The Official SBR-B Brawl Tier List v3.0

[Tien2500]

Sweetie, you really gotta do some more research on Samus.

@Shinyspoon:
Samus does indeed lack KO power, though. She has a few KO moves that are very hard to set up. Furthermore, she has a pretty telegraphed moveset, that also is very slow or has some awkward hitboxes or poor range. Add in low priority and you have Samus.

She would be bottom tier if she didn't have ZAir and her amazing offstage game thanks to it. I though do think that people are hopping on a sort of "Samus sucks" bandwagon, just like with Zelda.

I was just trying to explain the reason behind the viewpoint. She's definitely not Ganondorf/Falcon bad because she at least has some decent advantages against mid tiers. But she's still probably going to wind up in the botton 1/4 of the tier list.

 

[Red Arremer]

Saying DAir spike is her only way to KO is simply WRONG, though. Hence I corrected you. Or rather told you to look it up yourself.

If people like you keep on misinforming other players, it's no wonder why we have guys like YesNoMaybeSo.

 

[Tien2500]

Saying DAir spike is her only way to KO is simply WRONG, though. Hence I corrected you. Or rather told you to look it up yourself.

If people like you keep on misinforming other players, it's no wonder why we have guys like YesNoMaybeSo.

Eh it was a bit of an exagerration I guess. Fair enough.

 

[AtmaIllumina]

Hold up. How did Sheik pass Zelda in the tier list? Also, glad to see Peach at the top of C. She's making her way up. I'm so proud to be a Peach main.

 

[Tien2500]

Hold up. How did Sheik pass Zelda in the tier list? Also, glad to see Peach at the top of C. She's making her way up. I'm so proud to be a Peach main.

Zelda was initially ranked highly because of what was believed to be a buffed Din's fire. Once people got used to dodging Din's Zelda's lack of approach became more of a problem for her. Meanwhile Sheik's gimping potential was realized and some new techs (most notably DACUS) began to be used making Sheik go up as Zelda went down.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I remember when people thought ZSS was worse than Zelda.

WTF, people. WTF.

 

[phi1ny3]

I wish we could do that, but the problem is match-ups get too bad too fast for it to be useful.

Simple example, at equal skill level and at the top of the metagame, Marth can only hope to reliably win 5 out of 95 games, or something similar (again, at the top of the metagame, it's a lot better with aggressive MKs like M2K most of the time, but no marth is really his equal anyway).


60-40s are more like 80%.

When we hit 70-30 as we call it, it's over 99%.


A DK would not win like 1 or 2 games out of a hundred, more like 1 game out of 100,000,000,000,000.


So, there's the basic problem, it just gets too bad too fast, but slight advantages in skill also tip that very quickly, so if you're just a bit better, 60-40 becomes winnable in close to 50% range.



That's why it's simply more useful to make it a difficulty rating BUT it should be mathematically defined in terms of what that difficulty rating means.

I agree with this.
Similarly, like I said, it seems that if you look at it as straight up a "tool/situation comparison" as opposed to who's going to have the chances of winning, the numbers seem to fit more.

 

[Tien2500]

I remember when people thought ZSS was worse than Zelda.

WTF, people. WTF.

Back then people got hit with Din's and all ZSS did was spam side B.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I still dont see why we dont simply use only words. Because if the ratio 40:60 means "wins 40 games out of 100" or "wins 40% of the time" imo that doesnt even make sense. What people should be saying is this match is disadvantaged, even, or advantaged, not how many times you should win.

Thats how I'd do it at least.

Numbers describe a lot more match-up far more easily.

Zelda was initially ranked highly because of what was believed to be a buffed Din's fire. Once people got used to dodging Din's Zelda's lack of approach became more of a problem for her. Meanwhile Sheik's gimping potential was realized and some new techs (most notably DACUS) began to be used making Sheik go up as Zelda went down.

The bigger issue was she had an obvious tell (moving her hand) which was prior to the hitbox. Using it, you could airdodge/spotdodge/outprioritize it on reaction, making it useless except as punishment.

 

[da K.I.D.]

I wish we could do that, but the problem is match-ups get too bad too fast for it to be useful.

