Tier Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cosmic_Castaway said:
What kind of tier lists have you been making/reading?
Click to expand...

Could you provide some example lists that suggest the opposite?

I guess I'm looking for player independent non-tournament generated pure theory-crafted tier listings created only by forum discussions. That seems to be what the majority opinion of a tier list is for the last 3 pages. :\
 
Cosmic_Castaway said:
What kind of tier lists have you been making/reading?
Click to expand...
Like I said, tournament related tier lists. Check a couple of high-tier tournaments, check the results, see how different characters do. Based on those observations you can create a tierlist. Based on "potential" shenigans...nah, rather not.
Like I said, if we did that in T6 Bryan Fury would always have been #1 by far, which clearly wasnt the case looking at tourmanet results etc.
 
Supa said:
Could you provide some example lists that suggest the opposite?

I guess I'm looking for player independent non-tournament generated pure theory-crafted tier listings created only by forum discussions. That seems to be what the majority opinion of a tier list is for the last 3 pages. :\
Click to expand...
Proper tier lists are a fusion of both. The best examples of this currently are Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3's and Tekken 6's tier list.

However, all tier lists should be player independent. Someone being GDLK with a character does not make that character GDLK.
windirein said:
Like I said, tournament related tier lists. Check a couple of high-tier tournaments, check the results, see how different characters do. Based on those observations you can create a tierlist. Based on "potential" shenigans...nah, rather not.
Like I said, if we did that in T6 Bryan Fury would always have been #1 by far, which clearly wasnt the case looking at tourmanet results etc.
Click to expand...
See above.
 
Cosmic_Castaway said:
However, all tier lists should be player independent. Someone being GDLK with a character does not make that character GDLK.

See above.
Click to expand...

I agree to an extend, it shouldn't be directly linked to players playing the game, but should and have to take player's limitation into consideration. Like you can't consider a tier list where everyone can JG everything on reaction.
 
Cosmic_Castaway said:
However, all tier lists should be player independent. Someone being GDLK with a character does not make that character GDLK.
Click to expand...

Is this what people are misunderstanding? Granted, a single player with amazing execution doesn't all the sudden make insta-S tier. Similarly, neither does a single character with amazing paper potential.

Confidence ratings from tournament players certainly frame expectations with, "I am aware this character could punish me/out range/etc me" in expectation of what could be possible. Match-up averages again make this even more realistic by removing the bad match-up factor. Tournament players are expected to have studied and be able to recognize those match-up factors and play at a level beyond the average person with peers at similar skill levels.
 
Hes just unfinished. Its like his skillset isnt complete. His fly doesnt make any sense since it only has one "option" out of it and all his good moves have super low range which implies that hes supposed to fight close up. But his frame data is so poor that everyone else whos made for melee easily owns him at his own range.
 
At least jade was brazilian.. black.. some kind of asian? and worked that stripper pole like a single mom trying to pay her way through night school.

all Aeon has going for him is that he is a big lizard with wings and dragon fire. how totally cliche.
 
Bushido said:
At least jade was brazilian.. black.. some kind of asian? and worked that stripper pole like a single mom trying to pay her way through night school.

all Aeon has going for him is that he is a big lizard with wings and dragon fire. how totally cliche.
Click to expand...
You just aren't into lizard fetish is all.
 
Supa said:
Could you provide some example lists that suggest the opposite?
Click to expand...

Ever play Tekken? T5: Dark Resurrection is a prime example of a game where S-tier characters (Mishimas) didn't win squat in America because they were too difficult to use. On paper, Mishimas were the best and few denied that, but there are very few American Mishimas so they didn't win many majors.
 
Yes, they were. Assign whatever letter you wish, S+, S, A+, whatever, the bottom line is they were 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, or 1st, 2nd, and 4th.

A more recent example is vanilla SF4. Few would argue that Sagat was #1, but you can't base it off tournament results because Sagat rarely ever won. There was a God's Garden tournament, SBO 2010 (which was 3v3 teams), and some stuff in Europe. But, SF4 Japanese Nationals, SF4 US Nationals, SBO 2009 (although that was 2v2), and every US major was won by a character other than Sagat.
 
No they werent. Just like what we do here, thats just a random tierlist. Its in no way "true". Asian players have a different playstyle and might think differently of high-executional characters. It still doesnt make it true in any way. As long as they dont pop up all the time in the top 8 of big tourneys its all bollox. And yeah, needless to say they didnt.
 
I don't at all think characters have to place high to be top tier. Tournament results are based on the performance of players and the character is only a small factor in the outcome of tournaments. You don't have to pick top tier to win, and just because you're winning doesn't mean you're playing a top tier character.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom