Success/Popularity stuff. Final update coming later today!

[Grim Tuesday]

Unviable characters should be the ones that don't make more money than they put in.

 

[Vinylic.]

jigglypuff for example.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Jigglypuff is quite obviously the sole exception to my last post.

 

[Kewkky]

These last few posts got me curious... It's a bit too late for this so it may require lots of work, but comparing "entry+participation fee" and "cash won(full/no split)" would make for further analysis of characters in tourneys, seeing who's won more than they've spent entering a tourney with. That could be an unarbitrary threshold between viable, borderline, and unviable. Maybe John numbers could use his numbers wizardry and do this? :o

 

[John12346]

I would legit have to sift through all the tournaments, it would take too long for me, sorry.

We could just go by the Money Won/Usage ratio to better determine viability, I guess?

This is all arbitrary, mind you, but we'll go with having a ratio of 1 or higher as viable, a ratio between .5 and 1 as borderline, and a ratio below .5 as unviable.

lol Pokemon Trainer gj Reflex

 

[Kewkky]

Why did it take me this long to ask for it? D:

Well, if a certain something comes to happen, you're gonna have to restart your information due to a missing element, if you still wish to keep this up. So at that time, it would be possible to do this. :o

 

[Raziek]

So according to that chart, Link is the least viable character in the game?

Amusing.

 

[John12346]

Well, keep in mind I intend on starting over with each new year, so...

 

[Flayl]

Use Ripple's data as a population sample, like a survey - Instead of using the numbers directly, turn them into percentages. The true usage ratio won't be far off.

edit: Actually I forgot Ripple doesn't separate between solo and dual characters... Never mind.

 

[Kewkky]

So according to that chart, Link is the least viable character in the game?

Amusing.

He IS pretty bad. I can't think of a reason why I'd use him, but I could think of a couple for Zelda/Jiggs/Ganon.

 

[Steam]

so no matter how you manipulate it... marth is overrated? woo

 

[SaveMeJebus]

http://allisbrawl.com/ttournament.aspx?id=12551

another one for the MK banned tournaments. I don't know if it was posted on Smashboards

 

[Raziek]

Not necessarily. Keep in mind that the number John came up with takes usage into account.

Marth makes more than Olimar, but because Marth has more users, he looks a lot less viable. When you consider that a very small portion of the people who use a character are actually making money with said character, characters like Marth look a lot worse, simply because we have a higher percentage of users that aren't making money.

In a less complicated sentence: More Players = More bads.

I'm aware it doesn't completely explain it away, but it does account for some of that, consider the number of TOP players who play Marth isn't like it's 10x more than any other character.

Case in Point (In the opposite way): Pokemon Trainer. Very few users, but one of them makes bank, so he looks WAY more viable than he actually is.

 

[Steam]

sure marth has made more money than olimar (actually less than olimar in the full split column since marth apparently only wins money with secondaries) but marth has nearly twice the usage... AKA twice as many opportunities to win money... yes there are more bads... but also more goods/chances for goods. even then you can look at results of large tourneys and... yeah.

at the 45+ entrants level he's notably worse than those around him...

Spoiler

and apparently he's unviable at the national level... though there aren't many tournies used for this

Spoiler

 

[Blacknight99923]

http://allisbrawl.com/ttournament.aspx?id=12551

another one for the MK banned tournaments. I don't know if it was posted on Smashboards

I spoke with pitbull

MK was supposed to be banned at the event, however it is not listed on the tournament page, so tyrant won the tournament with metaknight.

I believe Pitbull said he beat had to "Beat the 2 random mks" who attended ( I wasn't there either).


Tearbear did not use metaknighat at the event however and placed 3rd anyway LOL

Not necessarily. Keep in mind that the number John came up with takes usage into account.

Marth makes more than Olimar, but because Marth has more users, he looks a lot less viable. When you consider that a very small portion of the people who use a character are actually making money with said character, characters like Marth look a lot worse, simply because we have a higher percentage of users that aren't making money.

In a less complicated sentence: More Players = More bads.

I'm aware it doesn't completely explain it away, but it does account for some of that, consider the number of TOP players who play Marth isn't like it's 10x more than any other character.

Case in Point (In the opposite way): Pokemon Trainer. Very few users, but one of them makes bank, so he looks WAY more viable than he actually is.

this.


edit: mikehaze has only attended 1 national the entire year LOL

 

[Steam]

junebug didn't attend all the nationals, we should spot lucario an extra ton of money.

It's not like mike placed anywhere close to in the money at the one national he attended :I

 

[mikeHAZE]

LOL steam hates on me 24/7. eat an elephant **** hater

 

[Steam]

I just think your character is overrated lol.

 

[Raziek]

sure marth has made more money than olimar (actually less than olimar in the full split column since marth apparently only wins money with secondaries) but marth has nearly twice the usage... AKA twice as many opportunities to win money... yes there are more bads... but also more goods/chances for goods. even then you can look at results of large tourneys and... yeah.

at the 45+ entrants level he's notably worse than those around him...


and apparently he's unviable at the national level... though there aren't many tournies used for this

Did you ignore the part where I explained why everything you just said is wrong? Marth doesn't have a ton of top-level players. Many of those who do, second MK.

