him" is not a valid statement.

So:

Link deserves his spot; there are plenty of skilled players to represent that.

 

[Nah]

It's also worth noting that Japan has considered Link potential high tier (or at least in the top 25) for a long while now.

We all laughed.

T performs at Civil War.

Who's laughing now?

I mean, Radical Larry was also saying that Link was potential upper mid/high tier for a long time too

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

Could you plz explain why?

 

[NuzTheMonkey]

Uh...no? Where did you find this false idea? I'm pretty sure that everyone agrees Mario is better than Greninja.

Could you plz explain why???? Why is >

 

[ShadowGuy1]

Could you plz explain why???? Why is >

Results, Matchups, General stuff

 

[Frihetsanka]

It was clear that, from Brawl, Link was a lot better in Smash 4, and I was positive Link had potential, but thanks to T, we see it. I think that Link's placement is so much better than the low tier he was considered for the past two or so years.

There seems to be a trend where if there are several similar characters, the one that is considered weaker will be significantly underrated. This happened to Lucina (and still happens, to some extent), it happened to Luigi (one could argue that he's similar to Mario, although he's not super-similar anymore), it happened to Lucas (Ness was considered stronger for a long time, but now Lucas has some results too), and it happened to Link (Toon Link was considered stronger, so people underestimated Link). Chances are it's also happening to Dr. Mario, and he might actually be a lot stronger than people think and just not played because Mario is better. Perhaps Dr. Mario is secretly Top 40 but the potential Dr. Mario players play Mario or Luigi instead?

Perhaps this is the case for Greninja as well: People don't play Greninja because Sheik is similar and stronger. I think this is the case for Corrin too: People who might've played Corrin play Cloud/Marth/Lucina instead, and maybe this is true for Ike as well. Greninja, Corrin, and Ike are not clones, but they are still similar to some top tiers, which hurts their usage.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I love how Marth and Lucina are both balanced like the Lord class is on the Fire Emblem series - above average to good stats across the board and their faults mostly come from technical issues their movesets don't cover well (landing, point blank game) - while Ike just totally throws any of this logic out the window and acts more like the General class than anything else...
...though to be fair, Ike is a General storywise rather than a Lord (even though he is promoted to the Lord class)... Hm... maybe the devs aren't as oblivious to the source material as I think they are.

ZeRo recently took yet another ignition under his belt and showed for the 4th tournament in a row his Lucina, that is likely still incomplete, is more than capable of taking down any High and Top level players he might fight. Even though I still firmly believe he's only gonna use Lucina on Majors and Supermajors against Mario or if he gets desperate and needs MU unfamiliarity.
Yeah, I've seen people have unfamiliarity with her even when they play Marth. That's because some people get too comfy in their heads that all you need to watch out for is FSmash and literally nothing else and that's exactly the kind of people you see getting Baired at 80%, Uaired/DB'd at 90% or FSmashed at 60%.
I think when people underrate the less used character of a clone duo, they end up making even more mistakes because they don't know what they're capable of.

 

[MrGameguycolor]

There seems to be a trend where if there are several similar characters, the one that is considered weaker will be significantly underrated. This happened to Lucina (and still happens, to some extent), it happened to Luigi (one could argue that he's similar to Mario, although he's not super-similar anymore), it happened to Lucas (Ness was considered stronger for a long time, but now Lucas has some results too), and it happened to Link (Toon Link was considered stronger, so people underestimated Link). Chances are it's also happening to Dr. Mario, and he might actually be a lot stronger than people think and just not played because Mario is better. Perhaps Dr. Mario is secretly Top 40 but the potential Dr. Mario players play Mario or Luigi instead?

I just hope this isn't another case of a character gaining a ton of hype in one or two tourneys, only for them drop back down in 2 months.

In my opinion, Top 40 is where Doc is at.
Although I don't see that thought catching on anytime soon due to his notorious reputation.

 

[Bowserboy3]

I love how Marth and Lucina are both balanced like the Lord class is on the Fire Emblem series - above average to good stats across the board and their faults mostly come from technical issues their movesets don't cover well (landing, point blank game) - while Ike just totally throws any of this logic out the window and acts more like the General class than anything else...
...though to be fair, Ike is a General storywise rather than a Lord (even though he is promoted to the Lord class)... Hm... maybe the devs aren't as oblivious to the source material as I think they are.

