Super High-Level In Your Face TIERLIST!!!

I know I'm late 2 da partay but, seriously, I can't find any tierlist (das not a wurd lol) thread that I can post in and I never got to share my opinion. If possible, I want this to be a discussion because I want to talk about everyone's perspective and actually like to hear this stuff (so, if we can, no close, please). I mean, I know people get angry for whatever reason but that's just another spice of life, right?

I'd like it if, rather than posting you guyseses own that you criticize mine. Now, I understand that might not always be the case but I'd at least like for the topic to start off that way so that I can give a chance to give some reasoning. But, please, be direct in your criticism and questioning; it's much harder to answer the question, "Why is *X* here?" as opposed to answering, "Why is *X* here and not here?" or "Why is *X" here instead of *Y*?"

Well, without further delay, my own personal tierlist! =o

A:

Cervantes
Alpha Patroklos
Mitsurugi
Algol
Tira
Viola

A-: Pyrrha

B+: Patroklos
Natsu
Yoshimitsu

B: Nightmare
Siegfried
Pyrrha Omega
Hilde
Voldo
Ezio
Xiba
Astaroth
Ivy
Aeon
Maxi
Z.W.E.I.

C: Raphael
Leixia

D: Dampierre

I also want to make a spreadsheet to see how much what I think matches up with what I think (know what I mean)? So, if someone can help me understand...how to actually make a spreadsheet, it'd be much appreciated!

 

I was thinking more along the lines of how Cervantes 1A:B is an unreactable low stepkiller, that while weaker than JFT x2 punish makes up for the weakness in its versatility. I think comparing the moves based on a single attribute(damage) isn't the way to go since it's ignoring a ton of other things that also have great value and contribute to the overall usefulness of attacks. I think if we compare moves based on a single attribute there will always be a very clear winner, but if we look at all the attributes things start getting a little bit hazy.

Well he was talking about damage and I didn't want to post something that isn't about what he was posting.

So is safe to get back to my original statement that Alpha's JF are the best in this game?

I would think so. I dont really think anyone has comparable JFs. Natsu has a:6 and Omega has her stabs but Alpha has so many(which all have uses) that its safe to say that overall he has the best JFs. Not necessarily the best single JF though.

 

But a MU chart is not static either?

I want to add couple of fallacies that also still happen. I'll use me for an example. I can regularly play against Hawkeye (who is probably the best Natsu player in the world right now). Because of this, I've probably played Viola vs. Natsu at a much higher level much more than most players here. Despite the results of our matches (with me winning more), I think the match is in Natsu's favor; Hawkeye thinks that it's in Viola's favor yet I'm the only Viola player he loses to. My matchup chart would cite the match as 6-4 in Natsu's favor.

Now consider the fact that many people can regularly play with a player that plays whatever character and that many of them are much more apt than I to use their own results as justification for their beliefs. The fact of the matter is that EITHER player could be not playing to their best or the character's best but that player may consider him or herself a subject matter expert on that matchup and call the match based on their own results. Now, realize that there are any number of these people just waiting to give their opinion on the matter.

Going back and using me as an example again. Though I don't try to shove my opinion down people's throat (though I do try to get people to understand it), back when SC5 first came out, I (and many others) believed that Viola vs. Asta was basically not winnable. There were people like Dest and I believe Trace who said that match was in Viola's favor. Now, I believe that match could be 7-3 Viola's favor but, back at Raleigh, Bibulus, whom was doing commentary for MLG, said that is a very bad matchup was bad for Viola. How do you say who is right?

Using me in yet ANOTHER example. Back in SC4, I swore up and down that Kilik beat Setsuka. Though I still believe my knowledge back then was sound, I do think that I overestimated my own skill. Regardless, as I just said...my knowledge was sound, despite people like Docvizzo and that one French Setsuka player telling me I was wrong. Later, I went on to beat Something-Unique (who was probably the best Kilik player in the world at the time) at FSAK with Setsuka.

 

Siegfried JFs are not bad neither.
but well this is not a thread about frames

 

AGB x2; 2A BE, 8A+B B x4; JFT

Please spend 30-40 seconds looking in the aPat SA at the 1st few pages of the combo discussion thread.