There's like 6 or 7 top level Olimar players, IMO. There's like 5 or 6 Top Marths. (even if only a secondary)

The fact that Marth is making more money, despite having approximately equal representation (at the top level), is exactly my point. Our actual "viability" is dragged down by the fact that Marth is an extremely popular (compared to characters other than MK) at most levels of play, so the mid and low level Marths impact the statistic by inflating usage, while winning little or no money.

The same cannot be said for a character like Olimar, who doesn't see much use at mid and low level, which is somewhat reflected by his overall usage.

TL;DR: Playing a popular character means more bads inflating the usage statistic, while not winning any money.

 

[Steam]

more top olimars than top marths? there are also more top pikachus than top kirbies. should we accomidate for that proportion? they have similar amounts of usage... also there's only two top lucarios and he's getting half as much money as marth with 5-6 top players... so lucario is better right? marth also has twice as much usage in general :0

if a character is seeing widespread success with multiple users... that probably means they're better than a character who usually really wins with an MK carrying him.

and yes there ARE more bad players when you increase usage. but there is also a greater chance of a good player being produced and in addition more opportunities to place well.

Besides, it's not like marth has done anything warranting 5th on the tier list at the national level any time recently other than being used as a secondary by zex to get 6th at genesis.

 

[Deleted member]

So much Marth hate...

Sure, he hasn't been the best in tournaments, but just looking at his overall MU's tells me he's a very capable character. You can't only base characters off of results alone, especially when that character is largely under-represented.

 

[Steam]

So much Marth hate...

Sure, he hasn't been the best in tournaments, but just looking at his overall MU's tells me he's a very capable character. You can't only base characters off of results alone, especially when that character is largely under-represented.

marth is the 3rd most used character.

and honestly, if his matchups were so good... he'd be winning them... matchups are supposed to be based on top level play... and if marth keeps losing all the time at top level... maybe this means his matchups aren't so great.

 

[Deleted member]

Yes, but how many top level Marth players are there?

 

[C.J.]

Mike (US), Ramin (EU), Leon (EU), MikeNeko (***), (NEO?- US)

High Level there's:
(NEO?), Kadaj, Anaky, Chaz, and others.

Mid Level there's like... a million of them.

And then every low level player ever has at least a secondary Marth because he's a simplistic character.

 

[Steam]

Yes, but how many top level Marth players are there?

5 or 6 according to raziek.

 

[Tesh]

Maybe marth just seems like he only has a few high level players because the character isn't very good. The same way MK appears to have alot of high level players.

 

[Raziek]

You guys are idiots.

Like, do you actually play this game? Do you actually play against a good Marth, ever?

Steam talks like the character is just fair and dancing blade, and that results mean everything ever.

Edit: If MK gets banned, just wait and see. There's a good chance some of the MKs will move to Marth, of course including those MKs that already secondary him.

 

[Steam]

He's already resorting to insults. lol

err... I think personal experience against a top player of a character would be the worst way to rate a character unless you are a top player yourself... unless you maaaaybe had that experience against characters across the board. but I do play this game :0

I've also brought up nothing about how marth plays... I've just said he really underachieves results wise... which given the data in this thread is pretty objectively true...

 

[Deleted member]

You guys are idiots.

Like, do you actually play this game? Do you actually play against a good Marth, ever?

Steam talks like the character is just fair and dancing blade, and that results mean everything ever.

Edit: If MK gets banned, just wait and see. There's a good chance some of the MKs will move to Marth, of course including those MKs that already secondary him.

Don't resort to flaming. You're making good points, but that insult deteriorates your post.

@Steam: You've said multiple times that Marth's position on the tier list isn't warranted, so it goes beyond you saying his results aren't up to par.

 

[Steam]

Results should be most of what decides the fate of top tier characters as they are actually used widely enough for a good amount of data... we kind of HAVE to go by matchups when it comes to the bottom tiers because pretty much everyone in low tier just drowns in pools at any significant tourney.

I kind of feel top level results should be dictating the matchups... since matchups examine top level play and you can't assume a playstyle/level of play that doesn't exist. :/

 

[Tesh]

Raziek, its kind of odd that a supposed top tier character has one top player in the country and results suggest even those "good matchup spreads" don't really exist for Marth. He really seems bottom of high tier to me. Having the tools to destroy super bad characters doesn't make him top tier. Look at DDD.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yes...clearly Marth's tier placement factored his ability to hard counter less than a handful of characters.
Which is why DDD hard counters more than he does and is still lesser...
Wait...that isn't right.
Maybe...just maybe...it wasn't factored in his tier list placement?

