The Official SBR-B Brawl Tier List v3.0

[Kinzer]

D: Pit, Ike, Sonic, Peach, Wolf, Luigi, Pokémon Trainer, Fox
E: Link, Zelda/Sheik, Ness, Yoshi, Bowser, Ganondorf, Lucas, Mario, Samus, Captain Falcon, Jigglypuff

If sonic is doing better than Fox, Wolf, and Luigi, why do people keep putting him under them?

And how did Mario end up above Sonic?

People forget that matchups 70-30 (and worse) exist for these characters and just think Sonic is garbage because he's all mindgames which aren't included in considering tier-lists.

As for Peach, let her be the captain of C-Tier or B-tier. I'd rather have her there instead of solo Sheik, considering that Peach might only have trouble with MK (and that is (somewhat) debatable.)

 

[Browny]

Because tournament placings aren't equivalent to a tier list. Personally, I am still a firm believer in matchup based tier lists.

matchup tier lists shall forever be pure fail for as long as the character boards here are to be believed. Everyone apparently goes near ever with high and top tiers, despite never having an impact in tourneys in almost 2 years. I wonder why >_>

 

[Turbo Ether]

matchup tier lists shall forever be pure fail for as long as the character boards here are to be believed. Everyone apparently goes near ever with high and top tiers, despite never having an impact in tourneys in almost 2 years. I wonder why >_>

Yeah, it's true that matchup discussion on these boards is in a state disarray. People are stubborn and overcomplicate the matchups.

I believe ratios should simply read 5/5, 6/4, 7/3, etc.

5/5: Even
6/4: Advantage
7/3: Counter

Simple and concise.

 

[Kewkky]

Yeah, it's true that matchup discussion on these boards is in a state disarray. People are stubborn and overcomplicate the matchups.

I believe ratios should simply read 5/5, 6/4, 7/3, etc.

5/5: Even
6/4: Advantage
7/3: Counter

Simple and concise.

Or, we could just stop with the 55/45, 65/35, 75//25 (etc) MUs, lower them a digit, and increase the numbers.

50/50 should be 5/5 (even)
55/45 should be 6/4 (slight advantage)
60/40 should be 7/3 (advantage)
65/35 should be 8/2 (counter)
70/30:80/20 should be 9/1 (hard counter)
90/10:100/0 should be 10/0 (impossible MU)

But hey, that's just me and my opinions. As we can see, (almost) all the boards just adore the ratios 65:35 < x < 35:65 (except the bottom tier boards), there SHOULD be something a bit odd with how people are using the numbers, dontcha think?

 

[Browny]

@ Turbo Ether

I believe thats the SBR way of dealing with the matter, and I agree its the best for the time being. The only problem remaining, is how do they come to those ratios. Im not going to sit by idly and accept an SBR matchup tier list without consulting the vast number of character mains who actually play the MU, but arent in the SBR >_>

 

[Turbo Ether]

Or, we could just stop with the 55/45, 65/35, 75//25 (etc) MUs, lower them a digit, and increase the numbers.

50/50 should be 5/5 (even)
55/45 should be 6/4 (slight advantage)
60/40 should be 7/3 (advantage)
65/35 should be 8/2 (counter)
70/30:80/20 should be 9/1 (hard counter)
90/10:100/0 should be 10/0 (impossible MU)

But hey, that's just me and my opinions. As we can see, (almost) all the boards just adore the ratios 65:35 < x < 35:65 (except the bottom tier boards), there SHOULD be something a bit odd with how people are using the numbers, dontcha think?

Well, yeah, I also believe that 55/45, 65/35, etc. ratios need to be done away with.

@ Turbo Ether

I believe thats the SBR way of dealing with the matter, and I agree its the best for the time being. The only problem remaining, is how do they come to those ratios. Im not going to sit by idly and accept an SBR matchup tier list without consulting the vast number of character mains who actually play the MU, but arent in the SBR >_>

Yup, the community needs to get the matchups figured out before a matchup based tier list will work. The problem is character bias skewing the matchup ratios.

 

[Col. Stauffenberg]

Or, we could just stop with the 55/45, 65/35, 75//25 (etc) MUs, lower them a digit, and increase the numbers.

50/50 should be 5/5 (even)
55/45 should be 6/4 (slight advantage)
60/40 should be 7/3 (advantage)
65/35 should be 8/2 (counter)
70/30:80/20 should be 9/1 (hard counter)
90/10:100/0 should be 10/0 (impossible MU)

But hey, that's just me and my opinions. As we can see, (almost) all the boards just adore the ratios 65:35 < x < 35:65 (except the bottom tier boards), there SHOULD be something a bit odd with how people are using the numbers, dontcha think?