Simple example, at equal skill level and at the top of the metagame, Marth can only hope to reliably win 5 out of 95 games, or something similar (again, at the top of the metagame, it's a lot better with aggressive MKs like M2K most of the time, but no marth is really his equal anyway).

well in that case, at the top of the metagame, the marth mk matchup shoudl be shown as a 95-5 matchup. because thats what the word ratios mean, how often something happens out of a certain number of trails, because if...

60-40s are more like 80%.

than its not a ratio. because those numbers translate to something inexact, and knowing you as a theory based person, you of anybody should not stand for something like this to be allowed. its stupid frankly, and theres no other way to describe it


When we hit 70-30 as we call it, it's over 99%.

than call it a 99-1

A DK would not win like 1 or 2 games out of a hundred, more like 1 game out of 100,000,000,000,000.

than its a 100-0 matchup

So, there's the basic problem, it just gets too bad too fast, but slight advantages in skill also tip that very quickly, so if you're just a bit better, 60-40 becomes winnable in close to 50% range.

It sounds like you are trying to BS me into believing that because you cant predict every move and that people have differing skills levels that its okay to say a matchup is a 60-40 when its really an 80-20.


That's why it's simply more useful to make it a difficulty rating BUT it should be mathematically defined in terms of what that difficulty rating means.

thats why i respect the snake boards for just using a difficulty rating instead of trying to tac meaningless numbers on to their matchups

 

[SuSa]

I think you have the wrong board, or haven't checked in for a while.

I was sick of being PM'd what *, **, ***, ****, and ***** were supposed to be in matchup ratio's. So we just converted over to ratios.

However our ratios are seen more as a difficulty, not this BS % win crap.

 

[AtmaIllumina]

Zelda was initially ranked highly because of what was believed to be a buffed Din's fire. Once people got used to dodging Din's Zelda's lack of approach became more of a problem for her. Meanwhile Sheik's gimping potential was realized and some new techs (most notably DACUS) began to be used making Sheik go up as Zelda went down.

Gotcha. It's true I guess. But fighting a level 9 Zelda on brawl+ is still as tough as eating nails through a straw. But I hear you on that. DACUS makes fighting better with Sheik. Zelda's slow paced approaches are quite lame imo.

 

[SuSa]

Gotcha. It's true I guess. But fighting a level 9 Zelda on brawl+ is still as tough as eating nails through a straw. But I hear you on that. DACUS makes fighting better with Sheik. Zelda's slow paced approaches are quite lame imo.

We don't use level 9 computers when making the tier list, nor do we use Brawl+ for the Brawl tier list.

 

[Dark.Pch]

SuSa, what you think the match up Ratio for Snake Vs Peach is?

 

[adumbrodeus]

60-40s are more like 80%.

than its not a ratio. because those numbers translate to something inexact, and knowing you as a theory based person, you of anybody should not stand for something like this to be allowed. its stupid frankly, and theres no other way to describe it

They SHOULD be exact, but choosing that theory behind it makes it very useless.


I need to do my thread on this, to redefine these stupid match-ups, but unfortunately, it IS an inexact science, and for win ratios, we need actual data.

It sounds like you are trying to BS me into believing that because you cant predict every move and that people have differing skills levels that its okay to say a matchup is a 60-40 when its really an 80-20.

Erm, no I'm disagreeing with your theory behind it, remember?

I go by "successful predictions beyond average", and use that as my personal basis, and convince everyone to do the same. Then define what certain amounts mean. Firm mathematical basis, and tells how the match-ups scale accurately based on difference of skill.

Because when we're talking about this, it's not just about saying something correct, it's about saying something useful, and law of large numbers makes it basically useless to discuss the differences between everything over 70-30, but gives too much precision to earlier numbers.

However our ratios are seen more as a difficulty, not this BS % win crap.

Exactly, which was what I was saying in the first place. Difficulty ratios.

 

[da K.I.D.]

you right susa, i have checked it a while, but I liked the star system.

even still, you still do it better than the rest of us.

 

[AtmaIllumina]

We don't use level 9 computers when making the tier list, nor do we use Brawl+ for the Brawl tier list.

I understand that. I wasn't implying that in any way. I'm saying it's amazing how a computer can maximize skills when they play.

 

[Kofu]

Time to see my sucky tier list!


