1.03 Tier List Discussion (aka Argument)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cirex said:
Shura, you know what \"early\" means? Or you decided to throw the word \"retarded\" without even reading the thread title?
Click to expand...

....no....

Shura: i can say that you're posting chart is confusing me. (not the actual chart...but you're example that you gave)

Could you explain it to me please? thx...oh and don't mind Cirex, at least with my negativity post that i gave....i was more sensible about it and not calling people retarded. Besides, you're not as good as Simple Jack :) there can only be one simple jack....
 
Chickenwing said:
....no....

Shura: i can say that you're posting chart is confusing me. (not the actual chart...but you're example that you gave)

Could you explain it to me please? thx...oh and don't mind Cirex, at least with my negativity post that i gave....i was more sensible about it and not calling people retarded. Besides, you're not as good as Simple Jack :) there can only be one simple jack....
Click to expand...


pls stop arguing about the 'retarded' word usage..i've edited my first post so it should be ok..


btw my example is about how a tier list works

first of all the tier list itself comes from the matchup chart
those matchups posted previously were only random examples..

usually a matchup result is estabilished in a range of 1-10

when i say: cervantes vs algol is 6 - 4, it mean that on a 10 value scale, cervantes win 6 times over algol
another example could be: cervantes has a victory percentage of 60% over algol

a tie is 5 -5, that is the case of a balanced match

this is really common in fighting games..
japanese call it 'ダイヤグラム' (traslated as 'diagram', you need asian character on your pc)
google may lead you to a lot of matchup charts

those numbers btw come from some in deep analysis involving a lot of factors..quickly i can mention damage, mixup amount/effectiveness, frame advantage/disadvantage, learning curve and so on
you have to match all of them then draw conclusions

keep in mind a thing
these numbers, charts and so on are only theory fighting..something that can be messed up by player skill
that's why from time to time you can see strong players owning with low tiers

after the matchup chart, adding those numbers for each character give another chart
this one show who is the highest or the lowest tier and judging by their distance you can choose how many rank you need (those letters like A - B - S)


this is a faq i made for another game (king of fighters 2002) there's a lot of this theory in it..give it a shot
 
You put Nightmare 2 tiers below Siegfried. Nightmare is far better than Siegfried, trust me, I played only Siegfried and now I'm learning Nightmare because of it. It'll take months, but soon you'll realize how broken Nightmare is. Just because Siegfried's moves translated better to this style doesn't mean that Nightmare's buffs don't outweigh the "easier transition to SC4" by playing Siefried. True, I can't even play a tournament with Nightmare as of yet because I have no clue how to play his butt. My impression, however, and the reason I'm going through these months of retraining a new character, is that Nightmare is far, far stronger than Siegfried. Especially in key matchups like Soph/Cass/Cervy.
 
the only nightmare worth playing is sc2 nightmare. : )

this sc3/sc4 sieg/nm nonsense has taken a good character and spread his best moves between the two. that makes me cry. neither one is really high tier in this game, but i'd definitely give sieg the edge.
 
Matchups are only one part of a tier list. Just going by matchups alone some characters who have the most tools to compete, but have the most bad matchups will be considered garbage.

Also, looking at all the characters it's fairly common for each of them to have a character matchup that's an auto-lose for them. I think this diagram will be a valid tool if we get valid data, but I think it's just one piece of the pie.

Oh, and if you think that the JPN only use matchups for their tier list, then answer me why they did this in an old Tekken 5 DR tier list...

From an old JPN Tekken 5 DR tier list...
RANK S+
1) Heihachi
GOOD: Julia, Kazuya
BAD: Devil Jin, Ganryu

2) Devil Jin
GOOD: Kazuya, Steve
BAD: Jack-5, Ganryu
Click to expand...
How can that be? Heihachi is higher than Devil Jin, yet Devil Jin is a bad matchup for Heihachi.
 
