I would really have to disagree with that
There’s enough of a basis to make such a list using experience as a guideline. For example, you can tell Yun vs Urien isn’t even because of several factors; Yun’s overall speed compared to Urien, his mobility, Genei Jin, etc. etc. Urien needs to get Yun in the corner, to pin him down in order to kill him, but Yun’s mobility makes that difficult - that’s just an example. You can easily take a major reason and branch off into whatever, discussing the minute advantages that are activated because of said major reason.
So it’s not 5-5, that’s clear. Is it 5.5-4.5? That’s when people start discussing and debating whether or not a matchup is x-x or y-y. People that understand the game and discuss the matchup amongst one another can eventually determine the relative composition of the 3s tier list. 3s is also an old game, meaning the tier list has had a lot more time to be discussed and altered. Saying a match is 6-4 is never concrete, but with information [scattered around these forums] it becomes clear why said match is rated as that.
Oversimplification would be “Yun beats Urien”. That’s not the case in this matter.
I was very skeptical of this chun Dudley is even talk myself.
But after switching to chun myself and playing in japan recently and talking with other chuns this thought is well known in the community.
It all has to do with chuns numerous options to avoid makotos mixups basically…
I know it sounds crazy but it’s true.
I kind of understand a rejection of tiering characters because of how it can negatively influence players opinions, but I think that only happens to weak willed/stupid players, and I don’t really care about them. If you’re going to accept defeat in a matchup because a chart says its an unlikely win, you have more fundamental problems.
<#44> dudley - S
<#44> makoto - S+
<#44> yun S+
<#44> chun SS
<#44> always like this
<#44> dudley = top upper
<#44> ken lower to dudley
<#44> dudley higher ken
<#44> dudley speed range zone is more than ken
<#44> super is AA/AG
<#44> corkscrew
<#44> chun - yun - mak ->> dudley - ken - gouki
<#44> this order ^^
<#44> yang … is ok
<#44> like ryu
<#44> YA/RY - rank A
this is the tier list according to Nomoto when he was on ggpo a few months ago.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding the point of tiering.
I look at it as oversimplification because any examples one can give are either hypothetical (If ___ happens, then…) or subjective (Urien must…). Character ability and player ability are completely different issues and must be separated. Character matchups were possibly first measured by pitting two computer opponents against each other (See SFII ‘CE matchup chart in a 1992 Gamepro). Who cares about two computer opponents fighting each other? How else can you measure character matchups, though? It’s a very dangerous habit to look at matchups in terms of absolutes because humans control the characters.
When I travel and play against Japanese, French, U.S., Canadian, Australian, Chinese or whatever players around my same level, I notice the tier charts rarely hold true. What’s the point of discussion then, if none of us are at the TOP level? Is it just like fans discussing pro sports? I figure that’s the reason, but far too many people apply the tiers set by top players to their own experience with the game. It may be weak or stupid to let that affect your outlook on matchups, but you’re trusting the word of the more experienced players’ opinions in regard to the matchups. So, if we shouldn’t apply their tiers to our games because we’re not on the same level, we’re also not qualified to comment on their tiers.
my tier list:
Kuroda
MOV
Momochi
.
.
.
Chun
Yun
Makoto
etc
IDK how high I would tier Mak
She is very good but compared to the rest of the top/upper tier she does arguably the worst against chun (ken, dud, yun, akuma and yang…)
I guess what it comes down to is how you are tiering
edit: CPRYU tier list are not oversimplification but they do make the assumption that the players are at a high level and both know the matchup well. Usually at lower levels of play people playing lower tiers get away with abusing options that will get you punished (properly) the majority of the time.
Anyways 3s tiers are more of a risk chart (characters at a disavantage will have to take more risks then ones who are at an advantage) then a I should when this matchup X amount of times out of Y… IMO of course.
It’s something to look to, in that this is what this match-up is destined to be like. Obviously, none of us who go by the tier list (which is basically everyone) will state that a certain player will win solely because he’s playing that character. It’s a paper-matchup. Kinda like how they show that “tale of the tape” deal in UFC and boxing; you get to see stats and factor in stuff like age, weight, reach, etc.
You can liken it to a gunfight, even. Say, for instance, Chun were a rocket launcher, Yun was an AK-47, someone like Ryu would be a Desert Eagle, and Sean would be… a knife. On paper, yeah, the rocket launcher beats all (BIG BOOM!). However, place an eighteen-year-old nerd behind the rocket launcher and a marine with the knife. The eighteen-year-old might get a lucky shot with the rocket launcher, but he doesn’t have the superior training of the marine, who’s well versed with his tools.
Because that’s what the characters are. They’re tools for you to compete with. And inherently, some tools are better than others. The list is there for insight, but it’s up to the players to work around it. Basically, you can’t deny it exists, but you also can’t deny that player skill is just as easy of a factor.
lol
Q = Sock with cue ball inside
Remy = Brass knuckles
Twelve = Wet towel
Why are you posting this? Is there anyone on srk that doesn’t understand how tier lists work?
LOL wet towel
if 12 was wet towel, Sean would most likely be… those fake tin garbage cans that they use in wrestling.
Actually I think tier lists are one of the most misunderstood concepts in fighting games, although I’d say the discussion of them on SRK does more harm than good.
Actually I think tier lists are one of the most misunderstood concepts in fighting games, although I’d say the discussion of them on SRK does more harm than good.
Or we can talk about how shitty SF4 is…lol
on a another note, whats with the hatred i get from ppl towards 3s? its like ppl either love it to death, or hate it with a passion. I thought if a game was good, its good, even if its not your style.
I dont know its like they hate that we love the game so much. Not the game itself.
Yup. I mean consider how a lot of the people on this forum are tools who thought what Viscant had to say about 3s and parrying was actually solid truth and they stopped playing for that reason. LOL! sad
S+ - Chun-Li
S - Yun
A+ - Ken, Dudley
A - Makoto, Yang
A- - Urien, Akuma, Oro, Ryu
B+ - Hugo
B - Ibuki, Alex, Elena
C - Necro, Q, Remy, 12
D - Sean
This is what I think lol.
Damnitt Pat
You haven’t fought a Necro yet I see, he is FAR above that
let’s see…
if there’s a very balanced game,
i’m not gonna see or play that. is it a game?
do every characters have uniformed conditions?
think about this.
in boxing,if a play fight with mike tyson,
does he have to had nuclear punch like tyson?
players have various different types of his situations and skills to play
and most of all, the state of fighting time.
but sure, most sports game need its weight,
we can compare it power of punch in fighting games.
in my thought, it’s ok to sf3ts.
example, it seems that chun li is very weak character of others
but our best chun li player is hard to win fight with even arex or remy.
i want to say that most of players don’t know how to play and whatching a fighting chun li.