The New Match-Up Chart v2 - Convert to +/-? ;;>_>

[Kabutox]

I'd say Falcon v Link +2. Link's projectiles + bair.

 

[The Star King]

That's such a lazy argument. Which is coming from me >_>

Anyways, no.

 

[Kabutox]

But one usmash from link means setup for a great combo..

 

[asianaussie]

But one usmash from falcon means setup for a kill
But one grab from falcon means setup for a kill
But shield pressure from falcon means setup for a kill

+3/+4, leaning towards the latter

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

Falcon vs jiggly I would say +1

 

[ciaza]

The match-up is exhillerating if you're the Link. If you play a very tight game and don't **** up anywhere you have a shot. Thing is you mess up even once and you're gone.

I'd vote +3.

 

[Battlecow]

I say +3 vs link, -1 against jiggy.

I'm not ironclad against +1, but +2 is ridiculous.

 

[The Star King]

Fine, I'll settle +1. As long as it's Falcon advantage.

 

[Battlecow]

I can deal with +1.

 

[Olikus]

lets get back on this list. Kirby falcon is finnish i believe now. Lets go mario!

 

[clubbadubba]

This is not working this way. What if icy (or anyone) created an excel document that resembled the matchup chart, and put out a blank copy. Everyone could download the blank copy, fill in their own numbers while leaving matchups they aren't sure of blank, and then give it back to icy to do statistical magic.

Yea this eliminates discussion, but how many people have actually changed their minds through the discussion in this thread? Its just people trying to convince other people, which will never happen because people perceive matchups differently based on their playstyle.
The problem would be who gets to contribute their opinions and how much weight is attributed to them. I don't think I should have as much sway as Star King for example, so maybe a weighted system based on the player tier list?

I'm just suggesting an idea in the interest of getting this done, if anyone else has an idea that isn't "keep doing what we're doing" I'll hear it.

 

[ciaza]

Sorry but I don't like the idea at all.

First of all, consensus of opinion does not constitute fact. Not only that, this is isn't even consensus of opinion, it's just personal views averaged out. Based on the meta-game, there would be close to a 100% right chart/tier list. Someone might hold the opinion that Fox - Samus is 90-10, Samus favour, and I don't think it's far-fetched to say they are objectively wrong.

Another related problem is that there is probably some controversial MU's out there. If there is a split between say, group A claiming a MU is 80-20, and Group B claiming 50-50, is it really correct to label the MU as 65-35 and be done with it? A far out example I know, but you get the gist.

Secondly, the chart would be based on the opinions of specifically the American players according to you. It goes without saying that I would not be happy in the slightest if anyone from Australia opinion's mattered less than that of anyone elses.

I'd much rather have an incomplete chart than a flawed one.

 

[SpeedGhost]

Yeah Falcon vs Jiggs is +1 ish.

Link vs Falcon +2 ish probably leaning a bit to 3.

 

[clubbadubba]

Sorry but I don't like the idea at all.

First of all, consensus of opinion does not constitute fact. Not only that, this is isn't even consensus of opinion, it's just personal views averaged out. Based on the meta-game, there would be close to a 100% right chart/tier list. Someone might hold the opinion that Fox - Samus is 90-10, Samus favour, and I don't think it's far-fetched to say they are objectively wrong.

Another related problem is that there is probably some controversial MU's out there. If there is a split between say, group A claiming a MU is 80-20, and Group B claiming 50-50, is it really correct to label the MU as 65-35 and be done with it? A far out example I know, but you get the gist.

Secondly, the chart would be based on the opinions of specifically the American players according to you. It goes without saying that I would not be happy in the slightest if anyone from Australia opinion's mattered less than that of anyone elses.

I'd much rather have an incomplete chart than a flawed one.

To your first point: All we have been doing so far is averaging views, just in a longer fashion. X says a matchup is +3, Y says its +1, and so it gets put down as +2. Whether thats really 'correct' or not, maybe it is maybe it isn't, but thats pretty much how its been going anyway. If we had tournament results to look at that would help, but we don't.
Basically here's what we have now: People 'discuss' by stating their opinion of each matchup. Then after an arbitrary amount of discussion during which no one changes their mind, Icy decides what number best characterizes the mass opinion, i.e. he averages the opinions without actually averaging.

As far as one rogue player saying a matchup is 90-10 for samus, thats where the quality control comes in. Did you say american players would only be able to contribute because I suggested the north american player tier list be used for quality control? That was just a suggestion, and I didn't realize that. Certainly all regions should have input. Maybe each region could nominate a few people to contribute, which would serve as quality control (i.e. no one says samus wins 90-10 over fox).

If you still don't like the idea, okay, but do you have any other ideas because this tier list won't be done until 2013.

 

[ciaza]

Fair enough, I'll give you the first point. I think icy has been leaning to whoever gives the most convincing argument however, thereby making discussion useful.

A few people being nominated who's opinion matters more? Hmm, where have I heard that before...

I'm still against the idea overall, I believe discussion plays an integral part in the formation of something so important.

However, I like to think I'm open-minded, so I'll wait for other people to voice themselves on the matter.

