Slhoka
Smash Lord
As I mentioned in the tier list voting thread, I took a look at the previous lists while making the current one. I always thought that the evolution of this list is a strong indicator of the development of the competitive scene.
Therefore, I created this table and chart, as well as some little cute tables for each character like the one you can see in page 2 of the pdf file.
Now, I don't want to post it like that, without any additional comment : I think that one of the things explaining why the last tier list release was well received by the community is that the list was backed up with statistics and comments explaining the reasoning behind its creation. While this look on the tiers evolution isn't an opinion and doesn't need any argumentation, I think that a few notes would make it way more interesting for the users. And that's where I need your help : I am not knowledgeable enough to explain all the changes in the community that impacted the list. So I'd like to get input on this, especially from the old timers regarding the first lists.
Basically, I saw two main kind of things impacting the list :
Following the chart and the table in the document linked above, I tried to list explanations for the characters improvements or decreases in the lists :
As you can see, these ideas are made a bit on the fly and are quite informal. That because I recently saw someone posting this thread and decided to hurry up. The experienced procrastinator in me wanted to take his time to do this, but with such a topic, it would be good to release it quickly.
So, could those who actually lived the early eras, or who have an idea on the whys of a character's evolution, please let me know.
Also, every proposition to make this more interesting is obviously welcome.
Therefore, I created this table and chart, as well as some little cute tables for each character like the one you can see in page 2 of the pdf file.
Now, I don't want to post it like that, without any additional comment : I think that one of the things explaining why the last tier list release was well received by the community is that the list was backed up with statistics and comments explaining the reasoning behind its creation. While this look on the tiers evolution isn't an opinion and doesn't need any argumentation, I think that a few notes would make it way more interesting for the users. And that's where I need your help : I am not knowledgeable enough to explain all the changes in the community that impacted the list. So I'd like to get input on this, especially from the old timers regarding the first lists.
Basically, I saw two main kind of things impacting the list :
- an evolution of the character's metagame which highly affected its performances
- a change in the overall metagame which profited to a certain character
- the rising of one or more top player(s) who pushed a character's metagame
Following the chart and the table in the document linked above, I tried to list explanations for the characters improvements or decreases in the lists :
Bowser : Always pretty bad.
CF : Low early ranking because he was thought to be too hard to control. Improved slowly at first (being "tamed" little by little), then abruptly in the 5th list (because of Isai ?).
DK : No idea for the low early ranking and the improvement in the 7th list.
Doc : Has been seen as really similar to Mario and pretty much followed him until the 7th list when it was clear he had his own metagame and was more efficient than Mario.
Falco : Early decrease (because of the developing chaingrabs and edgeguards ?), improvement in 2005 (metagame developed with the pillar and shine combos).
Fox : Always there, waiting for Sheik's limitations to kick in.
G&W : who ?
Ganon : Always seen as fairly good : his ranking seemed to be a consequences of the changes over and below him while he stayed the same.
Ice Climbers : Simple yet effective gameplay => good initial ranking. Gradual decrease as the limitations became obvious, then Chu arrived with the desynch and chain grabs.
Jiggs : Very low initial ranking, then sudden rise (because of the discovery of rest combos ?). Rose in 2008 (why ?), then in 2010 because of Mango and hungrybox.
Kirby : Always pretty bad.
Link : Good easrly ranking. My guess : popular character => played by many => gameplay developed faster at the beginning.
Luigi : no idea why so good at first
M2 : Crap until Taj's arrival.
Mario : simple gameplay + popular syndrome similar to Link = good early ranking, then went downhill
Marth : Simple and effective gameplay = good early ranking. Became a top character with Ken, reached the very top with M2K's 2007/2008 renewal of metagame. Lack of awesome Marth players may explain his decrease.
Ness : no idea why so good at the beginning
Peach : Not so good in the first list (why ?), then many good players arrived and developed her metagame (Peach players have always placed near the top while not reaching it).
Pichu : Crap
Pikachu : Popular syndrome may explain the good ranking in the first list before going down? Recent increase : Axe?
Roy : Roy syndrome : underrated a bit in the early lists because he was seen as the noob's character ? The rise in the 5th list would be Neo's influence, and then the lack of players may explain why he went down from there.
Samus : Popular syndrome ? The small rise in the 5th list would be due to the great Samuses (Wes, Oro, HugS, Aniki) ?
Sheik : Easy metagame => developed fast. Limitation kicked in in 2006 while the Fox/Falco metagame improved ?
YL : always somewhat lame
Yoshi : Little rise in 2003, because of Fumi ?
Zelda : Simple gameplay ==> high early ranking. Then, limitations became obvious (-13 ranks in 10 months, a new record !)
CF : Low early ranking because he was thought to be too hard to control. Improved slowly at first (being "tamed" little by little), then abruptly in the 5th list (because of Isai ?).
DK : No idea for the low early ranking and the improvement in the 7th list.
Doc : Has been seen as really similar to Mario and pretty much followed him until the 7th list when it was clear he had his own metagame and was more efficient than Mario.
Falco : Early decrease (because of the developing chaingrabs and edgeguards ?), improvement in 2005 (metagame developed with the pillar and shine combos).
Fox : Always there, waiting for Sheik's limitations to kick in.
G&W : who ?
Ganon : Always seen as fairly good : his ranking seemed to be a consequences of the changes over and below him while he stayed the same.
Ice Climbers : Simple yet effective gameplay => good initial ranking. Gradual decrease as the limitations became obvious, then Chu arrived with the desynch and chain grabs.
Jiggs : Very low initial ranking, then sudden rise (because of the discovery of rest combos ?). Rose in 2008 (why ?), then in 2010 because of Mango and hungrybox.
Kirby : Always pretty bad.
Link : Good easrly ranking. My guess : popular character => played by many => gameplay developed faster at the beginning.
Luigi : no idea why so good at first
M2 : Crap until Taj's arrival.
Mario : simple gameplay + popular syndrome similar to Link = good early ranking, then went downhill
Marth : Simple and effective gameplay = good early ranking. Became a top character with Ken, reached the very top with M2K's 2007/2008 renewal of metagame. Lack of awesome Marth players may explain his decrease.
Ness : no idea why so good at the beginning
Peach : Not so good in the first list (why ?), then many good players arrived and developed her metagame (Peach players have always placed near the top while not reaching it).
Pichu : Crap
Pikachu : Popular syndrome may explain the good ranking in the first list before going down? Recent increase : Axe?
Roy : Roy syndrome : underrated a bit in the early lists because he was seen as the noob's character ? The rise in the 5th list would be Neo's influence, and then the lack of players may explain why he went down from there.
Samus : Popular syndrome ? The small rise in the 5th list would be due to the great Samuses (Wes, Oro, HugS, Aniki) ?
Sheik : Easy metagame => developed fast. Limitation kicked in in 2006 while the Fox/Falco metagame improved ?
YL : always somewhat lame
Yoshi : Little rise in 2003, because of Fumi ?
Zelda : Simple gameplay ==> high early ranking. Then, limitations became obvious (-13 ranks in 10 months, a new record !)
As you can see, these ideas are made a bit on the fly and are quite informal. That because I recently saw someone posting this thread and decided to hurry up. The experienced procrastinator in me wanted to take his time to do this, but with such a topic, it would be good to release it quickly.
So, could those who actually lived the early eras, or who have an idea on the whys of a character's evolution, please let me know.
Also, every proposition to make this more interesting is obviously welcome.