Soon as we finish orchestrating a rehaul of the boards, they won't be dead. :U Need new rankings 'n' ****e. MAKE IT INTERESTING. 90% of the active Ganons here aren't on the board tier list and most of the list comprises of dead Ganons.
Ganon tier-listing needs to be a group effort.
Also, hi everybody. I'm listening to Gwar.
It's great to have a ganon ranking system but it's difficult to compare the skills between other ganons. It's an excellent idea as it brings out the competitiveness of people and will ultimately improve our ganons.
There's obviously 4 methods of evidence to take into account when ranking someone... You could
1. Rank people by how they play in videos which i don't believe accurately portrays the skill level of the player. Judging players by their videos gets too complicated as you have to address the issue of consistency. They may have a favourable match-up that they submit for assessing but get ***** by most other characters.
For example, submitting a video of you playing against your brother. You would be familiar with his playstyle and annihilate him but it wouldn't be indicative of your skill level. Get what i'm saying? Probably spark a few arguments here but that's my opinion and i've based it on reasoning.
2. Wi-fi matches... playing online definitely isn't nintendo's strength. Playing too much wi-fi will make you accustomed to it's lag and I don't think it's fair to rate someone that way. I've seen vids of ally get ***** on wi-fi when he clearly beats them offline. I don't think wi-fi matches should be considered AT ALL.
3. Offline matches aka tournaments/money matches. This is obviously the fairest option but geographically, we are 1,000's of kms apart so this method isn't that viable. However, you could have a chain of ranking systems across the boards ranking each player in their respective country as they will most likely come across each other at a major tournament. This leads to the 4th method.
4. Quality of the competition. This has to be taken into consideration as some countries are better at brawl than others. For an example, I average 5th out of 17 entrants at my state tourneys but Australia sucks at brawl so that would probably make me the equivalent of 13 out of 17 (very rough guess, don't take it seriously) if i entered a tournament in Europe. One of our top 3 players came 65th at genesis in the U.S.A so it speaks for itself. So is this method really applicable? Do we just rate ourselves by who we defeat under tournament conditions?
Maybe we could incorporate methods 3 & 4. We could have a rankings system in each country and then assess the quality of the competition and who we defeat and have an unbiased panel to judge the quality of competition, compare the skill levels of our defeated opponents and subsequently compile a rankings.
Also, please don't flame me for this. I'm just trying to contribute and offer my opinion. You may disagree with me and have a discussion with me about it but don't put me down. Thanks