I had asked in the Capcom Unity forums but it still baffles me, how reliable are those teir lists that fans keep posting? I had seen videos of supposedly low tier characters beat high tier ones in some videos as well as supposedly disadvantaged characters fare against characters such as Ryu. I kind of question the validity of those tier lists even Super Street Fighter II had its tier lists changed for two decades but there are some “constants” that exist within the games that have tier lists. Theory fighting can be fun but there is a difference between a theory and execution in that theory fighting doesn’t really take into take account the skill of those players or other human factors. We humans are not robots, we can adapt and come with newer more efficient ways to do things and the metagame is proof of that. <br><br>With that said, it is not as though we should take those tier for gospel but how reliable are tiers?<br>
About 70% true for me
It depends on the 1) the game and 2) how long said game has been around (e.g. Super Turbo). The longer a game has been out, the more reliable the tier list since if a game is a decade old most things worth finding out has already been found out. Yeah humans aren’t robots – although I wonder about most people – but what doesn’t change is the characters in the game, their moves and properties doesn’t change, and although a person may not be limited in their potential the character they control is. (But with more modern games following the trend of patching and updating the game this isn’t so much the case anymore, still if a game is left unchanged by developers then what I described applies.)<br>
about as reliable as the drunk guy at a bar telling you who the best teams in the NBA are. its really just opinion, and contrary to popular belief, the matchup numbers are essentially pulled out of thin air as opposed to being some kind of measurement. also tier lists assume all other elements are equal (overall skill of players, knowledge of matchups, etc.) which is NEVER the case<div><br></div><div>also worth nothing that tier lists assume the highest level of play, so they are even less relevant for people who aren’t placing top4/8 in majors.</div>
How reliable is someone’s opinion on a subject? Depends on how big of an expert he is regarding that subject.<br><br>Did you really need a thread for this?<br>
Usually the top and bottom ones is pretty accurate, you have to be a troll or an idiot to not see that Zero is blatantly top tier in UMvC3 and that Hsien Ko is a useless piece of crap. The ones in the middle however is almost never accurate, especially when chances are most people who make these tier lists know nothing about those characters. <br><br>Either way it’s pretty important to acknowledge that tiers exist for all fighting games and that the disadvantage you put yourself in by using a low tier character is real. Just because you can beat high tier characters with low tier ones doesn’t make your low tier characters better or mean that you aren’t going to start crying when you have to face someone with a skill level above you that’s using much higher tier characters and that know the matchup well.<br>
For a game like UMVC3 it’s hard to decide, since the tier of a character can be different, if you give them the best possible assists. <br>In MK9 it’s much easier and I feel like that the most actual tier list there is the best tier list out there. <br><br>To avoid the tier list crap, just play Virtua Fighter! <br>
Tiers are (supposedly) based on ten games played between two theoretical players who play perfectly, and never make any errors. <div><br></div><div>So, not very.</div>
I guess it all comes to skill besides very few players have such perfection.<br>
I see a lot of problems with tier lists:<br>1. They need time to really point out where the characters will stand in the end, i mean those tier standings can easily change even after a long time(T.Hawk in ST)(Urien/Yun in SF:3 wasn´t always top tier.)<br>2. They are very subjective, because it is very hard to determine match up numbers against characters, who are appearing very rare at high level, but still they find somehow a way to give match up numbers.<br>3. The explanation of those numbers is often very irrational.<br>4. Some people think that picking a “top tier” will lead them to victory, honestly in the end skill matters more than character.(Then they crack up)<br>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1IXpvNOu-s<br>5. Match up numbers assume equal skill(how this is possible, btw?) match up knowledge and also offline gaming, however this is all very unrealistic.<br>6.Tournaments are won by the best players, the characters give them the options to win, but the player is the one, who has to win in the end.<br>
As is posted on your thread in Unity. Tiers are mostly about probability of winning/losing. A high tier character should technically have a higher probability of winning than a low tier one. Off course, to get into specific match ups, you’re going to have to look into the match up chart. Each characters matchups are rated on a 10 point/match win:loss ratio scale with 5:5 being considered even. The more favorable (6:4 or better) matchups a character has, the higher tier they are ranked. Off course, just because a character is high tier doesn’t mean they can’t have a bad matchup against a low tier character.
If it’s a Japanese tierlist, it’s accurate. That said, I prefer matchup charts over tierlists, as there can always be top tier characters that have disadvantages against some specific characters that might be seen as low tier.<br>
Super Turbo’s nearly 20 years old at this point.<br>O.Hawk went from low tier to top tier in just the last few years. <br>That should give you an accurate idea how much you can rely on tiers, especially in the long run.<br><br>More examples?<br><br>Makoto entered 3S’ S-tier after being so long-dominated by Yun/Chun/Ken - and in fact, she’s probably better than Ken, who I’ve heard dropped into A-tier. I’ve heard of Akuma being S-tier and Oro being A-tier in recent years.<br><br>CvS2 in the last few years has had SNK characters entering the A-tier. <br><br>Marvel 2 actually has a viable middle-tier at this point. Even though your “majors” are still dominated by that Sentinel, it’s no longer unusual to see a Thanos or Colossus up in there (though it could be because of lack of competition, but I doubt it’s just that) That fucking Ruby Heart / Omega Red nonsense is ridiculous.<br><br>idk man… Tiers evolve. They’re rarely ever set in stone. Look at tiers being reliable in the moment, but don’t expect it to last more than a year. If it does, then more power to you, you have that much more time invested in a good character. I feel sorry for those Rufus players…<br>
<blockquote class=“Quote”>
<div class=“QuoteAuthor”><a href="/profile/84682/SirMixahLot">SirMixahLot</a> said:</div>
<div class=“QuoteText”>Super Turbo’s nearly 20 years old at this point.<br>O.Hawk went from low tier to top tier in just the last few years. <br>That should give you an accurate idea how much you can rely on tiers, especially in the long run.<br><br>More examples?<br><br>Makoto entered 3S’ S-tier after being so long-dominated by Yun/Chun/Ken - and in fact, she’s probably better than Ken, who I’ve heard dropped into A-tier. I’ve heard of Akuma being S-tier and Oro being A-tier in recent years.<br><br>CvS2 in the last few years has had SNK characters entering the A-tier. <br><br>Marvel 2 actually has a viable middle-tier at this point. Even though your “majors” are still dominated by that Sentinel, it’s no longer unusual to see a Thanos or Colossus up in there (though it could be because of lack of competition, but I doubt it’s just that) That fucking Ruby Heart / Omega Red nonsense is ridiculous.<br><br>idk man… Tiers evolve. They’re rarely ever set in stone. Look at tiers being reliable in the moment, but don’t expect it to last more than a year. If it does, then more power to you, you have that much more time invested in a good character. I feel sorry for those Rufus players…<br></div>
</blockquote>
The real key is to figuring out the stuff that suddenly moves characters up or down the list. Makoto’s st.hp xx SA2 tech plus the damage she can get out of it (100% in the hands of a skilled player) moved her right up to top 3 in 3rd Strike. Oro definitely has “something” up his sleeve (aside from his other arm), and you gotta give props to Kuroda for running him at SBO. That said, there are some characters that you can clearly see as easily being top tier because they are “fundamentally good” by design. These are characters that usually control alot of space and can deal lots of damage while doing so. For example I don’t see 3rd Strike Chun ever going down, her standing fierces (neutral and back) are just too good in a game with a priority system on its normals, this means that she can easily control the match until she has meter wherein she can output shit tons of damage with SA2. Same thing with Cable in MvC2, great space control via guns and grenades, massive damage with meter thanks to AHVB.<div><br></div>
<blockquote class=“Quote”>
<div class=“QuoteAuthor”><a href="/profile/60824/GAP">GAP</a> said:</div>
<div class=“QuoteText”>I had asked in the Capcom Unity forums but it still baffles me, how reliable are those teir lists that fans keep posting? I had seen videos of supposedly low tier characters beat high tier ones in some videos as well as supposedly disadvantaged characters fare against characters such as Ryu. I kind of question the validity of those tier lists even Super Street Fighter II had its tier lists changed for two decades but there are some “constants” that exist within the games that have tier lists. Theory fighting can be fun but there is a difference between a theory and execution in that theory fighting doesn’t really take into take account the skill of those players or other human factors. We humans are not robots, we can adapt and come with newer more efficient ways to do things and the metagame is proof of that. <br><br>With that said, it is not as though we should take those tier for gospel but how reliable are tiers?<br></div>
</blockquote>
Tiers are nothing more than personal opinions. So you gotta ask yourself, how reliable is your average person’s opinions?<br><br>It depends on the person. Any idiot can spout out a tier list, but it doesn’t make it reliable. On the flip side, somebody who spends 6+ hours a day playing the game at a competitive level probably has a pretty good idea of how the meta game looks and how certain characters stack up against one another. That being said, usually reliable tier lists are conducted by gathering a survey of top players and averaging out their opinions until you get a good overview of character strength versus another character. <br><br>You must also consider that tier lists are usually aimed at competent players operating at high-levels of play. Your average player doesn’t fit this description, so that tends to screw tier listing opinions even further. Yet another factor to think of, is that tier lists operate on the principle that you have 2 players of the EXACT same skill level playing their characters in a FT10 set. There is no such thing as 2 players of the exact same skill level. Players might be close in skill level but they’ll likely have their strengths and weaknesses in different parts of their game play. All these variables add in too much uncertainty to make tier lists 100% accurate.<br><br>tl:dr: Take tier lists with a grain of salt. Keep them in mind as a general guideline to the ever-changing meta game, but don’t rely on it solely to determine to pick your character or even decide how matchups go. The meta-game can change on month-to-month basis, even for old games such as ST.