This... is a strangely good analysis of these characters in reference to their home series.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I wonder if we make the obvious joke about how Roy is on the weaker side in Smash 4 and coincidentally he is the worst Lord in the FE series by a very long margin.
If you like Roy but haven't played FE Binding Blade, then I strongly advise against playing it if you want to keep liking him. It's a subpar game at best anyway.

Hm, combo that with how well Robin and Corrin represent themselves/the games they come from, then FE is represented pretty well in Smash if we go by this logic. Though if we think about specifics then not a single thing about Lucina is right, but this thread isn't about that.

I will just say that I miss the times Ike was a higher mid tier.

 

[Bowserboy3]

One thing I'll say I don't like about Robin and Corrin in Smash are the fact they are so slow, especially when you consider they can be given their own modifiers.

I usually always go +Speed -Luck because it doesn't require much thought and almost always works, so my Robin and Corrin end up quite quick, so seeing Robin as one of the slowest in the game, and seeing how slow Corrin trudges along really hurts me.

In fact, I'm playing through Conquest right now; not counting HP (which is usually always higher anyway) Speed is currently my highest; unpromoted level 18 and it's currently 22.

(I also put the Marth tiara on my avatar from my Marth amiibo - yay Marth!)

 

[JayZee1700]

There seems to be a trend where if there are several similar characters, the one that is considered weaker will be significantly underrated. This happened to Lucina (and still happens, to some extent), it happened to Luigi (one could argue that he's similar to Mario, although he's not super-similar anymore), it happened to Lucas (Ness was considered stronger for a long time, but now Lucas has some results too), and it happened to Link (Toon Link was considered stronger, so people underestimated Link). Chances are it's also happening to Dr. Mario, and he might actually be a lot stronger than people think and just not played because Mario is better. Perhaps Dr. Mario is secretly Top 40 but the potential Dr. Mario players play Mario or Luigi instead?

Perhaps this is the case for Greninja as well: People don't play Greninja because Sheik is similar and stronger. I think this is the case for Corrin too: People who might've played Corrin play Cloud/Marth/Lucina instead, and maybe this is true for Ike as well. Greninja, Corrin, and Ike are not clones, but they are still similar to some top tiers, which hurts their usage.

I agree that many clone-ish characters are underrated, (Even though Tink is technically a clone of Link and Tink is better, but whatever) however I don't see how Greninja is similar to Sheik. I know that both of them have high level tech, but that's about it. I'm not saying it's not true, I just don't play Greninja as much as I play Sheik (although I plan on picking him up). I'm curious, that's all .

 

[Bowserboy3]

The only thing similar about Sheik and Greninja is that they are both characters based off of ninja; well, one technically is a ninja, but you get me.

That's where the similarities stop though. You don't see Greninja up in your face comboing 20 moves into themselves (probably because his frame data doesn't allow himself to; another major difference).

 

[FamilyTeam]

Wintermelon43 , my friend, I truly do not want any more unpleasant discussions not only in this thread, but just in general. Which is why I want to have this conversation in public, now, rather than in private like we had countless times in the past.
We all here know you have a low opinion on Marth. I am sure here nobody is going to simply dismiss unpopular opionions - that's just too easy and not productive. We don't have a problem that you don't like him, we simply have a problem that you make bold claims and then you don't back them up, which isn't cool, isn't pleasing and doesn't lead to productive discussion.
It takes more than simply saying you have sources to confirm what you say. That's the /r/smashbros way of arguing: saying things without properly backing them up and hope people agree with you, and if they do, said baseless argument is preached as the norm. When you say things on a forum focused on discussion, especially when it's such a mix of objectivity and subjectivity like the metagame of a fighting game like Smash, your goal shouldn't be to "win" the argument that is happening, your goal is to learn. What else are we even in this forum for? Aren't we here to learn about the metagame and sometimes teach? You really cannot discuss anything in life in general if you don't take things with an open mind.
When you get going, people only tell you to stop because you seem baseless in what you say, and if you do have a base, you never show us. You "do your research", but you don't tell us what you researched, and it makes it hard for us to find credibility in what you say when you do that.

I am not scolding you. I am simply pointing out what you need to reconsider when you come to this forum to argue. You need to set your mentality straight and not try to "win" arguments. Why take all the "victory" for yourself, if instead on a healthy argument, everyone can leave actually victorious? Information is power, and power leads to victory. Victory, victory~

I'm just throwing that out there. The only reason I am even writing this is because I care about you, because if I didn't I just wouldn't give a crap and let you say whatever and make people dislike you. I know you want to add something to our discussions, which is why I believe you can be healthy on discussions if you atleast show your points right.