Tools can help a char more in one matchup then another. That's why counter-characters exist, like Dhalsim counter-charring Sagat in SF2.
 
pixel09 said:
Also, looking at all the characters it's fairly common for each of them to have a character matchup that's an auto-lose for them. I think this diagram will be a valid tool if we get valid data, but I think it's just one piece of the pie.

Oh, and if you think that the JPN only use matchups for their tier list, then answer me why they did this in an old Tekken 5 DR tier list...


How can that be? Heihachi is higher than Devil Jin, yet Devil Jin is a bad matchup for Heihachi.
Click to expand...


a tier list say that the highest characters have the highest win/loss rate
not that they completely destroy everyone below them

that's the most common error dealing with tiers..a brief explanation from that guide of mine:

When it comes to tiers every discussion can turn into a flame, I think this is the most delicate discussion concerning fighting games.
King of fighters is not an exception. Since no game is perfectly balanced, tiers exists.
Tiering is not an empirical concept, it comes from analysis that tell how much balanced is a match between two characters.
The final result is a scheme like:

name A--B--C--D--total
A----X--2--5--6---13
B----8--X--3--4---15
C----5--7--X--4---16
D----4--6--6--X---16

This tell the outcome for each possible match.
Those numbers tell in a range of 10 how much a match is in favor or not to a character, 5 is a tie.
Statistically those numbers can be considered as a percentage so a tie is a 50% chance to win for both.

We have: A lose to B 2-8, tie with C and win over D with 6-4, B own 8-2 A while lose 7-3 to C and 6-4 to D, C tie A and win over C with 7-3 and lose 6-4 to D, D lose 4-6 to A and win 6-4 to both B and C. Their total is 13 for A, 15 for B and 16 C and D.

When two or more characters have the same placement, to decide who’s higher it’s a good thing to consider their direct matchup. The tier list here is D and C with the same rank, B, A.

Usually tier list’s ranks are indicated with letters (A,B,C, etc) depending on how many different ranks there are. Sometime, when there is a character with a lot of advantage, you can see S rank that is the highest possible to achieve.
Tier lists also tell how is the average balance, if a game is broken or not, if you see large variety of usable characters or few ranks that game is clearly well balanced, a little distance between the highest rank and the bottom one mean that you can be competitive with everyone.
Also beware to don’t get caught in some common mistakes, tier lists are direct consequences of matchup charts.
Tier lists don’t tell that the highest tier win over the rest but his overall placement is the top, meaning that his winning rate is the highest. As you can see in the example above a top tier can lose a match with the bottom one but overall still lead the game. It also happen that B win over A that win over D but D win to B. This is the meaning of true game balance and tiering.
Obviously the more characters you have the more difficult is to balance the game. Kof2002 have 43 playable but no one is really trash beside few, it’s overall balance is really good thanks also to the 3 on 3 battle system that allow your team composition to cover more possible matchups.
As last note remember that matchup charts can be constantly upgraded, while they can’t be messed up after a while some minor adjustments can occur. It depend a lot on how many players that game have and so how fluent is its scene. The more the game is played the more strategies will be uncovered the more the matchup chart can suffer changes.
This may go against what said before but keep in mind that no analysis is done to a not played game, people play, if they like they analyze and go in deep, after some time things become almost definitive.
Click to expand...

this deserve another quote

Matchups are only one part of a tier list. Just going by matchups alone some characters who have the most tools to compete, but have the most bad matchups will be considered garbage.
Click to expand...

having more tools than another character don't mean that he should be high rated

you can have 100 setups but none of them is practical
and your opponent have a scrubby easy landing easy damage move

the learning curve factor is determinant here because the first one need a lot of hard work while the second one is easier to use and so to be effective with

then remember the most important rule

tier lists are only THEORY player skills and mind can go over all of this
 
warble said:
Nightmare is far better than Siegfried, trust me...

...I have no clue how to play his butt.
Click to expand...

Can you explain why we should trust you that NM is better than Sig when you don't know how to play him?

Specific examples of why you think some of his match ups are better would be preferable to broad generalizations and pleas for trust in your vague judgment.
 
shura30 said:
sc4 matchup spreadsheet
Click to expand...

Just FYI, you're missing Talim in the vertical axis. Otherwise excellent work... now we just need to figure out these matchups. Somehow I think there's going to be a lot of 5-5 and 6-4 stuff... I'd be shocked if anyone had as unbalanced a matchup as, for instance, Yoshi and Yunsung did in SC2.
 
arstal said:
I still disagree on Mina being that low. She has positives.

- great CF game, and more versatile then Yun's
- great range and keep out

I can't see her moving above mid at all though.
Click to expand...


I agree. Mina has a killer CF game and effective ways to implement it to a degree. It's too bad that the bullshit tip system holds her back.


Some minor revisions:

Top Tier-Cassandra, Yoshimitsu, Mitsurugi, Ivy

Upper Mid-Lizardman, Algol, Amy, Voldo, Cervantes, Setsuka, Kilik, Astaroth

Mid-Raphael, Siegfried, Hilde, Sophitia, Zasalamel, Tira, Xianghua, Taki, Mina, Nightmare

Lower Mid-Talim, Yunsung, Maxi

Low Tier-Starkiller, Rock


Astaroth may have lost some power in the blockstun dept, but his damage potential is still very high, still among the best in RO, IMO the best wakeup mixups in the game and a extremely solid throw game and ring control. If he retained the blockstun and old bullrush properties, he would be top tier again like AE.

I'm amazed there isn't much Kilik talk. Kilik is extremely solid in this game and he's getting lost in all this Alexandra talk.

Less Alexandras, more Kilik.

And I keep looking and looking and Rock doesn't look good in the low tier section. He has some decent damage, above average CF game and the best throw game after Astaroth. He also has some tricks and nice frames on wakeup setups. Yes, the damage scaling, and messed up properties on moves hold him back but I feel he deserves better respect than Starkiller and Maxi.

Starkiller is also fucked up like Rock in the move properties but he also has the major handicap in the Force Meter as most of his best stuff is dependent on it. Without Force Meter, his mixup game is 0. He doesn't excel in any area, not CF, not mixup (without FM) , post-GI. Starkiller is just lacking.

Maxi is either equal or more unsafe than Rock on his moves, which is a shame. And his mixup game isn't as good as SC3.

The more I think about it, the less low tier Rock looks.
 
Your appraisal of Sophitia is either skewed by your hatred for her, or you simply have a lack of good Sophie players because putting her in the same group as Zas,Tira and Nightmare makes my head hurt.

Other than that, I guess I can see where your are coming from. But I think you also seriously underestimate Taki and X.

To each their own I suppose.
 
Yeah Angrel-San, I would agree with ChaCha. You must not have played many good Sophie's yet. And if you have, please explain what exactly she is lacking in order to be so low.
 
I almost wish people thought Sophie was mid-low tier,, that way when I win with her, I wouldn't feel as bad :)

..But it's ok, I get to feel that way playing X now. Why people think she's not great, I dunno.
 
Ha ha I don't feel bad because I remember the 245245243523 people who played X back in SC2/3. It's almost like karma.
 
Ravariel said:
Just FYI, you're missing Talim in the vertical axis. Otherwise excellent work... now we just need to figure out these matchups. Somehow I think there's going to be a lot of 5-5 and 6-4 stuff... I'd be shocked if anyone had as unbalanced a matchup as, for instance, Yoshi and Yunsung did in SC2.
Click to expand...

dammit..ok i'll fix it in a blink

by the way we should start from somewhere..let's pick a character starting the analysis

i'm not really into this since my sc4 experience is little..now it's your time guys

should we switch to another less messed up thread?

fixed

sc4 matchup spreadsheet
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back