This is largely how it really is.

For some reason people are uncomfortable with calling a slight disadvantage 40/60.

 

[HK Donut of the Blue Fire]

All the people i keep talkin to say match ups are irrelevant

 

[DMG]

Matchups are very relevant. Same with matchup spreads and Matchup/Stage combinations.

 

[mountain_tiger]

Surely having a 10-point system wouldn't be accurate enough? I mean, some people think that the current 5-point system isn't broad enough; on the Pikachu boards they have stuff like 57:43 and 48:52.

If the 5-point system isn't considered wide enough, then how would a 10-point system work?

All the people i keep talkin to say match ups are irrelevant

Those people are morons.

 

[DMG]

The 5 point system IMO is better than the 10 point for Brawl. The reason I say this is because I think you can accurately grade matchups with that kind of precision for Brawl, and because with a 10 point system really close matchups fall through the gap. Take any 55:45 matchup out there. Do you label it as even or as 6/4? Putting it as 5/5 wouldn't seem fair, and putting it as 6/4 wouldn't be good either.

Having a 5 point system also helps because of the variety of stages. Say that for two certain characters, the ratio between 6/4 and 5/5 depending on the stage (6/4 on BF, 5/5 on FD, 6/4 on Smashville, etc including CP stages). What would you label the matchup as? Putting it as 5/5 would seem unfair given that one character noticeable struggles a bit on a fair majority of the stages. Putting it as 6/4 would be unfair as well since it's obvious that the character does go 5/5 on a pretty good variety of stages.

So for that, you label it as 55:45. One character has a slight noticeable advantage, but the other character has a lot of places where he can go even.

 

[Dark.Pch]

As for Peach, let her be the captain of C-Tier or B-tier. I'd rather have her there instead of solo Sheik, considering that Peach might only have trouble with MK (and that is (somewhat) debatable.)

Peach has a hard time against Meta and Marth. Semi hard time with Lucario and TL.

Everyone else she goes even with or beats.

And I do't take the rankings seriously. Nor do they mean anything to me. They do not show character skills at all. Cause a Peach go go to a big tournament with lots of pros in it and not do so well, while characters that are not as good as Peach go to weaker tournies and place better or even win the tournies. People tend to for get this alot. The ranks for characters mean nothing to skill of the characters.

 

[Clai]

And I do't take the rankings seriously. Nor do they mean anything to me. They do not show character skills at all. Cause a Peach go go to a big tournament with lots of pros in it and not do so well, while characters that are not as good as Peach go to weaker tournies and place better or even win the tournies. People tend to for get this alot. The ranks for characters mean nothing to skill of the characters.

Characters don't have skills, as they are virtual beings programmed into a game. Characters have tools. Players have skills.

 

[Dark.Pch]

Characters don't have skills, as they are virtual beings programmed into a game. Characters have tools. Players have skills.

You are so right, I tend to forget this myself sometimes. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Characters don't have skills, as they are virtual beings programmed into a game. Characters have tools. Players have skills.

I see what youre getting at, but I would still consider the ability for falco to jump really high and sonic to run really fast as skills.

 

[Dark.Pch]

I see what youre getting at, but I would still consider the ability for falco to jump really high and sonic to run really fast as skills.

That's more of a character trait. Not skill.

 

[DMG]

I would consider those attributes/facets/unique aspects of the character, not necessarily skills. Referring to those things as skills somewhat implies that you can improve them or change them.

Edit. Dark.Pch said it pretty well.

You could also consider them like "Character Genetics".

 

[deepseadiva]

Character skills?

 

[da K.I.D.]

fair enough.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

They exist...

Outside of Smash Bros.

 

[phi1ny3]

 

[Turbo Ether]

The 5 point system IMO is better than the 10 point for Brawl. The reason I say this is because I think you can accurately grade matchups with that kind of precision for Brawl, and because with a 10 point system really close matchups fall through the gap. Take any 55:45 matchup out there. Do you label it as even or as 6/4? Putting it as 5/5 wouldn't seem fair, and putting it as 6/4 wouldn't be good either.

Having a 5 point system also helps because of the variety of stages. Say that for two certain characters, the ratio between 6/4 and 5/5 depending on the stage (6/4 on BF, 5/5 on FD, 6/4 on Smashville, etc including CP stages). What would you label the matchup as? Putting it as 5/5 would seem unfair given that one character noticeable struggles a bit on a fair majority of the stages. Putting it as 6/4 would be unfair as well since it's obvious that the character does go 5/5 on a pretty good variety of stages.