Okay, now about the thread

Ike doesn't suck.

 

[Wintermelon43]

Wintermelon43 , my friend, I truly do not want any more unpleasant discussions not only in this thread, but just in general. Which is why I want to have this conversation in public, now, rather than in private like we had countless times in the past.
We all here know you have a low opinion on Marth. I am sure here nobody is going to simply dismiss unpopular opionions - that's just too easy and not productive. We don't have a problem that you don't like him, we simply have a problem that you make bold claims and then you don't back them up, which isn't cool, isn't pleasing and doesn't lead to productive discussion.
It takes more than simply saying you have sources to confirm what you say. That's the /r/smashbros way of arguing: saying things without properly backing them up and hope people agree with you, and if they do, said baseless argument is preached as the norm. When you say things on a forum focused on discussion, especially when it's such a mix of objectivity and subjectivity like the metagame of a fighting game like Smash, your goal shouldn't be to "win" the argument that is happening, your goal is to learn. What else are we even in this forum for? Aren't we here to learn about the metagame and sometimes teach? You really cannot discuss anything in life in general if you don't take things with an open mind.
When you get going, people only tell you to stop because you seem baseless in what you say, and if you do have a base, you never show us. You "do your research", but you don't tell us what you researched, and it makes it hard for us to find credibility in what you say when you do that.

I am not scolding you. I am simply pointing out what you need to reconsider when you come to this forum to argue. You need to set your mentality straight and not try to "win" arguments. Why take all the "victory" for yourself, if instead on a healthy argument, everyone can leave actually victorious? Information is power, and power leads to victory. Victory, victory~

I'm just throwing that out there. The only reason I am even writing this is because I care about you, because if I didn't I just wouldn't give a crap and let you say whatever and make people dislike you. I know you want to add something to our discussions, which is why I believe you can be healthy on discussions if you atleast show your points right.


Okay, now about the thread

Ike doesn't suck.

But then, what is the point of arguing? I've always felt like the point of it is to prove why you think you're right or the other is wrong? If it was just for learning about the arguing topic, wouldn't you simply be asking for facts on it, rather than arguing? What if you knew everything there was to know about something? Then what would be the point of arguing? I just don't get it....

As for the actual arguing itself, the thing is that I am trying to explain it as much as I can..... I'm just so bad at actually explaining it that I can't say anything else. I'm even having trouble explaining this! I litertatly can't explain much at all, I can't stand it..... That's why I don't say much about stuff.

 

[FamilyTeam]

But then, what is the point of arguing? I've always felt like the point of it is to prove why you think you're right or the other is wrong? If it was just for learning about the arguing topic, wouldn't you simply be asking for facts on it, rather than arguing? What if you knew everything there was to know about something? Then what would be the point of arguing? I just don't get it....

Like I always said: You got the point of arguing all wrong.
The point is to discuss a topic between two conflicting view points so the parties involved can reach a consensus as to what they feel is the better answer that satisfies both of their needs. That's in theory atleast.
What you think arguing is seems more in line with a one-upping contest than arguing. To be fair, this is how a lot of internet discussions go. That doesn't make them any righter, though.
Nobody has all the answers, nobody knows everything. That's why we're here in the first place, we share what we know and we learn with each other.

 

[jespoke]

I just did the count, and the middle of the cast is exactly the border between Mid+ and Mid.
and

 

[Browny]

Thanks for doing this Bowserboy3

I don't know if I even mentioned it before but the recent 4BR tier list is literally the first time I have ever agreed on a tier list and that includes melees and all of brawls. I can only hope that they drew references from this thread specifically regarding the number of tiers which has almost always been my biggest gripe along with accepting that recency bias can be valid.

Like people can go 'omg people only think lucina is good because zero started using her'. The fact that he only started using her is absolutely irrelevant, what matters is the results he pulled. Because if you don't react to new information and trends as they hit you in the face, you can't judge anything. Its not about kneejerk reactions and overstating them (like people saying Link is top 15 or something), its about understanding there is a reason why he didnt lose when using her. Matchup inexperience as an excuse expired last year.

 

[FamilyTeam]

Ironically the only thing this community seems to do faster than overreact to recency bias is say "X is just a kneejerk reaction". Not very productive for either I say.

 

[Galgatha]

It just irks me to constantly see Falco in the bottom 10.

he has god-like aerials, good smashes (especially fsmash and usmash), his dtilt and utilt are also good (dtilt especially on shield), 2 good combo throws (uthrow and dthrow) and bthrow kills on edge in higher percentages.

