tiers ARE subjective speculation, that’s the point. the purpose of tiers is who is theoretically the best, when both players are at equal skill levels (which never happens). and people saying sean is mid tier based on “inherent strengths” obviously, do not have a sound understanding of every other 3s character’s “inherent strengths”.
The best answer is a combination of inherent strenghts and ease of use. Inherent strenghts is probably the biggest factor of the two because without any inherent advantages the character you pick probably will be average at best.
However, ease of use is actually almost just a big a factor. I know of alot of low tiers that can do major damage in a single combo, but the thing is that usually those comboes are extremely hard to execute on a consistent basis. Hell in MvC2 Ken has a infinite, so does cyclops and alot of characters really. However not only are those infinites harder to get in, they are also generally harder to do. Magneto is top tier because he has inherent strenght and damage potential, and he’s also relatively easy to use at around his maximum potential.
Hell if you remember CFJ everyone was complaining about SF2 characters because they were so basic yet powerful, so ease of use definantly factors in. However, it doesn’t matter if it’s the easiest character to use in the world, if you have poor combo options and damage potential then you won’t go very far.
Sometimes people confuse tiers with tournaments because tournaments often illustrate the points in tier discussions. But many points can be made without even seeing a single tournament, for instace sagat in cvs2, cable in mvc2, etc…
In the end, this conversation has to include all available information, observing, studying the engine, tournaments, casual play, theories, educated guessing, etc… all of this information is compiled to determine the outcomes of these hypothetical matchups which then determine the tier list.
To try to simplify the process down to if <x> then top tier, or to base tiers on any one aspect of the scene, is just missing out on the discussion.
I think its the complete opposite. The things we know to be truely powerful are based on what we’ve seen in tournaments. Like I said, it seems obvious geneijin is so powerful, but thats only because we’ve seen great players make great use of it. I guess this is where we all don’t see eye to eye.
Not necessarily. A characters performance in competitive play shows how effective every aspect of the character is. What better way to illustrate how good a character is than its performance in tournament play? Its really all inclusive of the characters strengths. Really, its not simplifying it down, its just a concrete basis for how good the character is, with all strengths and weaknesses considered. Later you can try to understand why a person did what in a certain situation, but ultimately you know with all things considered, what character is most successful.
If tiering to you is just “subjective speculation” then I don’t see how they are of much use. It is proven that certain characters are good based on their tournament placings, so because of that, they are useful, but if a bunch of people with no exposure to or experience in tournament play made up a tier list, would it reflect the general accepted tier lists, and if it didn’t, would it be of much use? I say no, and no.
To be able to decide what characters are good just based on sitting around by yourself and evaluating every aspect of every character seems like a daunting task. I’d love someone to explain to me why Yun is better than Ken without using examples from competitive/tournament play.
In a context where the difference between the skill of the actual players is nonexistant. Of course, since this is impossible in practice, that’s why theory will always be very important in terms of tiers. You can’t let the skill of the player affect a game’s tiering, which is why tournament results mean little to nothing for tiers.
What happens in the actual matches during a tournament though, regardless of who won in the end or not, that can mean something.
Well, you can’t quantify skill, just like you can’t quantify how much a good cancelable normal factors into a characters tier placement. 2 people who have been playing 2 different characters for 2 years are probably of pretty equal skill. However, one of those characters will generally be more successful. I’d say thats good enough to test tiers. Its not like every Yun player is just a more skilled player than people who play every other character. They have all just played enough to know that they win the most when they are playing Yun, so they continue to play Yun.
I don’t know much about marvel, so this might not be a good example, but I know there was a point where Doom and Blackheart were the top tiers, more so than Magneto or Storm. If everyone has such an inherent knowledge of what makes a character top tier, then why weren’t those characters top tier in the beginning. Someone had to prove their uses in tournament play before they became the gods they are today.
The most integral thing to look for without seeing a game in progress is frame data. If you have the right sources, it’s not hard to see why a character would have an easier time pressing the advantage with light attacks, throws and meaties. This data is seriously overlooked. You can participate in as many tournaments as you want, but without studying the characteristics of moves, walking speed, the system itself and so on, experience alone can only get you so far. To get better, you also need the most accurate information available and incorporate it into your gameplan.
Playing the game tightens your ability to follow suit and gives you a better understanding of the mindsets players have with certain characters. It’s indeed helpful, but a no-brainer. Of course you’re not in a sound position to make tiers without tournament exposure or experience. Without it, you can’t put facts and theories into real use. But in the end, tournament play is still just a matter of execution. It’s a factor, but not the definitive factor in deciding tiers.
But there’s a specific reason why I mentioned Cyke’s infinite as an example. Even amongst top players the Cyke infinite is too hard to use for practical means. That’s why nearly every match with Cyke they always just do the standard magic series or a few reps of the inf into a pseudo-reset when they get the chance. IIRC I’ve only seen X and Sanford ever do more than 3 reps in a real match.
So if a player was capable of abusing the Cyke inf with ease it would most certainly change the way the character is perceived. However, even if such a player might exist, he might lack the other skills necessary to play on a ocmpetitive level, thus never realizing the full team potential of the character.
Another prime (but probably underrated) example is Fox in SSBM. No human has the dexterity or reaction time to use Fox to his full potential. But just a taste of his potential is enough to make him top tier. Even though in reality if someone could use Fox to his absolute limit nothing in the game could stop him, but since that isn’t the case he can be defeated.
Oh man, this is like the light at the end of the tunnel for me. THANK YOU!
