• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Since everybody is struggling on the topic: The definition of a "tier"

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
There's been a lot of struggle over people saying there will/will not be tiers in SSBB. To clear this up:


Tiers exist in EVERY fighter game that recieves tourney play. This is a solemn, unavoidable rule.

Tiers are based off 100% data. This data is what characters tends to win tournaments. Why do you thin Fox, Falco, Shiek, Marth, etc. were high tier? Because those characters were the most often to win tournaments.

So even IF all the characters in the game are TOTALLY and COMPLETELY !00% BALANCED, there will STILL be tiers in Brawl. As long as there are tournaments with characters winning them, then there will be tiers.


Bottomline: Tiers: List of characters in order winning tournaments the most.

Yeah, I know, an annoyign subject, but there ARE people out there that don't know what the true definition of a tier is, and this should clear that up.

EDIT:

don't shoot the messenger. AZ in the melee tier thread:
The tier list is a measure of how characters stack up in tournament play according to the current metagame.

you can read it for yourself if you like
http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=1652493&postcount=8

i'm simply telling you what the people who actually make the tier list say it is. which would make sense, of course, because they made it.
There ya go, for those who didn't believe me.
 

FenrirIII

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
51
To add something here, I think people should realize that the tiers in Brawl will actually be based on a completely different set of rules. Rather than which characters are legitimately better, like Melee where Fox and Marth and Shiek were top-tier because they were the best of the best, the tiers in Brawl will probably be based upon which characters people like the most. So if nobody really likes to play as DK, for example, he'd be bottom-tier even though he is technically just as good as every other character and has just as much of a chance at winning any high-level tournament as anyone else.
I, for one, support this new form of tiers, because then when you play as a high-tiered character it's probably because you like them and a lot of other people like them too.
 

WFL

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
443
Location
New York
To add something here, I think people should realize that the tiers in Brawl will actually be based on a completely different set of rules. Rather than which characters are legitimately better, like Melee where Fox and Marth and Shiek were top-tier because they were the best of the best, the tiers in Brawl will probably be based upon which characters people like the most. So if nobody really likes to play as DK, for example, he'd be bottom-tier even though he is technically just as good as every other character and has just as much of a chance at winning any high-level tournament as anyone else.
I, for one, support this new form of tiers, because then when you play as a high-tiered character it's probably because you like them and a lot of other people like them too.
But the only reason someone will not play DK is because he's bad. If he was really good then he would be top tier.
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
But the only reason someone will not play DK is because he's bad. If he was really good then he would be top tier.
Yup. Metagames are always beased around the best characters, not the coolest/cutest/etc.

It may be like that at first, but when a certain character begins winning all the tourneys, they'll become that "it" character, just like in Melee.
 

-Linko-

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
498
Location
Spain
TIRES DUNT EXIST!

Oh, and people will find some AT that makes some chars. broken and others suck. Just like in Melee (Waveshine, anybody?)
 

FenrirIII

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
51
But the only reason someone will not play DK is because he's bad. If he was really good then he would be top tier.
Please. I don't want to play as DK or Diddy because I hate the Donkey Kong series. I don't want to play as Game & Watch because his movements and noises annoy me. I don't want to play as the Ice Climbers because I just can't get the hang of using them.
Does this make the characters bad? No, I just don't want to use them. I'm sure there are characters on even Melee's roster that people don't want to play as just because they dislike the character or the series or maybe because the moveset doesn't "click".
 

peachori

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
314
Location
UCLA/Orange County
lol @ waveshine being broken. its pretty **** good, but not any moreso than marth's ******** grab range imo.

there will be tiers, but who really gives a **** because its going to be 1+ years before we even come up with a list that means anything. until then everyone just chill out and play your favorite characters.
 

Hellbeing

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
274
Location
Houston, TX
Bottomline: Tiers: List of characters in order winning tournaments the most.
.
Or it could mean a majority of people played them. Tiers are actually based off move damage percentages and weight and speed and other facts such as that
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
Or it could mean a majority of people played them. Tiers are actually based off move damage percentages and weight and speed and other facts such as that

No, it's not. Those are huge factors on when a person picks a character, which influences tiers. They influence who people pick, which in turn affects the tiers.

So they are influences, but not the basis.
 

peachori

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
314
Location
UCLA/Orange County
Or it could mean a majority of people played them. Tiers are actually based off move damage percentages and weight and speed and other facts such as that
thats blatantly incorrect.
the tier list produced by the sbr is a ranking of how characters fare in tournament play in today's metagame.
 

Cra$hman

Smash Lord
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
1,535
Location
In the last place you look
your definition fails, since low tiers so rarely place high in tournaments and low placings are too skewed by unlucky brackets, there is not enough placings data to accurately rank low tiers so the only way is by how good experienced players think they are.
 

Yeroc

Theory Coder
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
3,273
Location
In a world of my own devising
I didnt know that tiers were determined by Tourney play.
They used to not be. uring the reign of Ken, Sheik Fox and Falco were the sole constituents until Marth and Peach joined them a couple months later. I don't know who came up with that ideology, but IMO they're mistaken.
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
your definition fails, since low tiers so rarely place high in tournaments and low placings are too skewed by unlucky brackets, there is not enough placings data to accurately rank low tiers so the only way is by how good experienced players think they are.
Uh, this isn't my definition I made up out of the blue. This is THE definition of a tier.

Low tiers are based on the same thing the high tiers are based on: What characters have been winning the tournament. The characters on the bottom just don't tourneys, but they are sitll organized based on how many tournaments they've been winning.
 

Generic Dude

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
58
Location
SOCAL
That sounds like a more convienent way to make a tier list. Now I don't know much about making a tier list but shouldn't it be based on solid data like their attacks, weight, size, techs, ect. It realy doesn't sound logical to base it off people who win tourneys, maybe for the first year or so, but not for a solid tier list.
 

peachori

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
314
Location
UCLA/Orange County
don't shoot the messenger. AZ in the melee tier thread:
The tier list is a measure of how characters stack up in tournament play according to the current metagame.

you can read it for yourself if you like
http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=1652493&postcount=8

i'm simply telling you what the people who actually make the tier list say it is. which would make sense, of course, because they made it.
 

element_of_fire

Smash Lord
Joined
Jan 15, 2003
Messages
1,228
Location
wisconsin
tiers aren't defined by tournament results... tournament results simply reflect tiers because those characters are better suited for tournament play
 

Generic Dude

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 2, 2008
Messages
58
Location
SOCAL
don't shoot the messenger. AZ in the melee tier thread:
The tier list is a measure of how characters stack up in tournament play according to the current metagame.

you can read it for yourself if you like
http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=1652493&postcount=8

i'm simply telling you what the people who actually make the tier list say it is. which would make sense, of course, because they made it.
Just what I was going for!
 

Yeroc

Theory Coder
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
3,273
Location
In a world of my own devising
In 2004 the SBRoomers were adamant that tiers were not based on tournament victories, because those wins were more influenced by player skill than what character they were playing. Tournament victories could help shed some light on a character's unexplored potential (read: Marth, ICs, even Bowser), but was not the sole or even primary or even tertiary factor in their consideration. At least they weren't when I was voting on them.
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
don't shoot the messenger. AZ in the melee tier thread:
The tier list is a measure of how characters stack up in tournament play according to the current metagame.

you can read it for yourself if you like
http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=1652493&postcount=8

i'm simply telling you what the people who actually make the tier list say it is. which would make sense, of course, because they made it.
Mmmmhmmmm. Thank you. I'm gonna put this in the first post, as well. I was searching for my sourc eon thsi info before I got torn to bits...:dizzy:
 

Zek

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 1, 2005
Messages
784
The problem with this method of calculating tiers is that it's self-perpetuating. Prospective tourney players want a better chance of winning, and they trust the tiers, so they're unlikely to pick somebody who ranks low. Thus, low tier characters don't get many chances to prove themselves, and the high tier characters win more and more tournaments and secure their position as a progressively larger portion of the community plays them. I'm certainly not saying Melee was totally balanced or even close to it, but the system is not perfect.

I'm curious about the specific statistics that are used to determine this. Do you just take the results of as many tourneys as you can find, count up all the match wins and list the characters in order, dividing them into tiers for each significant gap? I think this information should be public. Too many people have faith in the tiers as absolute fact rather than the rough estimate that they are.
 

-Linko-

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
498
Location
Spain
TIRES DUNT EXIST!

Oh, and people will find some AT that makes some chars. broken and others suck. Just like in Melee (Waveshine, anybody?)
 

Senshuu

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
447
Location
TN, USA
This thread serves to confuse me all over again.

I guess tiers will always be subjective. There're too many things to consider, factoring into a character's use and soforth.
 

Yeroc

Theory Coder
BRoomer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
3,273
Location
In a world of my own devising
The posts in that link seem to be indicating the methodology I was referring to. But I think they could refine (revert?) the way they describe it to others, because without actual knowledge of what goes on in the deciding process, it really looks like they do things the opposite way that the actually do.
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
The problem with this method of calculating tiers is that it's self-perpetuating. Prospective tourney players want a better chance of winning, and they trust the tiers, so they're unlikely to pick somebody who ranks low. Thus, low tier characters don't get many chances to prove themselves, and the high tier characters win more and more tournaments and secure their position as a progressively larger portion of the community plays them. I'm certainly not saying Melee was totally balanced or even close to it, but the system is not perfect.
I'm curious about the specific statistics that are used to determine this. Do you just take the results of as many tourneys as you can find, count up all the match wins and list the characters in order, dividing them into tiers for each significant gap? I think this information should be public. Too many people have faith in the tiers as absolute fact rather than the rough estimate that they are.
This isn't always necessarily true. Usually when a new, groundbreaking AT is discovered (ie. wavedashing, L-cancelling, etc.) the characters who get the most benefit from it (think how Fox and Falco came to dominate the tiers) tend to end up winning more tournaments, thus taking over the tiers. Now eventually just about everything is gonna get found out, like in Melee's case, so yeah, the tiers do eventually lead to a standstill.
 

peachori

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
314
Location
UCLA/Orange County
perhaps it would be wiser to say that the tier list is a ranking of characters based on how their potential is applied to the metagame. the metagame, of course, is largely determined by tournament play. so while this definition of the tier list is still a "result of tournament play" it avoids being construed as a direct tabulation of tournament results.

then again, i'm sure there are plenty of people who have thought about this way more than i have, so i'll let them do the talking.
 

ViolentKyo

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
15
Location
America
*sigh* Okay, to backup WuTangDude (who obviously knows what he's talking about) and to add something to the definition of Tiers, I will elaborate on the subject of Tiers.

WuTangDude was right about the Tiers being based on tournament-winning characters. That's because the best characters in ALL fighting games are the ones that either win, or end up in the finals of the tournaments. You'll have to realize that NO FIGHTING GAME IS PERFECTLY BALANCED. There are some characters that are better than others. I will explain two things about tiers:

1. Tiers rank the characters based not only on tournament-winnings, but in general how good they are.
The first thing I have to get out of the way is that Tiers are under the assumption that the people using the characters are of the EXACT same skill level. Let's use an example from the tournament player, Ken. Ken is good with Marth, but he is also equally good with Pikachu. He's usually won the tournaments with Marth.
Now let's say a doppleganger of Ken (or Kenganger, if you will) appeared and challenged Ken. This doppleganger had the exact same skill level as Ken and chose Pikachu. The real Ken chose Marth. The real Ken will almost always win against the Kenganger, because, simply put, Marth is a better character than Pikachu. The reason why I put almost always is because there might be a small amount of luck involved, especially in a close match. This is why so many things had to be stripped out of Melee for tournament play. The tournament organizers had to remove as much luck as they possibly could, for fair, even matches. This was so that tournament matches wouldn't be won by chance, as in what item you got or what stage gave Fox his advantage.

2. Tiers can determine the balance of the game.
This applies not only to Smash, but to other fighting games as well. By balance, I mean that the characters have an even (not perfectly even) playing ground and that the lower-tiered characters could stand some chance against the higher-tiered characters. Now the reason why Melee victors were mainly either Fox, Marth, Sheik or Falco was because Melee wasn't a balanced game. It was broken. The top-tiered characters were so strong and so powerful that anything lower-tiered didn't stand a chance. There are other games with tiers, in which the tiers proved how balanced or unbalanced the game was. Let's look at some other fighting games:

Street Fighter 3: Third Strike
Even though it had the Parrying system to bridge the gap between pros and amateurs, it was still highly unbalanced. The only characters that won tournaments were the Top-tiers: Ken, Chun-Li, Yun and Makoto. Although some notable bottom-tiers got somewhere in the tournaments (most notably Q), they were never in the finals because the characters simply weren't good enough.

Marvel vs Capcom 2
This game is even more unbalanced than SF3. With 56 characters and plenty of glitches and oversights on the designers' parts, Marvel vs Capcom has become a REALLY unbalanced fighting game, yet its still good enough for tournaments. The god-tiers are the tournament winners, along with some high-tiers. In this game, you choose teams of 3 as your fighting team. Winning means that 2 members of your team are gods and 1 is high-tier. For example, Cable, Sentinel and Captain Commando is a God/God/High team that can actually win tournaments. Anything lower than a High will not even get anywhere in MvC2 tourneys.

