Tier /ti(ə)r/ (noun):
But before I can do that, it’s important that I submit to you my own working definition of character tiers. Here at Hate Speech Theoryfighter University (HSTFU for short), a character’s overall tier rank reflects its total potential, based on individual match-ups, when played at the highest possible level. In other words, when player skill is normalized and therefore factored out of the equation, which characters are simply most effective? Note that for our purposes ease-of-use has no place in tier discussion. This is because the easiest characters to play and are not always necessarily the most dangerous in high-level play, for one. Secondly, ease-of-use is subjective. What’s difficult for one player might be trivial to another. There is simply no reasonable way to account for these discrepancies.
Tier Myth One: Tiers Don’t Exist
Some version of this venerable myth gets trotted out every time an excellent player does well with a character not thought to be “top.” It’s patently ridiculous. Consider that tiers, for our purposes, reflect a character’s potential, not a player’s. The sheer diversity found in the casts of any fighting game made after Karate Champ dictates that some characters will have more favorable match-ups than others, and that is the very essence of what tiers should indicate.
Claiming that tiers don’t exist because Rock has a chance of winning against Amy, no matter how small, is akin to arguing that because I could theoretically walk from my apartment in the San Francisco bay area all the way to NEC instead of taking a plane, there’s no such thing as speed. I’d end up at the same destination, so what’s the difference, right?
Tier Myth Two: Tiers Are Destiny
One-hundred eighty degrees away from our first tier myth we find this one: “OMG TOP TIER = AUTO-WIN.” It’s an assertion that is entirely too broad. First, upsets will always be part of life in the tournament scene. Second, and more importantly, just because a character is good does not mean that it will do all of the heavy lifting. Top-tier characters tend to reward good decision-making on the part of the player far more generously than do low-tiers, but nevertheless that human element will always be a factor in how matches play out. Tiers are guidelines; they will help us make informed choices about the characters into which we invest our time, but there are never any guarantees.
Tier Myth Three: Tournament Results = Tiers
As stated earlier, a proper tier list should eliminate the human element as much as possible in order to provide any semblance of consistency. Given that reality, lending too much credence to tournament results when considering tier lists is incredibly counterproductive. Yes, there will be strong correlation between top characters and average tournament placing, but there will always be players who make certain characters seem far better—or, in some instances, far worse—than in fact they are. When in doubt, think logically and do the math, putting aside anecdotal evidence.
Tier Myth Four: Top Tiers Require No Skill/Low Tier Takes Balls
This one causes me physical pain. First, nowhere will you find a white-bearded man holding aloft a stone tablet with an inscription proclaiming all good characters to be brainless. Yes, some of them are. Many are, in certain games. Still, the relationship isn’t causal. Some high tier characters require a lot of thinking and engagement; they’re just high-tier because of how generously they reward such actions. Conversely, there is nothing particularly brave about playing a terrible character. If you only enjoy playing a bad character (or have serious character loyalty from game to game), that’s absolutely fine, but it is no badge of honor. In fact, in many cases the whole low-tier hero thing is a form of insipid, backhanded cowardice.
Picking a terrible character, giving oneself no shot at victory, and subsequently proclaiming some sort of moral victory is the behavior of a person who ultimately knows that he can’t hang with the big boys. Don’t be that person. Play the characters you love, but leave circuitous notions of honor out of it.
So, What’s the Point?
I’ve posed a fairly strict theory on the way to think about tiers, alongside which I’ve talked a lot about what tiers are not and should not do. What remains is a theoretical model fairly limited in scope, but not at all useless. Proper tier lists, once they’re a bit settled, actually provide us with valuable information about how and where to invest our practice resources.
First, tiers give a general idea of return on investment at the level of character selection. Let’s say, hypothetically, the time and effort necessary to become the best Rock player in the world is identical to the time and effort necessary to become the tenth-best Amy player. Oh, and it just so happens that you have exactly that amount of time and effort at your disposal. A review of the tiers and the match-ups tells us that your time is probably far better spent in becoming the tenth-best Amy, all other things being equal.
Even once you’ve chosen a character, reviewing a tier list for insight into which match-ups are most difficult for that character, regardless of its tier, can help you decide which match-ups to study most in-depth when budgeting your limited practice time.
Homework:
You know the drill. Before you rip me too viciously, however, note that Theoryfighter University will be back very soon with explication and defense of some of the more assailable points from above, particularly with regard to the meat and potatoes of how to sort out a tier list. Consider the gauntlet thrown.
- A row or level of a structure, typically one of a series of rows placed one above the other and successively receding or diminishing in size.
- One of a number of successively overlapping ruffles or flounces on a garment.
- A level or grade within the hierarchy of an organization or system.
