The Official BBR Tier List v4 -> Sonic's HA Stall is NOT beaten by spot dodge!!!!!!!!

[adumbrodeus]

So if I lose to M2K I can just say I don't know the MU and I am the better player in reality?

Is he consistently losing to players below your level?


Then no.

 

[Mariofan12]

Who were the players who voted? I don't think Yoshi is really better than Mario, but I could see Yoshi being better than Lucas.

Fox over Luigi??????

 

[Purple]

Who were the players who voted? I don't think Yoshi is really better than Mario, but I could see Yoshi being better than Lucas.

Fox over Luigi??????

Of course you don't.

 

[vVv Rapture]

Isn't Mario supposed to be banned, though?

 

[Umby]

Who were the players who voted? I don't think Yoshi is really better than Mario, but I could see Yoshi being better than Lucas.

Fox over Luigi??????

It's alot more efficient to state valid reasoning of why you don't think x character is better than y character than to just state your opinion in logical discussion.

 

[-LzR-]

Isn't Mario supposed to be banned, though?

Just like Meta Knight's case. There is enough evidence, but nothing will be done anyways.

 

[Deleted member]

His cape is broken. We need to enforce a cape limit.

 

[Poltergust]

Who were the players who voted? I don't think Yoshi is really better than Mario, but I could see Yoshi being better than Lucas.

Fox over Luigi??????

Well, state your points and I'll be happy to refute each and every one of them. =)

Kidding, but you need to show why you think Mario is better than Yoshi. You can't just say one character is better than another and just leave it at that.

 

[#HBC | Scary]

Well, if Mario used his Backwards long jump, he be an instant death human projectile. **** wouldn't even be fair to anyone.

Hence why Mario da bess.

 

[Justblaze647]

aaaannndd this thread is officially useless

ggs

 

[#HBC | Scary]

Just biding time until the new list lol. Gotta have fun on this site somehow.

 

[Kofu]

There are so many ways Mario could be improved, so many options from so many games. Especially in terms of recovery.

And yet they stick with his rather mediocre moveset.

I suppose they want him to be an average character, but come on.

 

[Spelt]

aaaannndd this thread is officially useless

ggs

Only so much theorycrafting one man can do.

 

[Deleted member]

forget ittt

 

[Loota]

You know how to create some discussion?

IT'S RANDOM TIER LIST TIME WHEEEEE

S: Meta Knight
A: Snake, Falco, Diddy Kong, Wario, Marth, Ice Climbers
B: King Dedede, Olimar, Pikachu, Lucario, Zero Suit Samus, Mr. Game & Watch
C: Toon Link, Kirby, Peach, R.O.B.
D: Fox, Donkey Kong, Pit, Wolf, Luigi
E: Sonic, Ness, Sheik, Ike, Pokémon Trainer, Bowser
F: Yoshi, Lucas, Mario, Falcon, Samus, Jigglypuff, Link
G: Zelda, Ganondorf

How do I make those faces of the characters lol

 

[Justblaze647]

Inb4Snakeisnt2ndbest

 

[Shaya]

induringitsatrap.

 

[-LzR-]

Snake isn't the 2nd best! Falco shall be 2nd in place.

 

[Flayl]

Not without LGL he won't.

 

[-LzR-]

Since when was there an official LGL?

 

[DanGR]

Doesn't need to be "official".

It's used a ton.

 

[deepseadiva]

The BBR tier list is formed only considering the BBR ruleset - which doesn't include a LGL.

 

[Flayl]

Since when was there an official LGL?

Your question confuses me. I'm saying Falco isn't 2nd without LGL.

This is the BBR made tier list follwoing the BBR made ruleset. BBR ruleset doesn't use LGL.

 

[DanGR]

Who's talking about the BBR's tier list?

I thought the discussion was about Falco.

edit: Screw it. nvm

 

[Yikarur]

actually the BBR Tier List does include LGL because they use character rankings of thousands of tournaments and I'm pretty sure A LOT of them ran a LGL.

 

[Espy Rose]

We should invoke Punch Time for Ganon.
I mean, LGL buffs Falco. Punch Time would surely buff Ganon. It makes perfect sense.

 

[deepseadiva]

Who's talking about the BBR's tier list?

I thought the discussion was about Falco.

edit: Screw it. nvm

lol

actually the BBR Tier List does include LGL because they use character rankings of thousands of tournaments and I'm pretty sure A LOT of that tournaments ran a LGL.