 

[Olikus]

There are ups and downs with clubbas suggestion. It eliminates the discussion part, as I agree with ciaza is the best way to get to a conclusion, since you can actually see why they are thinking that way and not only "that MU is 60-40."

You get better insict which allso can make you change your previous statement. Ofc some in this discussion thread is "everything I say is correct" sided, but many allso contributes in a good way.

But the good part with your suggestion, is that its get the job done. With people rarely posting, and a leader who check and updates every 4th century, we obviously are going nowhere. So maybe send in ideas as you mentioned, and afterwords discuss? IDK but its alleast a possible solution.

 

[Sempiternity]

I like chubba's idea. Why don't we at least try it? What's the worst that could happen?

I'm actually very curious to see if the averaged matchup opinions of everybody resembles at all the current matchup chart. I feel like if we get enough people to participate, it would iron out the averages quite nicely.

You could also go crazy with this and calculate standard deviation, as well as looking at outliers to boil down that average into an even more statistically sound... statistic.

THEN there would be room for discussion. Is one matchup's average grossly different from the assumed norm? THIS is where we discuss.

Everybody is weighted equally, but you have to promise not to submit any troll matchup charts.

 

[Dr_Strangelove]

can someone explain to me why falcon beats fox? i appreciate that falcon can combo fox hard, but fox can "combo" him into oblivion too. the two of them are both easy to gimp and excellent at edgeguarding each other. the only separating factor that i can see is that fox has lasers and falcon has taunt cancels. fox wins.

 

[Battlecow]

This is on DL, Strangelove. Fox beats Doug on Hyrule.

Also, you couldn't get enough people to make that method worthwhile, clubba. Like, obviously Kirby-Falcon is +3 for kirby at the very least, but for whatever reason a couple of good people who haven't played that matchup enough think otherwise. If it were put to a vote, it'd probably come out somewhere around +2 with current opinions. Of course, if you managed to get opinions from everyone good who knew the matchup- I'm recalling a YT comment from Ecartman where he implied that it was one of the worst MU's in the game- it would probably come out above +3.

Really, there's just not enough community input into this list. I say we scrap it and hold our own opinions. Scrubs can ask in the Q&A thread and get all of our opinions.

 

[The Star King]

That's it. My Falcon, your Kirby, Battlecow.

BTW, based on some things A$ said during our 12 char battle I think he agrees with me. Heh.

 

[DMoogle]

Yeah, Falcon vs. Kirby really isn't as bad as a lot of people say.

 

[clubbadubba]

And yet your falcon was destroyed by Star Kings kirby. But yea only one match doesn't mean anything anyway. What you two should do is play each other in that matchup, and record how many wins each player gets with who.

Also did you see in the Tacna 12 char how luigi destoys jigglypuff?

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

And yet your falcon was destroyed by Star Kings kirby. But yea only one match doesn't mean anything anyway. What you two should do is play each other in that matchup, and record how many wins each player gets with who.

Also did you see in the Tacna 12 char how luigi destoys jigglypuff?

loooool I was like "inb4 star king" each time I saw that matchup.

 

[Fish641]

Can you record those as well? I've seen no good players have a Falcon v Kirby where the Falcon wins (and I actively sought out this matchup).

 

[Sangoku]

You haven't watched the Boom vs MATTS! match? Both player of the same skill level and the falcon winning.

 

[The Star King]

Same level? Ridiculous. It isn't even close.

Boomfan isn't an ultra god like MATTS! is. PWNED

The Luigi Puff matches didn't seem that bad to me, but OK.

 

[Sempiternity]

yeah MATTS! is way better than boom. no competition

 

[Battlecow]

Yeah, papito two-stocked Isai's puff, but Capitan Tavo could barely do damage with his three stocks... PRETTY SUSPICIOUS.

 

[tyhiggz]

This chart is awesome. Any workings of ones for hyrule or other maps?

(sorry to bring this back from the dead)

 

[asianaussie]

wrong thread disregard this

BUMP

 

[Han Solo]

Fox is +4 on all characters except Kirby, where he is +5.

 

[Neon!]

I was happy to finally find a 64 matchup thread until i saw that fox loses to 35-65 to pikachu lol. Cant trust any of these numbers now.

 

[M!nt]

I guess you've never played a good Pikachu then.

DREAMLAND is the key word here

 

[The Star King]

IDK I could easily see it being like 60-40

Not that I have a good grasp on what these numbers mean

 

[asianaussie]

it means pikachu has a 65% win rate most all some of the time

no wait, it means pikachu will win 65/100 65000/100000 matches

hold up, no, it's the stock proportion pikachu will have when fox is at 1 stock and 0%



just call it an advantage and be done with it

also, <3 cocky noobs with brawl FC codes

 

[The Star King]

I tried to see if I could still recall my Brawl FC off the top of my head, and I can't.

I'm glad.

I remember the last 4 numbers was 0700 though, but that's ultra easy. And either the first 4 or middle 4 were 6713.

 

[Fish641]

It should mean that Pika will take 65 stocks off of Fox for every 35 he gets off from pikachu

 

[Sangoku]

Come on don't start over...

 

[Sempiternity]

It should mean that the crowd will cheer for Pika 65 times for every 35 times it cheers for Fox.

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

+1 semp