So for that, you label it as 55:45. One character has a slight noticeable advantage, but the other character has a lot of places where he can go even.

The stage argument is probably the best reason for a 5 point system to exist. Traditional fighting games communities can get away with the 10 point system more easily, because stages aren't taken into account in matchup discussions.

However, the problem with the 5 point system is that people will endlessly debate that a 55:45 matchup may actually be 50:50 or 6/4 instead. One reason why matchup discussions are in a state of disarray. That and character bias. With simplified matchup ratios, it becomes easier to finalize the ratios and move on, until a shift in the metagame occurs.

Take Snake vs MK. It's still being debated that either character may have a tiny advantage. It would be easier to just label the matchup 50/50 and call it a day.

 

[DMG]

Well it's still being debated on who wins/where they win. Recent results point towards MK having it around 55:45 or so, even though Inui will come in here and tell you that Snake is the best character in the game and that he beats MK 55:45.

That matchup unfortunately will "fluctuate" quite a bit between 55:45 either side and 50:50. In reality, it's one solid number, but people still haven't figured it out yet/it changes. In instances where the matchup legitimately sways like Snake/MK, it wouldn't really matter how precise you wanted to rate the matchup. It would still swing from 53:47 to 51:49 to 55:45, etc.

The big problem with trying to keep things simpler is that you become less precise/accurate. It would be clear that some 6/4's are harder than others, and than some 5/5's don't feel truly even or that some 7/3's aren't THAT bad. Like take Diddy vs Marth. 55:45 matchup, you classify it as 6:4. Then you get a matchup that is ranked 65:35 and is debated, and that gets classified as 6/4. It's clear that while the numbers are similar, that the matchups clearly differ in difficulty. Labeling them both as 6/4 would be a small injustice.

I think anything more precise than 5 points is ******** however. Being able to discern the difference between a 51:49 and a 53:47 matchup doesn't seem realistic, and that makes the community even more prone to the "undecided/still debating the matchup" issue.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Yes.

There is no point for such precise readings, especially w/ new ideas and minor changes in the metagame.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Or, we could just stop with the 55/45, 65/35, 75//25 (etc) MUs, lower them a digit, and increase the numbers.

50/50 should be 5/5 (even)
55/45 should be 6/4 (slight advantage)
60/40 should be 7/3 (advantage)
65/35 should be 8/2 (counter)
70/30:80/20 should be 9/1 (hard counter)
90/10:100/0 should be 10/0 (impossible MU)

But hey, that's just me and my opinions. As we can see, (almost) all the boards just adore the ratios 65:35 < x < 35:65 (except the bottom tier boards), there SHOULD be something a bit odd with how people are using the numbers, dontcha think?

Do we have to do what other fighting games do or can Smash be different?

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Well it's still being debated on who wins/where they win. Recent results point towards MK having it around 55:45 or so, even though Inui will come in here and tell you that Snake is the best character in the game and that he beats MK 55:45.

That matchup unfortunately will "fluctuate" quite a bit between 55:45 either side and 50:50. In reality, it's one solid number, but people still haven't figured it out yet/it changes. In instances where the matchup legitimately sways like Snake/MK, it wouldn't really matter how precise you wanted to rate the matchup. It would still swing from 53:47 to 51:49 to 55:45, etc.

The big problem with trying to keep things simpler is that you become less precise/accurate. It would be clear that some 6/4's are harder than others, and than some 5/5's don't feel truly even or that some 7/3's aren't THAT bad. Like take Diddy vs Marth. 55:45 matchup, you classify it as 6:4. Then you get a matchup that is ranked 65:35 and is debated, and that gets classified as 6/4. It's clear that while the numbers are similar, that the matchups clearly differ in difficulty. Labeling them both as 6/4 would be a small injustice.

I think anything more precise than 5 points is ******** however. Being able to discern the difference between a 51:49 and a 53:47 matchup doesn't seem realistic, and that makes the community even more prone to the "undecided/still debating the matchup" issue.

I thought diddy marth was even.

 

[Suspect]

Do we have to do what other fighting games do or can Smash be different?

Smash is already different, it's not a fighter

 

[Shaya]

Diddy/Marth is pretty close to even.

But Marth has this little "natural advantage" thing going for him.

hell, it may be 60:40 Marth's advantage. Diddy's have been getting supressed by Marth's a lot longer than vice versa.