1. Meta Knight, Snake (BROKEN Tier)
2. Falco, Wario, Diddy Kong (Foils Tier)
3. King Dedede, Marth (I GRABS Tier)
4. Zero Suit Samus, Mr. Game & Watch, Ice Climbers (Impossible to Master Tier)
5. Pikachu, Olimar, Toon Link (Camp Campy Counselors Tier)
6. R.O.B., Kirby, Sheik, Peach, Pit, Lucario (Maybe Someday Tier)
7. Donkey Kong, Sonic (AM I GOOD OR NOT Tier)
8. Fox, Wolf, Ness (Shiny Specials Tier)
9. Bowser, Mario, Luigi (Mushroom Kingdom Tier)
10. Zelda, Ike, Lucas, Pokémon Trainer, Yoshi (Motley Tier)
11. Samus, Link, Jigglypuff (BLATANT Problems Tier)
12. Captain Falcon, Ganondorf (Manly Tier)

All characters in the row of the tier are, in my eyes, equivalently good.

Not really sure about the placement of the tiers below #6, though.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I place ratios to state difficulty.

50-50s are even

60-40s have one character with an advantage but it is still realistically winnable for two players of equal skill.

70-30s are the boundary of winnable, they are winnable on a competitive level, but it is still insanely difficult and nearly impossible if both players are of equal skill.

80-20s are hopeless if both are of equal skill.

90-10s I'm not even going to talk about this one.

 

[Nanaki]

Time to see my sucky tier list!


1. Meta Knight, Snake (BROKEN Tier)
2. Falco, Wario, Diddy Kong (Foils Tier)
3. King Dedede, Marth (I GRABS Tier)
4. Zero Suit Samus, Mr. Game & Watch, Ice Climbers (Impossible to Master Tier)
5. Pikachu, Olimar, Toon Link (Camp Campy Counselors Tier)
6. R.O.B., Kirby, Sheik, Peach, Pit, Lucario (Maybe Someday Tier)
7. Donkey Kong, Sonic (AM I GOOD OR NOT Tier)
8. Fox, Wolf, Ness (Shiny Specials Tier)
9. Bowser, Mario, Luigi (Mushroom Kingdom Tier)
10. Zelda, Ike, Lucas, Pokémon Trainer, Yoshi (Motley Tier)
11. Samus, Link, Jigglypuff (BLATANT Problems Tier)
12. Captain Falcon, Ganondorf (Manly Tier)

All characters in the row of the tier are, in my eyes, equivalently good.

Not really sure about the placement of the tiers below #6, though.

Made me lol.

 

[Dark.Pch]

That impossible to master tier makes no sense. Really for a simple character as G&W. Also Shiek over Peach? Oh man. You kids and your list dealing with Peach.

 

[shinyspoon42]

I'm curious, did the entire smashboards backroom who makes this tier list skip kindergarten? it goes a b c, not s a b c. >_>

 

[Kofu]

Made me lol.

That impossible to master tier makes no sense. Really for a simple character as G&W. Also Shiek over Peach? Oh man. You kids and your list dealing with Peach.

To be honest, while the basics of using him are incredibly simple, to use him at a high level of play requires thinking ahead in scores to be able to land KO moves and get around his predictability is nigh impossible.

Peach is not higher than Sheik; Peach is equivalent to Sheik.

 

[SuSa]

Snakeeach is 60:40, or a "Solid Advantage" (Solid, not Strong)

Snake's advantage in the matchup is clear, but there are enough holes that Peach can abuse that makes it winnable.

(PS: In Theory, 50:50 is even, 55:45 means you should never lose less it be by mistake/luck. 45:55 means the same but for winning)

But we all know it doesn't work like that.

My idea:

50:50 - Even
55:45 - Mild Advantage
60:40 - Solid Advantage
65:35 - Good Advantage
70:30 - Strong Advantage
75-35 - Ridiculous Advantage
80:20 - .... counterpick
85:15 - ....so i herd u r G tier
90:10 - lol. H Tier?
95:5 - ... Ganon:IC's. Nuf' said
100:0 - ..... Are we playing MVC2, Roll vs Magneto or something?

 

[da K.I.D.]

Snakeeach is 60:40, or a "Solid Advantage" (Solid, not Strong)

Snake's advantage in the matchup is clear, but there are enough holes that Peach can abuse that makes it winnable.

(PS: In Theory, 50:50 is even, 55:45 means you should never lose less it be by mistake/luck. 45:55 means the same but for winning)

But we all know it doesn't work like that.