LGLs probably influences the tier list, since it's such a standard these days and such a big part of the metagame, but when forming the list the BBR specifically has to think "When there is no LGL, how good is MK?"

And that's why he moved into his own tier again for version 4.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

We should invoke Punch Time for Ganon.
I mean, LGL buffs Falco. Punch Time would surely buff Ganon. It makes perfect sense.

LGL is not specifically in place to buff Falco though.

 

[Espy Rose]

Fair enough.
How about an Air Time limit then? Sure as hell would help ground based characters a lot.

 

[Nefarious B]

The thing is, if you're assuming no LGL, the only thing that matters in the MK matchup is your ability to build a lead, because as soon as you have more % you lose. Falco probably has the best ability to build and retain a lead against MK compared to any other character, or atleast is one of the best at doing so. So even without LGL Falco has one of the best MK matchups.

Snake without a LGL on the other hand is pretty boned. Since MK can easily build leads on Snake but fails to kill Snake til late percents usually, Snake loses far more if LGLs are removed compared to Falco, if we're assuming perfect planking.

The characters benefiting from LGLs vary much more if we're not considering MK's perfect planking.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I think the problem is not the LGL but the way timeouts are solved. The decision to give the win to the player with less percent is completely arbitrary and gives an unfair advantage to characters who can make themselves unattackable for a certain amount of time. Planking is just a very convenient way to do so. Increasing the timer to 10 (or at least 9) minutes and changing the way the winner is chosen in case of a time-out is a lot more effective than limiting ledge-grabs.

 

[Justblaze647]

I say in the event of a time out, the winner of the sudden death match wins the game. That's how it was originally intended, and it decreases the urge to strive for a time out.

 

[vVv Rapture]

I find it a little weird how everyone says Brawl is not a traditional fighting game at all, or even call it a party game, yet use the excuse of allowing time-outs because that's how other fighters do it.

We all know Smash has more ways to KO someone than regular fighting games. In SSF4, all you have to do is knock down their health to zero. In Smash, you can knock them past the horizontal blastzone, knock them past the vertical blastzone, take away all their health (stamina-mode only, obviously), etc. And you can do these things by using a regular Smash attack, spiking, gimping, hell, you can even break a shield for a KO (sorry Jigglerpoof).

So, with that said, Smash clearly doesn't need to assume the characteristics of other fighters when it isn't. Thus, there is no reason to say that making time-outs a legitimate way of winning is because it makes the game more like other fighters and that's how it's done. It's completely arbitrary.

If Sakurai wanted games to end to time, he wouldn't have added Sudden Death. Because, if you play the game without any of our rules, no game will go to time.

Except Coin Battles.

 

[Yikarur]

lol you end your Post with "if Sakurai wanted".

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I think the most notable flaw with our current "arbitrarily chosen" system is that there's no such thing as health in Brawl. At the most superficial level, the player with the lower percent damage taken is "winning." That isn't really true though since moving a character past the blast line is completely independent of the actual amount of damage it has taken.

If a game goes to time and I have taken 50% damage and my opponent has taken 100% damage, it means I have actually dealt more damage to my opponent which could assist in lowering their stock count, but never actually can do that on it's own.

Fascinating.

Unfortunately, games have to end and I see this as being the best solution to that end. It is also a clear goal: either reduce your opponent's stock count to zero, or end the game with the highest amount of stock and/or lowest percent. This is simply a baseline we have created, since the game hasn't done a good job of indicating one for us.

Maybe it's time for this rule to change, but I am not smart enough to come up with an alternative solution that is fair on my own.

 

[Yikarur]

but the rule is perfect. there is no need for a change D:

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

but the rule is perfect. there is no need for a change D:

It is certainly not perfect. I have just pointed to a very large hole in the logic used for the arbitration of this rule.

But it might be the best rule we will ever have. I'm not sure it can feasibly change, really.

 

[Yikarur]

changing this rule would mean changing results and changing ways to fight aka changing the metagame D:

 

[Justblaze647]

What exactly is wrong with the sudden death option?

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

changing this rule would mean changing results and changing ways to fight aka changing the metagame D:

Given that Brawl is rapidly devolving into a game where opponent X hits opponent Y once and runs away for eight minutes, I'm not sure this is such a bad thing. It might not be a good thing either. I'm not sure.

What exactly is wrong with the sudden death option?

Simply put, too many random elements make up sudden death. There's also nothing to stop players from planking/stalling out sudden death.