Street Fighter 2: Hyper Fighting
Ah, one of the most balanced fighting games of its time. 12 characters, each with their own special moves. The reason why this game was so balanced, even though there were tiers, was that each character had methods of defeating another person's moves. Some characters had anti-projectile moves. Some characters had anti-air moves. Some characters had fast go-across-the-screen moves to put them on the offensive. It wasn't PERFECTLY balanced, but because each character could stand some chance against eachother, the tournament winners were usually varied. Some low-tiers knocked high-tiers out of the competition, while some mid-tiers won tournaments.

That's all I'm writing for today. I have to go to school tomorrow.
 

usea

Smash Ace
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
773
There is a big difference between "how characters stack up in tournament play according to the current metagame" and making a list based on what characters have been winning tournaments.

That sounds like a more convienent way to make a tier list. Now I don't know much about making a tier list but shouldn't it be based on solid data like their attacks, weight, size, techs, ect. It realy doesn't sound logical to base it off people who win tourneys, maybe for the first year or so, but not for a solid tier list.
There are too many variables to just look at raw data to figure out which characters are better. If it was that easy, the developers would do that and be able to balance the games better and easier. The way character potential pans out in a fighting game is virtually impossible to figure out just from looking at the statistical data.
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
*sigh* Okay, to backup WuTangDude (who obviously knows what he's talking about) and to add something to the definition of Tiers, I will elaborate on the subject of Tiers.

WuTangDude was right about the Tiers being based on tournament-winning characters. That's because the best characters in ALL fighting games are the ones that either win, or end up in the finals of the tournaments. You'll have to realize that NO FIGHTING GAME IS PERFECTLY BALANCED. There are some characters that are better than others. I will explain two things about tiers:
Thanks. I'm not the world's smartest smasher, btu I wanted to clear that up because people won't admit it, but tiers, what they are, etc. can be really confusing. I know it took me a lil' bit to grasp what a tier is, and I was confused on it for a lil' while. I just wnated to help others out.
 

higgins

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
91
Location
Winnipeg
But the only reason someone will not play DK is because he's bad. If he was really good then he would be top tier.
most people choose fast players as they can get alot more hits on the opponent or a person with very good moves.
those are the main things people look in a character
 

MasterCheeze

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
352
Location
Fargo, ND
NNID
MasterCheeze
3DS FC
0688-5933-2030
Wait, so what if a tournament just had Bowser players? Would he be top-tier? :O
 

kellerdood32

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
32
To add something here, I think people should realize that the tiers in Brawl will actually be based on a completely different set of rules. Rather than which characters are legitimately better, like Melee where Fox and Marth and Shiek were top-tier because they were the best of the best, the tiers in Brawl will probably be based upon which characters people like the most. So if nobody really likes to play as DK, for example, he'd be bottom-tier even though he is technically just as good as every other character and has just as much of a chance at winning any high-level tournament as anyone else.
I, for one, support this new form of tiers, because then when you play as a high-tiered character it's probably because you like them and a lot of other people like them too.

i agree with u 1000% i was thinking the same thing
 

kellerdood32

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
32
tires dont exist only popular characters and the occasional 1 or 2 characters that suck, any character can win if you use strategy and if you practice with them. anyone who thinks they do exist is just THINKING to much about SSBB, its meant to be played
 

Dess

Smash Rookie
Joined
Apr 20, 2006
Messages
9
I must be a bit confused, but I always went on the idea of tier list are based on "How Easy Is It For A ****** To Win" idea. Like how with fox, all you need to do is Spam Up-Smash and you can easly kill the person. However with Ness, it would take the same guy time to understand his recovery and be good with it. Just my opinion on it though.
 

Eddy01741

Smash Cadet
Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Messages
55
IMO, tiers will come out, like a year from now. Once everybody finds out who can combo, who has this special ability, who has a cheap combo, who benefits from new ATs, then a tier list will eventually come out. That is, unless nintendo managed to make the game entirely perfect, with absolutely nothing to exploit.
 

WuTangDude

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
526
Location
Tucson, Arizona
tires dont exist only popular characters and the occasional 1 or 2 characters that suck, any character can win if you use strategy and if you practice with them. anyone who thinks they do exist is just THINKING to much about SSBB, its meant to be played


No. Tiers DO exist. You're just in denial.

I can already tell that you won't hear this out anyway, afterall, you wanted Waluigi in Brawl. :p
 
Top Bottom