Be warned: Tier Debating can lead to feeling like this guy looks. Or British. Same difference.
But before I can do that, it’s important that I submit to you my own working definition of character tiers. Here at Hate Speech Theoryfighter University (HSTFU for short), a character’s overall tier rank reflects its total potential, based on individual match-ups, when played at the highest possible level. In other words, when player skill is normalized and therefore factored out of the equation, which characters are simply most effective? Note that for our purposes ease-of-use has no place in tier discussion. This is because the easiest characters to play and are not always necessarily the most dangerous in high-level play, for one. Secondly, ease-of-use is subjective. What’s difficult for one player might be trivial to another. There is simply no reasonable way to account for these discrepancies.
Tier Myth One: Tiers Don’t Exist
Some version of this venerable myth gets trotted out every time an excellent player does well with a character not thought to be “top.” It’s patently ridiculous. Consider that tiers, for our purposes, reflect a character’s potential, not a player’s. The sheer diversity found in the casts of any fighting game made after Karate Champ dictates that some characters will have more favorable match-ups than others, and that is the very essence of what tiers should indicate.
Claiming that tiers don’t exist because Rock has a chance of winning against Amy, no matter how small, is akin to arguing that because I could theoretically walk from my apartment in the San Francisco bay area all the way to NEC instead of taking a plane, there’s no such thing as speed. I’d end up at the same destination, so what’s the difference, right?
Everyone knows Red was broken in Karate champ anyways.
Tier Myth Two: Tiers Are Destiny
One-hundred eighty degrees away from our first tier myth we find this one: “OMG TOP TIER = AUTO-WIN.” It’s an assertion that is entirely too broad. First, upsets will always be part of life in the tournament scene. Second, and more importantly, just because a character is good does not mean that it will do all of the heavy lifting. Top-tier characters tend to reward good decision-making on the part of the player far more generously than do low-tiers, but nevertheless that human element will always be a factor in how matches play out. Tiers are guidelines; they will help us make informed choices about the characters into which we invest our time, but there are never any guarantees.
Tier Myth Three: Tournament Results = Tiers
As stated earlier, a proper tier list should eliminate the human element as much as possible in order to provide any semblance of consistency. Given that reality, lending too much credence to tournament results when considering tier lists is incredibly counterproductive. Yes, there will be strong correlation between top characters and average tournament placing, but there will always be players who make certain characters seem far better—or, in some instances, far worse—than in fact they are. When in doubt, think logically and do the math, putting aside anecdotal evidence.
...and then sometimes tournament results and tiers do align
Tier Myth Four: Top Tiers Require No Skill/Low Tier Takes Balls
This one causes me physical pain. First, nowhere will you find a white-bearded man holding aloft a stone tablet with an inscription proclaiming all good characters to be brainless. Yes, some of them are. Many are, in certain games. Still, the relationship isn’t causal. Some high tier characters require a lot of thinking and engagement; they’re just high-tier because of how generously they reward such actions. Conversely, there is nothing particularly brave about playing a terrible character. If you only enjoy playing a bad character (or have serious character loyalty from game to game), that’s absolutely fine, but it is no badge of honor. In fact, in many cases the whole low-tier hero thing is a form of insipid, backhanded cowardice.
Picking a terrible character, giving oneself no shot at victory, and subsequently proclaiming some sort of moral victory is the behavior of a person who ultimately knows that he can’t hang with the big boys. Don’t be that person. Play the characters you love, but leave circuitous notions of honor out of it.
So, What’s the Point?
I’ve posed a fairly strict theory on the way to think about tiers, alongside which I’ve talked a lot about what tiers are not and should not do. What remains is a theoretical model fairly limited in scope, but not at all useless. Proper tier lists, once they’re a bit settled, actually provide us with valuable information about how and where to invest our practice resources.
First, tiers give a general idea of return on investment at the level of character selection. Let’s say, hypothetically, the time and effort necessary to become the best Rock player in the world is identical to the time and effort necessary to become the tenth-best Amy player. Oh, and it just so happens that you have exactly that amount of time and effort at your disposal. A review of the tiers and the match-ups tells us that your time is probably far better spent in becoming the tenth-best Amy, all other things being equal.
Even once you’ve chosen a character, reviewing a tier list for insight into which match-ups are most difficult for that character, regardless of its tier, can help you decide which match-ups to study most in-depth when budgeting your limited practice time.
Besides, we all know this is the only tier list that matters anyways.
Homework:
You know the drill. Before you rip me too viciously, however, note that Theoryfighter University will be back very soon with explication and defense of some of the more assailable points from above, particularly with regard to the meat and potatoes of how to sort out a tier list. Consider the gauntlet thrown.