Or maybe...and don't get all up in arms, Marth's great MU's is part of why he doesn't place so well over all
Think about it, most of Marth's MU's are around +1 advantage.
So he has an advantage, but it isn't great, or in many cases with other viable characters he basically goes even with them.
Asa a result, it is more difficult to be successful for the character, because then there will be other characters who are better suited for the situation.

Who would have an easier time against Donkey Kong?
Marth?
Or King DDD?
Clearly King DDD, and so it would be that much easier to be successful in that particular MU using the Penguin rather than the effeminate swordsman.

As a result, despite him being an overall "better" character than Olimar, in reality it actually hurts him because there isn't as great an advantage to using him as opposed to another character.

That is my theory anyway, and truth be told I honestly cannot see as to why anyone would even try to compare Marth to Pit. It is just lulzy.

 

[Raziek]

There's also the "Why play the Jack of All Matchups when you could play the King of All Matchups" factor. :l

 

[Cassio]

People hate on marth too much. Theres a reason tiers exist as opposed to a list of characters from best to worst, characters placed in the same tier are essentially the same in viability. Trying to quibble over placement within a tier eventually becomes petty bragging rights. If you have the opinion that marth belongs at the bottom of B its not exactly wrong, so you can just leave it as that without trying to convince the world. But some of yall make it sound like he belongs in C, which is taking it a bit too far.

 

[Meru.]

so no matter how you manipulate it... marth is overrated? woo

Definitely, the list is 100% fact. Don't forget that PT is obviously top tier, Zelda/Sheik is more viable than Fox and Peach and Jigglypuff is more viable than DK.

and apparently he's unviable at the national level... though there aren't many tournies used for this

Spoiler

Yes, Marth is clearly unviable at a national level. I think all Marth players should just switch to Ness since he seems way more viable now.

 

[Steam]

@SL84- too hard to win only a +1 matchup? sounds like johns. either way if it results in the character not being as effective... then said character just isn't as good as the other characters.

@raziek- Marth still has the 3rd most usage... so that applies to him less than everyone but snake

@cassio- I could see marth at the top of C... at the national level he seems to place around that tier. olimar, ICs, Wario, Pikachu all seem to do consistently better nationally while random mid tiers also outplace him from time to time.

@yaaay- Results get more and more accurate the higher up you go in the tier list, due to more usage overall/larger pool of data... as I said a few posts ago. and I also mentioned there weren't many tournies used for the 100+ entrant chart.

 

[Dark 3nergy]

People hate on marth too much. Theres a reason tiers exist as opposed to a list of characters from best to worst, characters placed in the same tier are essentially the same in viability. Trying to quibble over placement within a tier eventually becomes petty bragging rights. If you have the opinion that marth belongs at the bottom of B its not exactly wrong, so you can just leave it as that without trying to convince the world. But some of yall make it sound like he belongs in C, which is taking it a bit too far.

Shadowlink does make a good point on Marth's MUs. He goes even with alot of characters and thats his weakness. Sure Marth has really good priority attacks, grab mix ups and kill moves. However, when it comes to matchups hes just "even" with, Marth still has to work just as hard as he'll have to in all his other even match ups. Now couple the fact that Marth is used by mediocre players, you'll run into alot more players that'll know Marth's tricks and tactics because they've seen that same old **** before.

Does marth have potential? Oh yea he sure does, as a character. But the bottom line is, whatever Marth can do, other Top Tier characters can do way better and they have a much EASIER time getting it done. In Brawl players tend to gravitate towards characters that give them more of an edge. You wont see many good marths, since these players want their solid advantaged character to do the thinking for them in the match.

The less 'guessing' thats required, the easier it is to win right? Just my 2cent

 

[Tesh]

If thats a logical arguement then MK should also have pathetic results for going "evenish" with alot of top tiers when there is a better option to get a bigger advantage.

 

[Meru.]

@yaaay- Results get more and more accurate the higher up you go in the tier list, due to more usage overall/larger pool of data... as I said a few posts ago.

Heh. Well, if we are only looking higher up, then there are only three character below him who are green in that ridiculously inaccurate and arbitrary 'viability' list. Big deal three characters. In John's updated list, I only see two characters getting better results than him. That puts him 7th. Yet you assert he should be put in C tier because his results match the likes of... Zero Suit Samus and Toon Link??

and I also mentioned there weren't many tournies used for the 100+ entrant chart.

Which means this list barely proves a thing, so why use it?

 

[Steam]

Heh. Well, if we are only looking higher up, then there are only three character below him who are green in that ridiculously inaccurate and arbitrary 'viability' list. Big deal three characters. In John's updated list, I only see two characters getting better results than him. That puts him 7th. Yet you assert he should be put in C tier because his results match the likes of... Zero Suit Samus and Toon Link??



Which means this list barely proves a thing, so why use it?

I don't actually think marth is C tier. I said I could see him there. But results still aren't everything. when you look at success/usage he kinda seems to fit at the top of C pretty well... but 7th or 8th seems like a good spot for him IMO.

and It's still something to point out, it may only be 6 tournies but it's the biggest 6 tournies.