Besides the stall on dair, slow lazers, and a poor neutral, falco is rather good.

He seriously needs to be mid teir, not bottom 10. Still, wont stop me from playing him. Hoping to show my falco off at a local tourney soon.

 

[Nah]

It just irks me to constantly see Falco in the bottom 10.

he has god-like aerials, good smashes (especially fsmash and usmash), his dtilt and utilt are also good (dtilt especially on shield), 2 good combo throws (uthrow and dthrow) and bthrow kills on edge in higher percentages.

Besides the stall on dair, slow lazers, and a poor neutral, falco is rather good.

He seriously needs to be mid teir, not bottom 10. Still, wont stop me from playing him. Hoping to show my falco off at a local tourney soon.

While I think that Falco is a smidge underrated by the community in general, one kind of needs more than just randomly listing a handful of "good" moves to argue that Falco is good or mid tier or whatever. Having a poor neutral is kind of a big deal btw.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I think a problem with this game is that, like it or not, somebody is gonna end up closer to the bottom than the others no matter how good they are. Even the Bottom Tiers in this game have quite some worth going for them.

 

[Galgatha]

I think a problem with this game is that, like it or not, somebody is gonna end up closer to the bottom than the others no matter how good they are. Even the Bottom Tiers in this game have quite some worth going for them.

Yeah, this makes sense. This is probably the main reason as to why I dont pay much attention to tier lists.

Falco is who I feel the most comfortable with, so I continue to use him and strive to get better with him.

However, I still would like to discuss Falco, though please excuse me if I dont understand all the abbreviations (have enough of them at my job to remember what the smash ones stand for)

 

[FamilyTeam]

I don't know what to talk about Falco much.
I actually never see good ones fighting on the streams, so I don't like judging him based on that alone. (I know a few people have 0 remorse about doing that kind of thing, though. I'm not one of them)

 

[Frihetsanka]

I think a problem with this game is that, like it or not, somebody is gonna end up closer to the bottom than the others no matter how good they are. Even the Bottom Tiers in this game have quite some worth going for them.

Solution: Don't call it Bottom tier. There are many games where the lowest tier is simply Low tier, since the game is balanced enough. I think Smash 4 is balanced enough to not really have a Bottom tier, and it seems like 4BR agrees with me (the newest tier list doesn't have a Bottom tier).

Perhaps we should consider tiers something like this:

Tier OP or Borderline OP (Top)
Tier Really Good (High)
Tier Still Pretty Good (High-Mid)
Tier Decent (Mid/Low-Mid)
Tier Kind of Bad (Low)
Tier Joke Characters (Bottom)

Those are kind of the basic ideas anyway. Some games might not even have any "Kind of Bad" characters, so in those games we wouldn't see any Low tiers at all (perhaps, at that point, they would use S/A/B/C tiers instead to reflect that no characters are bad). Smash 4 does have some pretty bad characters, but they're not terrible and they're not nearly as bad as the worst characters in Melee or Brawl.

In Smash 4, you see characters like Ganondorf and King Dedede win locals. How often do you see Kirby or Pichu win locals in Melee?

Oh, and could we decide on tier names earlier this time? So many high tier characters ended up in Mid tier (+) because we didn't know it was Mid tier (+). This issue could be solved by decided on tier names early in the process (or we could just keep the ones we have now, though I suggest we drop bottom tier).

 

[Nah]

like I said before

we can keep the name Bottom Tier

we just have to understand that bottom tier in one game =/= bottom in another game and so the meaning is different

Bottom Tier is simply just the, y'know, tier at the physical bottom of the list

y'all just have Melee/Brawl PTSD

 

[Frihetsanka]

We could keep it, but should we? Many tier lists for various games don't seem to have a Bottom tier, after all. Personally I quite like being able to compare characters over various games, and changing the meaning of Bottom tier would make that harder. I'd argue that many characters in the current Bottom tier are better than many of the characters in Low tier in Melee. So why not drop Bottom tier? 4BR did it, after all (perhaps we should simply use the same tiers as they do?).

 

[link7]

I'm not sure about Link's placement, just because T's a really good player who recently had an amazing tournament doesn't mean Link should be in high mid tier.

It's been a couple of months, and we've had a couple of nationals with Link placing relatively high since Civil War.
Slenderman placed 17th at Smash N' Splash 3 with Link.
T placed 13th at Umbura Japan Major.

I think Link has the potential to be in high mid tier.