Anyway, you make a great point by bringing up frame data. Its concrete data you can rely on instead of just having a hunch something is good. The only problem is, frame data alone wont tell you enough about a character. You won’t know a characters reaction to taking damage, and certain juggles and can’t really be found out through frame data.
What I’m trying to get across, like you said, is you are in a poor position to make judgements on what tier a character is without knowledge from tournament play. I think we can all agree that what works in theory doesn’t always work in practice. In the end, our understanding of what is inherently strong about a character comes from it being tested in competitive play.
Thats like saying that nothing happens in the world until you see it on CNN. What i mean is that a lot of people who are passively watching the scene, won’t notice a tactic until it wins a tournament, that doesn’t mean that it didn’t exist before (sometimes years before), and it doesn’t mean that the tier list wasn’t adjusted prior to that tournament.
I would also hope that people didn’t need to see tournaments to realize that a super that does a lot of damage with a short bar with a fast char that partially refills itself on a successful attempt might just be a little too powerful. Also consider that there are a lot of tournaments where yun doesn’t win, do those tournaments lower his tier? of course not.
People can only play the best way they know how, and that creates variety and a chance to be wrong and lose as a result. If people could really exploit the best aspects of their characters, the game would be very robotic and predictable.
A tournament match is a combination of things, the ability of the character, the ability of the player, how they react to situations, how the opponent reacted, etc… so you can’t just extract the tier list from that.
Would tier lists based just off of who placed higher in a tournament be accurate? not at all.
Saying that tournaments aren’t the only factor in tier lists, also doesn’t imply that tournaments are useless. Like i said in my last post, it’s a conversation involving many factors.
It may be subjective, but it’s very essential to the scene. It provides a starting point for discussion and evaluation of one’s own strategy. The whole process of developing a gameplan is subjective, if it was objective, it would just be a math problem and everyone would have the answer and best gameplan.
Making an actual tier list is a daunting task, that’s why most people don’t make believable ones. It’s actually a lot of work and pulling from different sources and talking to different people to come up with a complete picture of the character’s abilities. If your just restricting yourself to one source, your not getting the whole picture.
Tiers are determined by both character performance at tournies and the individual character’s strengths/weaknesses.
For example, a top tier character in Tekken:
- Good/Excellent Tracking
2. Safe/Mid launcher(s) - Good Lows (that KND)
4. Damaging Juggles/Wall Combos - Good oki
6. Superb punishing
Mishimas…
But you’re forgetting what I said about overlooking frame data. There are a lot variables that tell you easily what could happen under any situation, the best example being footsies. If a player can extract this data, the slipping up may be reduced. Mistakes happen due to lack of knowledge and desperation, and you will see this no matter what level you play on. Tournaments don’t come complete without holes.
Like you said before, people don’t begin to understand what they see until its brought out in the open. That doesn’t mean the advantages they don’t recognize aren’t there.
You’ve almost described denjin ryu, but we all know denjin ryu is way below Yun, and Ryu is as mobile as Ken, another top tier. You cant simplify it down that much.
How many sources can you really have. You can discuss it with respected players, look up frame data, and look at competitive play. I see the point you are making, that many things go into determining tier placement, and I agree, but I just see the practical abilities of a character, observed in competitive play, would weigh more heavily on tier placements, than their theoretical strengths you come up with just through discussion, so if I had to pick one of the options in the poll, I would definitely pick tournament placement.
Your right, however if I add “can combo into it from fast normals” I think it covers it. If ryu could do crossup divekick chain to denjin he would be top tier IMO.
I edited my post i’ll requote it here:
Eh, people are acting like these concepts are mutually exclusive. You can have tiering that takes into account inherent strength, and placement in tournaments.
You could hand the results of major 3S tournaments to a person who never played, and ask them who they think the top tier characters are. From just the results, they’d be able to give you Chun, Ken, and Yun. Knowing why these characters are better than the others is where the “inherent strrengths” come in, but these only reinforce the tournament placings. So it can be both tournament placement and inherent strength to moi. (It’s just they sort of go hand in hand.)
Or it could also be that Chun, Yun and Ken are winning because they’re picked more than other characters, which reinforces the second option I included. It sounds ridiculous, but it’s not far from the truth.
It could even be that other characters are being picked less because not many people know enough about their inherent strengths outside of what they see in tournaments. It’s not a solid conclusion to make without in-game research to back it up.
A good example of Inherent Strengths would be the Twelve vs Ken matchup in 3s. Even if the Ken player is sucky or picks a diffrent SA he’ll still have an advantage over the Twelve user by being able to out poke him and his higher priority on normals/specails etc.
Well, I don’t know where you play, but where I play (South CA, FFA area), Ken is the only super popular character. You are just as likely to find an Alex as a Chun player. There are great players playing every character in Japan, but its still CKY on top.
I’ll just say there are degrees of usage for each character, and the number of times I see them fall under a pattern, as if matching the order of the current tiers as we know them. Top-tiers will be used the most, upper-mids/mids - almost as much, and low-tiers - rarely. For team based games, even if there are lower-tiered characters in circulation, there’s always at least one top-tier picked for insurance.
Not that this really changes my opinion or anything, but it’s not coincidental. And that’s why I think some tournaments are won by mid/low-tier users; with top-tiers you get an idea of what to expect, but it’s hard to fight against something you don’t fight often.
haha well, thats sort of a mystery of fighting games. are the top tiers used most because they are top tier, or are they top tier because they are used the most. can’t really prove one way or another.
Thats what i think is neat about team games, specifically cvs2 though is that you can used a mix of top, mid, or low characters and still be a competitor. Unfortunately I’m only decent at 3s :sad: