(Sorry, I come from a D&D background when evaluating options. D&D is SRSBSNS.)
If anything I think people are making things too simple
If anything I think people are making things too simple
Just go by overall value to the team. So how good their assist is, how good they’re on point, how well they DHC in and out, and if they can DHC glitch.
A matchup chart would be pretty much impossible for this game. One method that might be more feasible would be to come up with some different categories, like mobility, damage output, meter gain/usage, hyper combos, DHC synergy potential, assist/crossover counter versatility, etc. If we break it down like that, we could sort characters into tiers for each category and then weight the importance of each of those categories to come up with an overall ranking.
But a matchup chart leaves too much out. It disregards how different teams effect that matchups ( Character X loses to character Y… except when he’s using Z assist ). And it ignores the strength of assists, which is huge in determining a team (ex:CapCom in MvC2 )
No fucking shit. 
Nope. This is discussed and corrected in every tier discussion for every game, including earlier in this thread. Tournament results have nothing to do with tier lists. Top players will win with nearly any character they want and dedicate themselves to. Tourney results are also skewed by character popularity: if you have a top 8 with all players of roughly equal skill, but 4 of them play Character X, and the other 4 play 4 different characters, you are just much more likely to have Character X have a strong showing. And you just can’t say that this means Character X is the best character. That’s just not necessarily true.
Tier lists are just a theoretical ranking of how well characters do against other characters, i.e. a summary of a match-up chart. The problem is that, in Marvel 3, there are 38!/3!35! = 8,436 possible teams, each of those teams has access to 27 different combinations of assists, and each team can have its characters ordered in 6 different ways. And that makes for a pretty big match-up chart.
I’m working on a spreadsheet containing detailed ratings for each character on a SABCDF scale - I’ll post it on Google Docs and link it here when I’m done. I’m currently planning on including:
HP, average meterless combo damage, average combo damage w/ meter, chip damage potential, max damage (no XF), abare, mixups, zoning ability, anti- / counter-zoning ability, movement options, reversals, XF damage scaling (l1,l2 and l3), XF speed scaling (again, all levels), assists (alpha/ beta/ gamma separately), and an overall ranking.
^
GOOD SHIT.
General statement towards people who can’t seem to grasp this within their heads:
WTH, MVC2 TIERS WERE RATED BY VALUE ON TEAM. WHO WOULD BENEFIT THE MOST TEAMS THE MOST IF THEY WERE ON YOUR TEAM, THIS WOULD INCLUDE THEM BEING A GOOD/GREAT POINT CHARACTER AS WELL AS AN ASSIST CHARACTER, WHY IS EVERYONE TREATING THIS AS SF TIERS, IT’S NOT THE SAME SHIT.
Why not just grade each character’s traits then?
Come up with a list of things to grade them on like this for example:
Building Meter:
Using Meter:
Supers:
Assists:
DHC into:
DHC out of:
Effectiveness with assists:
Effectiveness alone:
Special Notes/Final Verdict:
Yeah, we’re doing that. We just need to figure out exactly what categories to use, and how important each one is.
i wouldnt even call myself a marvel player, but a matchup chart seems a little far fetched. like the other posters have said, there seems to be too many variables.
i think at this point figuring out what tools make good characters or team mates, and then ranking the characters based around those tools would be the easier way to go.
in dont think a matchup chart will be remotely possible until some solid teams start to develop
EDIT: beaten by like 8 posts. that’ll teach me to go hit the crapper in the middle of a reply
why not just try to keep it simple.
damage, mixup potential, mobility, zoning/space control, assist value
And some people tried to tell me this was a dumb thread…
The very same SRKers who don’t even know how to play the game and are concerned with look leet and smart. Always has the opposite affect.
This is still should go in general discussion IMO and you are like the 47th person to make this thread. The other 46 have been deleted and quite frankly don’t know why this one wasn’t either. It was the exact same thing as all the previous posters had put up.
1 month
Record keeping for game development
GenDis: Often overshadowed by idiots preaching what they see other people say.
Actually has people looking at other characters.
Huh?
The game has been out 1 month
This thread can keep records for the The development of the game over time
GenDis: Les just say that thread attracts idiots of the highest order.
This thread would require people to test out all characters, if they find out some ridiculous shit during this tiering, such as a great team, then boom others would quickly jump on board.
Be sure do to ask each atleast one intermediate/advance player for every character because there seems to be some false info around, like “oh Zero has low health and does low damage but has amazing mix-ups”, because Zero can do a lot of damage alone. This is just so we don’t get the wrong idea of the character. So better than asking one player, let’s all discuss it here on the thread and then come for the final verdict. That makes more sense.
All im saying is that this isn’t the first time that this thread has been made. It has been made countless times before but deleted and told to move to the General Discussion thread. The TS was trying to pat himself on the back like he was the first to come up with the idea for a thread like this. It is fine by me if it stays but nonetheless confusing how other threads exactly like this got deleted (and in some cases got someone banned for a few days iirc)