My idea:

50:50 - Even
55:45 - Mild Advantage
60:40 - Solid Advantage
65:35 - Good Advantage
70:30 - Strong Advantage
75-35 - Ridiculous Advantage
80:20 - .... counterpick
85:15 - ....so i herd u r G tier
90:10 - lol. H Tier?
95:5 - ... Ganon:IC's. Nuf' said
100:0 - ..... Are we playing MVC2, Roll vs Magneto or something?

So why dont you say that, instead of using numbers that everybody obviously is NOT on the same page about.

and that last one made me rofl hard

 

[SuSa]

Because after 80:20 (which IMO, I have yet to see such a ratio worse then 75-35 in my eyes) I run out of words to accurately describe it.

Also, I'd use it. But then I have to explain it for idiots, I'm really, really lazy. Most people who know me know my rating scale however.

Also my MVC2 team:
Roll, ServBot, Megaman

GET AT ME

 

[Dark.Pch]

To be honest, while the basics of using him are incredibly simple, to use him at a high level of play requires thinking ahead in scores to be able to land KO moves and get around his predictability is nigh impossible.

Peach is not higher than Sheik; Peach is equivalent to Sheik.

There is not much to G&W. Fact. Idk why people keep trying to cover up for this character so much. Face it. to do just about all you can do with this character and beat with him is not impossible. He is not a ground breaking character at all. He is just some over powered character that people just spam 2-3 moves with/ annoy/piss off and thus you win. As I said before, once people start using thier heads, then they will realize this and start beating the hell out of him. I mean come on. even with the top G&W players, it's the same stuff with him. Nothing knew or ground breaking.

And Peach being equivalent to sheik is wrong. Peach is the better character.

 

[SuSa]

I disagree.


Zero Suit Samus
Sheik
Toon Link
Peach/Lucario
Pit
Donkey Kong

Without really changing the B tier at all, that's about my feelings on it. Unsure about Peach/Lucario

 

[CaliburChamp]

There is not much to G&W. Fact. Idk why people keep trying to cover up for this character so much. Face it. to do just about all you can do with this character and beat with him is not impossible. He is not a ground breaking character at all. He is just some over powered character that people just spam 2-3 moves with/ annoy/piss off and thus you win. As I said before, once people start using thier heads, then they will realize this and start beating the hell out of him. I mean come on. even with the top G&W players, it's the same stuff with him. Nothing knew or ground breaking.

And Peach being equivalent to sheik is wrong. Peach is the better character.

Peach is top tier when she pulls out a beam sword. You happy now?

 

[thrillagorilla]

Wait, the MU ratios have always been in regards to win percentages? I've always viewed them as comparisons of character tools. Who would use ratios to try and predict the probability of a character winning a match when players are also key? No wonder so many people get in a tizzy about them, they are 100% theory-craft using that model (and the numbers are unreasonable at that). I digress... I'm tempted to put up my list based on the eventual meta-game/character MUs, but I would take a lot of flak if I did. A LOT.

 

[4nace]

4nace's awesome tier list of funtastic things
Mostly balanced around with both 1v1 and 2v2 in mind.

SS (Stupidly Silly)
Metaknight
Snake

A
Diddy Kong
Wario
DDD
Marth

B
Falco
Ice Climbers
Pikachu
Game and Watch
Olimar
Kirby

C
Lucario
R.O.B.
Toon Link
Peach
Zero Suit
Pit

D
Donkey Kong
Luigi
Fox
Shiek
Wolf
Zelda
Pokemon Trainer
Sonic

F
Ike
Bowser
Mario
Lucas
Captain Falcon
Yoshi
JigglyPuff
Ness

G
Samus
Link
Ganondorf

SS-C are tournament viable.
The rest have something holding them back.

EDIT: Changed up my low tiers a bit.

In my bracket, characters in the same tiers generally have a good fight against each other unless for a crazy match up like ICs or shiek and fox etc...

 

[Dark.Pch]

Snakeeach is 60:40, or a "Solid Advantage" (Solid, not Strong)

Snake's advantage in the matchup is clear, but there are enough holes that Peach can abuse that makes it winnable.

(PS: In Theory, 50:50 is even, 55:45 means you should never lose less it be by mistake/luck. 45:55 means the same but for winning)

But we all know it doesn't work like that.