 

AGB x2; 2A BE, 8A+B B x4; JFT

Not a combo, lol. Also agB is worthless.

 

Also agB is worthless.

Bitch please. aB is risky but still has uses.
1. Guard damage. If the opponents guard guage is yellow, get that shit ready to burst. Well I guess only use this if you aren't anywhere near a wall, edge, Viola, or aPat and you have 200+ health and they have lower health. lol
2. Anti-air. Grab and 1AA enough and they'll start jumping.
3. Wall combos. Best wall combo filler. Plus... watch dat meter gain.
4. Whiff punishers/JG punishs. Damage up the yin yang.

 

Woahhzz makes agB not ass.

 

agB is only truly useful in wall combos, after guard crushes, and for punishing massive whiffs. It's way too slow and short ranged to be useful anywhere else. Not to mention you get ANNIHILATED if it gets blocked (Which it almost always will) by every character, not just those that have good punishers. I might try using it after JGs, though.

 

This is basically my point, imo NO ONE is able to build a completely correct MU chart, so this is not how i would do it either. If i were in charge i would basically just let two SA's discuss about a certain MU and see what their consensus would be. I would do that with every MU in the game and collect all the data, which would result in a complete MU chart/Tier list.

It would be a lot of work but imho its the best way.

Something like that was done in SC4.

To this day, there is no consensus on the SC4 tierlist.

lol.

But a tierlist isn't meant to be static.

I would love to do that. Unfortunately not all SA's even have complete frame data, so i have no idea how well it would work. maybe if more stuff got done we could think about it

also in SC4 alot of the SA's just kind of died. i know the sieg SA was dead for almost a year before i picked it up. so long as we dont allow that to happen, the project would be viable at least sometime in the future.

but in order for us to even think about starting this, we need at least two things:

1. complete frame data(and some general data as well, such as whiffs, glitches, ect)
2. complete in depth matchup guides for each character.

only then can we actually look at the difficulties of the character matchups, and compare our results with other SA's results to achieve the most accurate placings possible on the matchup chart, which would in turn determine our tier list.

this would be a hell of alot of work, and while id be willing to participate, im not sure if everybody would be up for it anyways.

then again as you said this isnt a place for that kind of thing, so to close:

Siegfried = MANLY TIER
all other characters = SISSY TIER

 

agB is only truly useful in wall combos, after guard crushes, and for punishing massive whiffs.

"This move has some uses"

Also agB is worthless.

Ok.

 

My bad didn't realize you could tech out of it. But if you must please continue to chop off my balls

 

"This move has some uses"

Ok.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole

Ok.

 

snip

Maybe i worded myself poorly but to me it sounded like you didnt like the idea of a MU Chart because it would be static. So when i said "but a MU Chart is not static either?" i wanted to say that i dont think that it is static at all.
Now it seems to me that you think so too, so which part about the MU chart did you not like?
I guess its that too many people would have input on the matter but i fear that is always the case when discussing anything tier related.

 

iMCF IS THE BEST JF

HOW MANY OF THOSE JFS ARE SAFE AND SPAMMABLE AND FRAME TRAP INTO THEMSELVES??

but this kind of discussion belongs in the casual forums :(

 

@LP i dont see what so hard with just doing a numeric MU chart and letting that be a factor. Also i plan on being at NEC

 

As long as you don't brand your own MU cchart as the "official" one there is no problem with the reception. People are free to create their own tier list. If you follow the competitive scene, you know which tier lists are more likely to be correct (in a situation where money is on the line) compared to the ones based on experience from online/casual/theory fighting.

 

why not just do a community MU chart and get everyone on the same page

 

why not just do a community MU chart and get everyone on the same page

Because you'll get all these forum goers putting their two cents in. Saying things like well I play character "A" and character "B" gives me the most problems so obviously that's a 10-0 matchup. It will be a cluster fuck. It always is.

 

it isnt much different from whats going on now. at least each character forum could designate representatives to talk about their MUs