Considering Diddy's best OoS option other than grab is minimum 6 frames, that's down throw banana (minimum 7 with glide toss; meaning whens a normal down thrown nana oos going to get a well spacing marth). That's more than enough time for Marth to abuse. Players like Neo thought that Diddy's banana throw was 3 frames oos. God ****.

 

[Red Arremer]

Smash is already different, it's not a fighter

Yea. Just like a car is not a vehicle, right?

Smash IS a fighter, it's just not a fighter in the traditional sense because it changed the basic rules, and emphasized the platforming aspect.

 

[Kitamerby]

Characters don't have skills, as they are virtual beings programmed into a game. Characters have tools. Players have skills.

A young man who emerged to rescue Hyrule from peril. He's the bearer of the Triforce of Courage who fights to keep Ganondorf from conquering the world. His green outfit is a constant throughout the series. He's a skilled swordsman, horseman, and archer. He's also proficient with bombs and boomerangs.


~ Link's Brawl Trophy.


GG Clai.

 

[Clai]

A young man who emerged to rescue Hyrule from peril. He's the bearer of the Triforce of Courage who fights to keep Ganondorf from conquering the world. His green outfit is a constant throughout the series. He's a skilled swordsman, horseman, and archer. He's also proficient with bombs and boomerangs.


~ Link's Brawl Trophy.


GG Clai.

lol. Way to take my quote out of context. That's quite clever.

And Smash is absolutely, undeniably a fighter. The small things that separate it from other fighters don't take away from the huge aspects of Brawl that are exactly like other fighters (cross-ups, shield-stabbing, turtling, footsies, etc)

 

[Turbo Ether]

Well, Smash is apparently enough of a fighter to be on the evo roster. Some people in other fighting game communities don't consider Smash a fighting game. If you disagree, feel free to make an account on their boards and debate the subject.

 

[CaliburChamp]

Newly updated 12/24/09

Tier 1 (Galaxy) God Tier.
Meta Knight 10.0
Snake 9.9

Tier 2 (Moon) Top Tier.
Diddy Kong 9.8
Wario 9.6
Falco 9.5
King Dedede 9.4
Marth 9.3
Ice Climbers 9.2
Pikachu 9.1

Tier 3 (Sky) High Tier.
Zero Suit Samus 8.9
Game & Watch 8.8
Olimar and Pikmin 8.7
Pit 8.5
R.O.B. 8.4
Toon Link 8.3
Lucario 8.2
Kirby 8.1

Tier 4 (Mountain) Middle Tier.
Donkey Kong 7.9
Squirtle 7.8 (Independant)
Peach 7.7
Fox 7.6
Luigi 7.5
Wolf 7.4
Zelda/Shiek 7.0 (Used as both)
Shiek 6.7
Ness 6.5
Lucas 6.4
Sonic 6.3
Yoshi 6.2
Pokemon Trainer 6.0 (Balanced. All 3 pokemon used equally.)

Tier 5 (Earth) Low Tier.
Mario 5.9
Charizard 5.8 (Independent.)
Bowser 5.7
Ike 5.6
Zelda 5.5
Samus 5.3
Ivysaur 5.2 (Independent.)
Jigglypuff 5.0

Tier 6 (Underground) Bottom Tier.
Captain Falcon 4.9
Link 4.7
Ganondorf 4.5
Popo/Nana 4.0

 

[da K.I.D.]

havent we been over this? all three pokemon used equally is really bad.

if you want to be accurate, you should say pokemon trainer used correctly, instead of equally.

and CC, what makes you put sonic below the three characters that he is above in the current sbr list? (shiek, lucas and ness) im curious.

 

[Morrigan]

A 10.0 character? Unbeatable?

 

[phi1ny3]

Fighter:

When the desire of the game is to give the opponent a big fist to the face.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Fighter:

When the desire of the game is to give the opponent a big fist to the face.

I do that in Chrono Trigger, is it a fighter?


*uses uzzi punch*

 

[infomon]

^^ no, you fail for keeping Robo in your party

lol

 

[Suspect]

Yea. Just like a car is not a vehicle, right?

lolwut

a van is a vehicle, does that make a van a car?

your logic has confused me.

 

[adumbrodeus]

^^ no, you fail for keeping Robo in your party

lol

PROMETHEUS!

Spoiler

Cause I like Chrono Cross, and it's a cooler name.

Anyway, lifeline ftw! First time I ever got the developer's room ending on first playthrough I abused that tech so hard.


Yea, so Robo + Marle + Chrono = god tier.