My idea:

50:50 - Even
55:45 - Mild Advantage
60:40 - Solid Advantage
65:35 - Good Advantage
70:30 - Strong Advantage
75-35 - Ridiculous Advantage
80:20 - .... counterpick
85:15 - ....so i herd u r G tier
90:10 - lol. H Tier?
95:5 - ... Ganon:IC's. Nuf' said
100:0 - ..... Are we playing MVC2, Roll vs Magneto or something?

You guys still think Peach vs Snake is 60:40 after all this time? Come on dude. Snake does not beat Peach like that.

And sheik is not better than Peach and I can easily explain why no problem. And sheik being better than Toon Link is a no too.

 

[CaliburChamp]

Peach is better than Shiek. But Wolf is better than Peach...

Wolf
Peach
Shiek

 

[AtmaIllumina]

I agree with Dark on this one. I play both Sheik and Peach so I know from experience that Peach has more going on. Sheik might have a speed advantage but with a lack of killer moves, Peach wins overall. Peach has float canceling man. There are too many advantages that peach has and besides, both characters are nerfed. Why are we even talking about this?

 

[SuSa]

You guys still think Peach vs Snake is 60:40 after all this time? Come on dude. Snake does not beat Peach like that.

And sheik is not better than Peach and I can easily explain why no problem. And sheik being better than Toon Link is a no too.

I've played Edreese (twice...thrice? now) and Sky'.

Edreese switched to Bowser (more fun apparently?) and Sky' was a friendly, I didn't camp him like a ***** like I would have in tournament.

Peach.... can apply pressure, but if the Snake does the right thing. He takes no damage, you take chip damage (small %'s here and there) and overall, Snake wins.

Here's the thing:

I'm one of the few people I know who actually can use theorycraft to "know" a matchup based on my knowledge of both characters

I'm one of the few Snake's that I know whom know the Sheik matchup, the Fox matchup, the Peach matchup, etc. Why? Because at one time I had played all of these characters. I read up on each of their boards, I know their problems in the matchup, I abuse that.

Few Snake's put that much effort, and just play Snake like Snake (and usually win). More Snake's learn simply from experience, seeing theorycraft useless.

When I lose to a Peach by more then 50%, I'll let you know.

@Person above me
Peach has no guarenteed KO moves. Sheik has grab release > dacus on much of the cast, and ftilt > usmash on pretty much the entire cast. Please tell me who has a worse killing problem?

Did I mention Sheik also has down-B?

 

[Tien2500]

Because after 80:20 (which IMO, I have yet to see such a ratio worse then 75-35 in my eyes) I run out of words to accurately describe it.

Also, I'd use it. But then I have to explain it for idiots, I'm really, really lazy. Most people who know me know my rating scale however.

Also my MVC2 team:
Roll, ServBot, Megaman

GET AT ME

Ummmmmmm... 75:35?

 

[Smash G 0 D]

4nace's awesome tier list of funtastic things
Mostly balanced around with both 1v1 and 2v2 in mind.

SS (Stupidly Silly)
Metaknight
Snake

A
Diddy Kong
Wario
DDD
Marth

B
Falco
Ice Climbers
Pikachu
Game and Watch
Olimar
Kirby

C
Lucario
R.O.B.
Toon Link
Peach
Zero Suit
Pit

D
Donkey Kong
Luigi
Fox
Shiek
Wolf
Zelda
Pokemon Trainer

F
Sonic
Ike
Bowser
Mario
Captain Falcon

G
Lucas
Yoshi
Ness
JigglyPuff

H
Samus
Link
Ganondorf

SS-C are tournament viable.
The rest have something holding them back.

I thought this list wasn't bad until I got to low tiers... I promise you that Samus isn't that low.

 

[SuSa]

Ummmmmmm... 75:35?

Epic math fail. I won't even shrug that off as a typo, I plain out failed.
75:25*

 

[PhantomX]

I'm one of the few people I know who actually can use theorycraft to "know" a matchup based on my knowledge of both characters

I don't have a Wii, or play very much outside tournaments, so this is what I do. My theorycraft usually has pretty good results when I put it into practice.

 

[Tien2500]

Epic math fail. I won't even shrug that off as a typo, I plain out failed.
75:25*

Lol. It happens.